U.S. Threatens to Fine L.B. for Incinerator

The Environmental Protection Agency has stepped into a two-year battle over the safety of the city’s trash incinerator and is threatening heavy fines if the plant continues to violate clean-air standards.

Emissions from the Terminal Island incinerator--known as the Southeast Energy Resource Recovery Facility--repeatedly exceeded permissible levels of sulfur dioxide, a common pollutant, during the first six months of this year, EPA engineer Steven Frye said.

On Tuesday, the City Council approved a $10-million loan to help repair the plant. Officials said that more than seven consulting companies are working on the equipment responsible for the pollution violations and that emissions were at acceptable levels throughout August.

The $170-million incinerator--which burns 1,380 tons of garbage a day from Long Beach, Lakewood and Signal Hill--has been dogged with problems since it opened in September, 1988. It has been operating under temporary permits from the South Coast Air Quality Management District while repairs continue. The agency establishes air quality standards.

This is the first time that the EPA has cracked down on the facility, however. “We’re not going to let this problem slide,” Frye said.

If emissions rise beyond acceptable levels again, he said, the city must either fix the plant within two hours or shut it down.

Failing that, the EPA could lodge a civil complaint that would expose the city to six-figure fines, Frye said.

City officials told the plant’s board of directors Tuesday that they had been working to repair the equipment even before they received the EPA warning and that they plan monthly reviews of the plant’s progress with the EPA.

“We feel for sure it’s fixable,” project director James Kennelly said.

Charles Tripp, the plant’s operations officer, said the emissions were caused by frequent breakdowns in three atomizers used to “scrub” toxins from the gases that billow from the plant’s smokestack.

The atomizers have malfunctioned on and off since the plant opened. They are among 88 serious problems that have kept the incinerator--one of just two in the county--from being fully licensed by the air-quality district.

Just 18 of the 88 deficiencies have been corrected, city officials said. And a report from plant officials Tuesday predicted that the incinerator may not meet air quality standards before the end of 1991.

Councilman Warren Harwood, who also is chairman of the plant’s board, complained: “I’m having increasing difficulty saying where we’ve been, where we are, where we are going. It’s very fuzzy.”

Local environmental activists say Long Beach citizens will ultimately pay for the plant’s problems in increased garbage collection fees.

Activist Wil Baca said he believes that Long Beach should consider dumping the incinerator altogether before it becomes a financial albatross.

“The city thought this was going to be a magic machine,” he said, “but it’s really just a horrible mistake.”

But City Manager James Hankla said the plant is already burning much of the city’s garbage. He said critics have lost sight of the only alternative: burying the city’s 360 tons of daily garbage in landfills.

“It’s fixable--at a price,” Hankla said.

The city this week obtained a $10-million loan from Southern California Edison, calling it an advance against projected future profits from the plant. The plant is supposed to transform garbage into electricity sold by Edison to power 30,000 area homes.

The council also decided to increase the plant’s insurance coverage, which boosted the insurance premium nearly 20%, to $743,000 a year.

Last fall, the City Council approved $7 million in repairs for the plant, including $1 million borrowed from the city’s general fund, according to Ed Hatzenbuhler, administrative officer for the facility.

Meanwhile, another court battle continues. City officials have sued the plant’s developer, Pittsburgh-based Dravo Corp., in the string of problems. Dravo promptly countersued for money it says the city owes.

Officials said that the litigation means even more delays and confusion for the plant and that it could take years to resolve--even longer than officials predict it will take to fix the plant for good.