My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
GENERAL41634
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
General Documents
>
GENERAL41634
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 8:09:59 PM
Creation date
11/23/2007 11:18:30 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977208
IBM Index Class Name
General Documents
Doc Date
4/20/2004
Doc Name
CKD @CEMEX
From
St. Vrain Valley Community Watchdogs
To
DMG
Permit Index Doc Type
General Correspondence
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
47
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
Again, Cemex was fined $10,000, and again the state permitted Cemex to do an SEP. This time, a check far $6,000 was <br />sent to the Fire Impacted Water Restoration Fund. ' <br />'There are no freebies," Lohr says. "There aren't any warnings with the state. They see something, they observe <br />something, you have a violation." <br />We tell him that a cynical person might decide that the state shows up once a year to raise a little extra money for itself. <br />"I like to believe that they are committed to enforcement and full implementation of all the laws and regulations," Lohr <br />says, appearing to be deliberately tactful. <br />Then we move on to housekeeping, which, in the cement industry, largely means keeping the plant and grounds free from <br />piles of dust and debris that might impact worker safety or might be picked up by high winds and transported through the <br />air. Inspectors have repeatedly found piles of dust at the plant and mentioned housekeeping as a concern. <br />An Oct. 15, 2002, memo from the state notes, "Piles of dust were noted under conveyor belts, kiln, dryer, etc., during the <br />inspection. These areas have a significant potential fugitive dust impact during windy conditions, which is a frequent <br />occurrence in the area... The division recommends a more frequent schedule for housekeeping in these areas to <br />minimize the potential for fugitive emissions." <br />Lohr tells us that housekeeping is relative to the industry and that for a plant that moves some 300 million tons of rock <br />each year, Cemex is a clean plant. <br />We mention an Oct. 22 memo from Cemex to the state in which Cemex claims its level of housekeeping at the plant is at <br />an all-time high. Lohr reaches into his stack of papers, removes a document and hands it across the table. <br />It is the Oct. 22 memo. And although it contains the sentence we just mentioned, deleted from the second page are <br />references we'd seen on the state's version of the memo to specific dollar amounts Cemex is willing to spend to resolve <br />the situation, along with the statement, "Cemex is interested in programs and improvements, NOT fines." <br />Lohr grins sheepishly when confronted. <br />"You must have seen the version I sent to the state," he says. "This is a cleaned-up version. <br />The topic quickly shifts to trust. How does Cemex respond to statements by community members who say they simply <br />cannot trust the company? <br />"If people are willing to live and let live, the company is willing to bend over backwards to try to address issues and try to <br />make changes. I think we have in the past, and we intend to in the future," says Lohr. "But I can't deal with somebody who <br />says, 'I don't like you, and I want you to go away.' I don't know how to deal with that." <br />12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.