A pretrial conference date was set at a status hearing on Tuesday in the case of Commonwealth v. River Metals Recycling.
News of an agreement between the city and River Metals Recycling, also known as RMR, was announced in a Newport news release on Aug. 11 ahead of a previously scheduled Aug. 14 bench trial. The trial was canceled, and both parties explained to Campbell County District Court Judge Cameron Blau that they were working on an agreement that was supposed to be heard at the status hearing on Sept. 5. Instead, representatives from RMR said they required more time.Â
The representatives said they had received suggestions from the city last Thursday that they found “substantial.” They requested more time to work on the memorandum of understanding, which was drafted, but its details needed to be worked out.
The pretrial conference will be held on Oct. 16 at 10:30 a.m. Blau, who has overseen the case since it appeared in his courtroom in January 2021, said a decision would need to be made on Oct. 16, or the case would be diverted or set for trial.
According to the news release from Newport last month, the city will work with RMR to address concerns regarding the operation of the company’s Newport facility.
The new equipment outlined in the release is a pre-shredder that will allow for the reduction of processing noise and mitigate the risk of combustion during the shredding process, as well as a fire rover, which will have the capability to detect emerging hot spots and further reduce the risk of fire throughout the facility. The release said that the initial investment by RMR will exceed $5.5 million and add operating costs of over $600,000 annually.
“RMR has committed to making significant investments in advanced technologies that will enhance their processes and the quality of life for local residents,” the news release said.
Newport resident Annette Kitchen, who has been heavily involved in getting RMR to change its daily operations since around 2019, called RMR’s request for more time “frustrating.”
“It feels very disrespectful to not only the residents, to the city, but also to the court system,” Kitchen said. “I feel they’re making a mockery out of it.”
Kitchen said that she loved that the judge would make them move one way or another, and without the judge, the residents would be at a parallel.
Newport Commissioner Ken Rechtin said he thinks that RMR violated the city’s noise ordinance and said if the city can’t reach a resolution with them, they need to press ahead and get the bench trial started.
“I do believe in my heart that RMR does want to resolve this issue,” Rechtin said. “And a commitment—though verbal and not in writing—a commitment to a machine (pre-shredder) that will not only eliminate explosions but reduce the operational noise of the shredder. That’s a big deal.”
Rechtin said the timeframe was the “sticky point.” He said he would like to see things implemented in at most six months and take no more than six months to prove to the city that their new tactics work.
“It is kind of an add-on that RMR is conceding that the fires down there are excessive enough to put in a system (fire rover) to detect a rise in heat in any one of the piles of material, and that way, they’ll be able to pre-combustion stopped something,” he said. “So, I think that’s an important tool as well and that monitoring.
Rechtin said he thinks RMR is trying to rectify the situation following a separate matter with the state Energy and Environment Cabinet that sent a letter outlining four dates, one from December 2022, February 2023, April 2023, and May 2023, in which open burns occurred at RMR, leading to notices of violation.
The letter states that RMR had two plans of action they could take. One was to pay $75,000. The second option is an Agreed Order (legally binding and enforceable in Franklin Circuit Court) that outlines a Corrective Action Plan and an “agreed upon civil penalty.” The letter states that the case will be closed once the penalty is paid or the Corrective Action Plan is implemented.
The letter states that RMR must respond by July 25. There is no public documentation showing what RMR’s response was.
