Spring Valley residents working to stop second asphalt plant

About 20 Spring Valley residents told Clark County employees Monday evening that they don’t want a second asphalt plant built next to their residential neighborhoods.

The residents, who have protested the opening of another plant for more than a year, testified during a Department of Air Quality permit hearing that they’re already suffering from pollution created by the current plant.

“This plant is a major health hazard to our neighborhood,” Ron Hawkins said during the hearing, at the Clark County Government Center. “And it should be closed. It shouldn’t be expanded.”

Construction company Wells Cargo owns and operates the existing plant, at the corner of Spring Mountain Road and South Tenaya Way, and has sought to open a second nearby.

At first, the company aimed to build a second permanent plant. But Wells Cargo withdrew its application in January after the county’s Comprehensive Planning Department determined that the company was entitled to only one on the 142-acre property.

Now, Wells Cargo seeks a permit that could allow it to temporarily open a second plant. The company could because it is an asphalt paving subcontractor for an in-progress public works project: Project Neon.

Wells Cargo would have to remove the second plant upon Project Neon’s completion or after five years, whichever comes first.

Project Neon, slated as Nevada’s largest freeway infrastructure project, is expected to be finished by summer 2019.

Wells Cargo is requesting a permit that would let it produce 560,000 tons of asphalt annually at its second plant. That’s about three-quarters of what the existing plant is allowed to produce now.

Residents testified Monday that increased production would exacerbate health problems, including headaches and breathing troubles, which they blame on Wells Cargo’s current operations.

“Our living situations have become so horrible that we’re confined to our houses,” Mary Lou Abbruzzese said.

Wells Cargo representative Trent Scarlett testified that his company has responded quickly to address issues that nearby residents reported to the county and is committed to being a “good neighbor.”

“We have taken aggressive and proactive approaches to our operation to minimize our impact and to ensure that our dust and emissions controls meet and exceed the federal, state and county requirements and regulations,” Scarlett wrote in a statement. “We are committed to responsible development and environmental compliance with all of our operations.”

Air Quality Department employees did not immediately decide on the permit request. Department director Marci Henson said the decision would likely come in one to two weeks, after employees have reviewed residents’ Monday comments and 60 or so more that were submitted in writing.

Henson said that if her department grants a permit for the second plant, county commissioners still must decide whether to approve land-use applications for the project.

Contact Michael Scott Davidson at sdavidson@reviewjournal.com or 702-477-3861. Follow @davidsonlvrj on Twitter.