KB Corp. responds

In response to the article, “Mulch firm fined $9,200” (BDN, May 10). We would like to clear up a few rumors and several lies. We will begin with the fact that the Greenford Group site in question is in Greenbush, not Milford.

The site was visited by professionals in both the state and private environmental sectors. Those who visited were aware of Greenford Group’s future plans and never mentioned any possible wrongdoing. We then returned to work to find a Department of Environmental Protection calling card in a machine and it was from there we found out we had done wrong.

If you are a forestry company, you can alter wetlands to reach standing timber. We followed the previous landowner, which was a logging company, and improved the site from the clearing they had done and the road they had built. Again, we did not know we had done anything wrong until the surprise card was left.

Joyce Buxton stated that she had a relative inquire about a trucking job with Greenford and was told the trucks would be hauling CDD to the site. Greenford Group is not a trucking company. The relative filled out an application to drive trucks for K-B Corp.

There was no discussion of anything the applicant would be hauling because he did not get the job. He applied for the “position” just three weeks after the application for the bark storage facility was submitted.

There was nothing said of hauling any products to the Greenford site, since it wasn’t yet approved to accept anything. The claim to have heard similar statements from people involved with K-B Corp. is not true.

There has been nothing said of using the site for anything other than bark storage since the comment was made to the DEP inspector over a year ago. The debris processing facility was dropped in favor of the bark storage site because bark mulch is a movable commodity. CDD is dependent on mills that can burn it staying open.

As everyone has seen in recent months, there is no guarantee in that.

We also would like to say that no one but Greenford knows the money that was spent on the site. The road is large and wide to accommodate loaded truck traffic. There was no mention in the article of Greenford Group having to install gates on the ends of both roads because of vandalism and partygoers on the property.

They were also installed to prevent the illegal dumping of rubbish. All of these acts are trespassing on private property.

The site is located 1 1/2 miles from the Greenfield Road and all residents. Noise levels from the site is not disturbing others. The truck traffic on Greenfield Road is not greater than any other year. Dump trucks haul steady from pits farther up the road.

As for fire protection, it is written in the forward of the Wood Bark Mulch Storage Site Application. There is an entire section addressing stockpile management and fire prevention and control.

And lastly, there are three other licensed bark storage sites within a two-mile radius of the Greenford site. These sites show that Greenford is not the first company, nor the only company to request the bark storage permit in the area.

We would like to say that everyone’s fears are completely unfounded.

This commentary was written by William Kitchen, Tony Kitchen and Greg Kitchen, officers of K-B Corp.