2 WASTE-BURNING MEASURES FACE CHALLENGES IN BOTETOURT

                         Roanoke Times
                 Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: FRIDAY, February 5, 1993                   TAG: 9302050283
SECTION: VIRGINIA                    PAGE: B1   EDITION: METRO 
SOURCE: MARK MORRISON STAFF WRITER
DATELINE:                                 LENGTH: Long
2 WASTE-BURNING MEASURES FACE CHALLENGES IN BOTETOURT<
OPPONENTS of a Botetourt cement company that planned to burn hazardous waste thought they could rest easy after battling the company for 18 months. Now, they're not so sure.
\ Two measures adopted by Botetourt County to potentially block hazardous-waste burning are facing serious challenges - one in the General Assembly and one by Roanoke Cement Co.
Roanoke Cement has filed papers in Botetourt Circuit Court that would position the company to challenge a zoning change adopted in December by the county Board of Supervisors.
The zoning measure requires the company to apply for a special permit from the county before it could burn hazardous waste as a fuel in its cement-making process.
It also prohibits hazardous-waste burning on land that sits on limestone terrain, which is more vulnerable to ground-water contamination. Before passing the zoning change, the supervisors had no such control.
The measure was adopted after Roanoke Cement announced plans to seek EPA permission to burn hazardous waste - a plan the EPA twice denied. Since then, Roanoke Cement has been bought by a Greek company, Titan Cement, which says it will not burn hazardous waste. Titan bought the plant from Tarmac America Inc.
Roanoke Cement officials repeated that vow in a written statement, released Thursday, from the company's chief executive officer, Fred Cohrs. The "decision to file suit against Botetourt County does not signal any change in the company's long-range strategy. We have no plans to seek a permit to burn hazardous waste," Cohrs said in the statement.
County Administrator Gerald Burgess said company officials also had emphasized again to him that they had no plans to burn hazardous waste at the Botetourt plant, which is off Catawba Road near Haymakertown.
Members of Valley Concerned Citizens, the group that opposed Roanoke Cement's original plan to burn hazardous waste, wondered Thursday why Roanoke Cement was positioning itself to challenge the county zoning measure.
The papers filed by Roanoke Cement do not officially challenge the county because they were not served on county officials. Roanoke Cement's lawyer, Timothy Hayes of Richmond, requested that the papers not be served at this time.
Hayes had to file the papers with the court, however, within 30 days after the supervisors adopted the zoning change to keep alive the option of a lawsuit. He now has a year to serve papers.
Reached by telephone in Richmond, Hayes would not comment on the filing.
In his statement, Cohrs said: "It is necessary to file the suit because of our concern that we could not get the permits to modernize the plant." When the cement plant was purchased by Titan, the company announced plans to spend $25 million to modernize the facility.
"The zoning ordinance is so broad and vague and lacking in definition that it impairs the ability of the company to modernize the plant," Cohrs said. The suit, if pursued, would ask the court to declare the zoning measure void under state law.
That reason puzzled County Attorney Buck Heartwell. He said the company's modernization plans would not be affected at all by the zoning restrictions, which come into play only if a company wants to burn hazardous waste. "I just don't know what they mean by that," Heartwell said.
Some Valley Concerned Citizens members said they were suspicious of Roanoke Cement's motives and wondered whether the company means what it says. "It frankly shocked me, because the cement company has said publicly that they don't intend to burn. So why are they challenging this?" said Wayne Weikel, a member of the group.
Meanwhile, the General Assembly is considering a bill that could block an air pollution emissions ordinance that the county is pursuing.
The emissions ordinance - the first local ordinance of its kind in Virginia - would give the county the authority to regulate emissions at Roanoke Cement should the company get approval to burn hazardous waste.
Under state law, however, a local emissions ordinance must be approved by the state Air Pollution Control Board before it can be enacted by a county. The Air Pollution Control Board did not approve Botetourt's ordinance.
Botetourt has appealed the air board's decision to Botetourt Circuit Judge George E. Honts III, who will not rule on the appeal until after March 1.
His ruling could become moot, though, if a bill drafted by state Sen. Frank Nolen, D-New Hope, is passed. The bill would prohibit localities from enacting their own emissions ordinances. The bill passed the Senate Thursday 30-6 and has been sent to the House of Delegates.
Nolen said in a telephone interview Thursday that he introduced the bill after discussing Botetourt's emissions ordinance with members of the state air board and concluded that it could hurt economic development in Virginia.
Air emissions should be regulated by the state agencies already set up to regulate them, he said. "The main reason for the bill is to keep one standard for Virginia and not a hundred."
Sen. Malfourd "Bo" Trumbo, R-Fincastle, opposed Nolen's legislation and argued on the Senate floor Thursday that a system already is in place to ensure that the state does not end up with different emissions standards from county to county. "We have state oversight of them by sending them to the air board," he said.
Trumbo said he was contacting delegates and would try to get the bill killed, but he wasn't optimistic.

by Archana Subramaniam by CNB