By AMANDA GILMORE

The Independent

HAVERHILL Economic development leaders in southern Ohio are excited once again about the possibility of a large coke-processing plant being built in Scioto County.

Sun Coke Co. is considering building a 400-oven coke plant in Haverhill, adjacent to the Aristech Chemical Corp. site, owned by Sun Coke's parent company, Sunoco.

Sun Coke seemed poised to build a plant at the site in 2001, right after Sunoco purchased Aristech from Mitsubishi Corp. But the economy turned sour and the company put any construction plans on hold.

At the time, Sun Coke also was considering other locations for the $1 billion plant, including one in Pittsburgh, and had not made a final decision. It had, however, received a final permit from the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency, allowing it to build three 268-oven coke battery facilities at Haverhill.

Coke plants contain high-temperature ovens to bake coal and turn it into coke.

The EPA permit, issued to Haverhill North Coke Co. in February 2001, was good for 18 months. The company received a 12-month extension in August 2002. In July of this year, it filed for the modified permit, which the Ohio EPA treats as a new application, according to Cindy Charles, who works in the air pollution unit of the Portsmouth Health Department.

The Ohio EPA approved the modified permit Oct. 8. It contained two major changes from the original permit, Charles said.

In addition to reducing the number of ovens from 804 to 400, the modified permit also breaks the project into two phases. The first phase would involve construction of a 100-oven coke battery. Until the remaining 300 ovens are built in phase two, the EPA authorized "venting" at the plant during maintenance periods, about 14 days per year, Charles said.

"We are requiring testing to quantify the emissions while they are testing," she said.

A hearing on the modified permit is scheduled for 6:30 p.m. Nov. 12 at Green High School.

Bob Walton, executive director of the Southern Ohio Port Authority, takes the changes in the permit as a good indictation that Sun Coke will build in Haverhill.

"They are saying they are considering Haverhill and a site in Indiana," Walton said. "A final decision has not been made, but we are optimistic."

So optimistic, in fact, that the authority is taking a busload of community leaders, schools and other public officials and people who live near the proposed coke plant on a trip Wednesday to Virginia to view a coke plant there.

"This is a plant similar to what they are proposing for Haverhill. We are taking a community group through to show how clean and environmentally friendly it is."

Also among those on the tour will be former employees of New Boston Coke Corp., which closed in the spring of 2003 following a lockout of workers by the company and a frantic community effort to save it. The company blamed the shutdown on financial problems and a dispute with labor. About 200 hourly and 40 salaried employees worked at the plant when it closed.

"I think when people around here hear coke plant, they associate it with the one that was in New Boston, which was quite dirty," Walton said. "This will be nothing like that."

Walton said he's been told the new Haverhill plant would have 400 coke ovens. AK Steel, by comparison, has fewer than 100, he said.

In 2001, when it was planning for 804 ovens, Sun Coke said it would need an average of 700 construction workers every year for five years to build the plant. When it was finished, the plant would employ about 450.

Jerry Davis, spokesman for Sunoco, said he could not comment on the likelihood of a plant being built in Haverhill, but confirmed that company and community leaders are continuing their discussions.

Walton said infrastructure, in the form of water and sewage lines, would have to be in place before the company would build. Sun Coke had previously also asked for an interchange off U.S. 52 to the site.

AMANDA GILMORE can be reached at agilmore@dailyindependent.com or (606) 326-2648

The above article was copied from the Ashland Independent, Tuesday, October 28, 2003. Copied  by Austin Leedom