| BREDL Letter regarding
                Corning, Inc. Air Permit 
March 7, 2000
 Alan Klimek, Director
 Division of Air Quality
 1641 Mail Service Center
 Raleigh, NC 27699-1641
 
 Re: Corning Incorporated, Air Permit Application
                No. 1300117.99B
 
 Dear Mr. Klimek:
 
 I write to outline our concerns about the nearly
                completed permit for Corning, Inc. in Cabarrus
                County.  For several weeks I have been
                attempting to gather the necessary information to
                review the application and to feel comfortable
                that the people who live near the facility are
                being protected.  I have been unsuccessful
                to date.
 
 First, we have been unable to get copies of the
                facility emissions data.  Mr. Jim
                Southerland has been away and contacted me
                yesterday to let me know he would be forwarding
                information and that he would ask the regional
                offices to provide information.  It is my
                understanding that Laura Butler had also
                contacted the regional offices.  I am
                awaiting the results.
 
 Second, our BREDL technical advisors need time to
                review the Corning application.  One of our
                evaluations will compare and contrast the Corning
                facility with Cardinal Glass.
 
 Third, information in the Corning application is
                being held confidential.  It is information
                that we need for our review and that we believe
                should be provided to the public.
 
 For the above reasons and others, we request the
                following:
 
 1) DAQ should establish a public comment process
                with an opportunity for public hearing.  The
                Corning expansion is large, and the affected
                public has had no opportunity to have knowledge
                of the expansion or input into the permit
                decision.
 
 2) The Corning facility in Cabarrus should not
                avoid PSD (prevention of significant
                deterioration).  We believe this decision
                was made in error.  A full public review is
                essential for this reason alone.
 
 3) A full determination that methodology for
                determining emissions can legally be held as
                confidential information should be justified and
                explained prior to permit decisions.
 
 4) US EPA must have input into the
                decision-making about Corning pollution
                technology and emissions limits.
 
 Two people have contacted me about the permit
                already granted to Corning in New Hanover. They
                are considering a challenge to that permit
                because of the failure to notify the affected
                public.  The enthusiasm that the NC
                Department of Commerce has shown for the Corning
                expansion should not interfere with the rights of
                affected citizens for a full public participation
                process.
 
 Thank you in advance for your help in securing
                needed information and the necessary public
                review.
 
 Sincerely,
 
 Janet Marsh Zeller
 Executive Director
 
 
 cc: Keith Overcash
 Laura Butler
 Jim Southerland
 Michael Landis
 
 More Info: BREDL
                Action Alert
 
 
 |