What is the Plainfield trash plant?

SMART Technology Systems has applied to the state to build a waste-to-energy gasification plant on about 81 acres at Norwich Road and Black Hill Road, between Routes 12 and 14, in a residential zone in Plainfield. It would process 1,800 tons of trash a day.

Has the Plainfield trash plant been approved?

No final decision has been made. Two DEEP applications are on file, Nos. 202503132 and 202503134, which DEEP describes as in preliminary staff review with no Notice of Tentative Determination issued. At the Connecticut Siting Council, SMART has filed Petition No. 1719 seeking a declaratory ruling rather than a Certificate. In that track a public hearing is not required by law, and on September 3, 2026 the Council granted the requests for one, confirmed in its letter of September 4, 2026, though no date has been set. Written comments may now be submitted within 30 days of the close of the evidentiary record; the initial schedule's September 6, 2026 date applies to party or intervenor requests, with a final decision due by February 3, 2027.

How many trucks would the Plainfield trash plant bring?

More than 100 heavy garbage-truck trips a day, roughly 6 a.m. to 5 p.m., according to a joint statement by Plainfield's Republican and Democratic town committees.

Did Plainfield vote on the trash plant?

Yes. In a June 2025 non-binding referendum Plainfield voted 1,148 to 125 against the plant. The vote does not bind the state, which holds permitting authority.

How can I oppose the Plainfield trash plant?

Contact the state directly in your own words: the Connecticut Siting Council at siting.council@ct.gov and CT DEEP at deep.adjudications@ct.gov, and your state legislators at cga.ct.gov. Say you are a Plainfield resident, name your street, and give one specific concern. Reference Siting Council Petition No. 1719; after the September 3 hearing grant the Council accepts written comments until 30 days after the hearing record closes, so write now.

Plainfield Trash Plant: Facts on the SMART Proposal

The Plainfield Trash Plant, in Plain Facts

A company called SMART Technology Systems has applied to the state to build a waste-to-energy gasification plant on 81.2 acres across six parcels of an approximately 506-acre O&G Industries property off Routes 12 and 14, in a residential zone in Plainfield. Here is what is proposed, where it stands, and how to be heard.

1,800

tons of trash a day, trucked in¹

120

loads per weekday, the developer’s own figure¹³

81.2

acres across six O&G parcels, off Routes 12 & 14¹³¹

1,148–125

how Plainfield voted against it (non-binding)²

What is proposed

What Is Actually Proposed

Every figure below links to its original source. Where the developer and independent reporting differ, both numbers are shown.

The plant would be built by SMART Technology Systems, a partnership of O&G Industries and Advanced Waste Technologies International.²
The site is about 81.2 acres, within an approximately 506-acre O&G Industries sand and gravel property, at Norwich Road and Black Hill Road, between Routes 12 and 14, in a residential zone.¹³¹
It would process 1,800 tons of trash a day. Early reporting described up to 468,000 tons a year, which is 1,800 tons a day on a 260-weekday schedule.¹³¹³
The developer’s August 2026 petition puts deliveries at around 120 loads per weekday, with up to 2,500 tons on a single day.¹³ The two town committees had estimated “over 100 garbage trucks” a day, roughly 6 a.m. to 5 p.m.²
It would generate about 45 megawatts of electricity.¹
Gasification is distinct from mass-burn incineration: it makes a synthesis gas from prepared waste, and the proposed system would then combust that gas to make electricity. Regulatory treatment depends on the process, feedstock and jurisdiction.⁴
The developer’s own schedule filed in August 2026 gives commercial operation as 31 March 2031, construction starting July 2027.¹⁵

Read the full breakdown of the proposal → How this kind of plant works →

Where it stands

Where the Proposal Stands Right Now

The plant is a live proposal. It remains under active review by state agencies, and no final permit decision has been issued. Here is exactly what has and has not been filed.

Filed or decided

New · Aug 2026Siting Council Petition No. 1719, seeking a declaratory ruling for the 45-megawatt facility⁶
New · Aug 2026The Council’s initial schedule: party/intervenor requests due September 6, 2026; final decision by February 3, 2027. After the hearing grant, written comments run to 30 days after the record closes¹⁶²¹
New · Sep 2026The Council granted a public hearing on Petition No. 1719 on September 3, 2026, confirmed in writing September 4. No date has been set yet²⁰¹⁸
New · Sep 2026The Town filed for party or intervenor status and moved to dismiss the petition or send it to a full Certificate proceeding; the Council takes up status on September 17 and the motion on October 1, 2026²²²³²¹
New · Sep 2026Town referendum on $250,000 for legal representation passed 770 to 90 on September 3, 2026, per WINY Radio; certified count pending¹⁹
Two DEEP applications on file, Nos. 202503132 and 202503134, in preliminary staff review¹² — reported as the air permit application and the solid waste management plan⁵
Town of Plainfield granted intervening party status before DEEP¹²
Environmental justice public participation plan approved by DEEP on June 23, 2025⁷¹⁴

Still to come

No hearing date. The Council granted a public hearing on September 3, 2026 but has not yet noticed a schedule; its September 4 letter says one will be²⁰¹⁸
No DEEP comment window has opened yet¹²⁵
Town building, stormwater and wastewater permits⁵

Plainfield voted 1,148 to 125 against the plant. That vote was non-binding: the state, not the town, decides.²

Plainfield already voted — 9 to 1 against

In the June 2025 town referendum on the proposed plant (non-binding; the state holds permitting authority):

Source: referendum result reported by the Hartford Courant (via Government Technology), June 2025. govtech.com

Data

Plainfield non-binding referendum, June 2025
Vote	Ballots	Share
No	1,148	90.2%
Yes	125	9.8%

In 2025 the state legislature passed a bill that would have let towns challenge permits like this by referendum. The Governor vetoed it in July 2025.⁸

Full status & regulatory timeline → How other towns stopped plants like this →

How to be heard

How to Be Heard

There is no online form. The way to be counted is to contact the state directly, in your own words. Write it yourself: a letter naming your street and one specific concern puts information in front of the agency that a copied text cannot.

Connecticut Siting Council: siting.council@ct.gov Ten Franklin Square, New Britain, CT 06051 · Petition 1719 comments accepted until 30 days after the hearing record closes⁹¹⁶
Connecticut DEEP: deep.adjudications@ct.gov Office of Adjudications, 79 Elm Street, Hartford, CT 06106¹⁰
Your state legislators: cga.ct.gov Find your representative and senator by address¹¹

What to say

Keep it short and specific. Say you are a Plainfield resident. Name your street. Give one concern in your own words: the truck traffic, the groundwater, a second gasification plant in one town, or whether the state has shown this plant is needed.

DEEP’s formal comment window has not opened. When DEEP publishes a Notice of Tentative Determination, that notice will set the deadline and filing instructions. Unless another statute controls, a timely petition signed by at least 25 persons can request an informational public hearing. A contested-case hearing requires the additional specific-facts or CGS 22a-19 showing described by Public Act 25-84. This site has not found DEEP confirmation that comments sent before the formal window automatically become part of that later permit record.⁵

Complete guide to being heard →

Where These Facts Come From

Foundation for Fair Contracting of CT, “Plainfield opposing plans for a trash to energy plant in a residential zone” (81 acres, residential zone, 1,800 tons/day, ~45 MW). ffcct.org

Hartford Courant via Government Technology, “Connecticut Residents Object to Plans for High-Tech Trash Plant” (referendum 1,148–125 non-binding; developer partnership; joint town-committee letter on 100+ trucks 6 a.m.–5 p.m.). govtech.com

Norwich Bulletin via Yahoo News, “Plant to convert trash to gas, electricity to be pitched in Plainfield” (468,000 tons/year; earliest operation ~2028). yahoo.com

U.S. EPA, “Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Pyrolysis and Gasification Units” (examines when Clean Air Act section 129 requirements apply; it is not a blanket classification), and European Union Industrial Emissions Directive language covering gasification when resulting substances are subsequently incinerated, subject to the directive’s treatment-based exception. epa.gov · eur-lex.europa.eu

CT DEEP, “Public Act 25-84 and Initiating the Hearing Process” (timing and requirements for informational and contested-case hearing petitions), together with Norwich Bulletin reporting that no Notice of Tentative Determination or formal comment window had opened. portal.ct.gov/deep · AOL syndication link no longer live; checked September 3, 2026

Connecticut Siting Council, Pending Matters (the Council’s own list of live cases). Lists Petition No. 1719, SMART Technology Systems, LLC, a petition for a declaratory ruling under CGS §4-176 and §16-50k for a 45-megawatt trash-to-energy facility on six O&G Industries parcels east of Black Hill Road, Plainfield. No Certificate application for this project is listed. In a petition proceeding the Council’s own citizens guide states a public hearing “is not required by law.” portal.ct.gov/CSC

CT DEEP, Environmental Justice Public Participation Plan on file for SMART Technology Systems, Norwich Road / Black Hill Road, Plainfield. Read the archived document and transcript

CT Mirror, “Lamont finishes review of 2025 bills with a veto” (HB 7004 referendum-challenge bill vetoed, July 8, 2025). ctmirror.org

Connecticut Siting Council, Contact (email and mailing address). portal.ct.gov/csc

CT DEEP, Office of Adjudications, intervening in the hearing process (email and mailing address). portal.ct.gov/deep

Connecticut General Assembly, find your legislators. cga.ct.gov

CT DEEP, Office of Adjudications, letter of August 29, 2025, re: “Petition for Hearing and Motions for Intervention, Application Nos. 202503132 & 202503134” (the two DEEP applications, submitted by TRC Environmental Corporation on behalf of SMART; “still undergoing preliminary review by staff”; “A Notice of Tentative Determination has not been issued”; the Town of Plainfield granted intervening party status under RCSA 22a-3a-6(k) and CGS 22a-19). Hosted by the Town of Plainfield. Read the document and transcript

SMART Technology Systems, LLC, Petition for a Declaratory Ruling That No Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need Is Required, filed with the Connecticut Siting Council August 7, 2026 (the applicant’s own filing). Source for the CGS §16-50k(a) argument, the 81.2-acre footprint, the 115-kV interconnection, the 1,800-ton average and 2,500-ton maximum daily acceptance rates, and the operations figure of “around 120 loads per weekday.”

CT DEEP, Office of Environmental Justice, letter of June 23, 2025 from Edith Pestana, MS, MPH, EJ Program Administrator, to William J. Corvo of SMART Technology Systems, filed as Exhibit Q to Connecticut Siting Council Petition No. 1719. States that the Environmental Justice Public Participation Plan Final Report, received June 6, 2025, satisfies CGS 22a-20a and DEEP’s Environmental Equity Policy, that the initial public information meeting was held May 7, 2025 at Plainfield Town Hall and noticed in the Norwich Bulletin on April 14, 2025, and concludes: “The Environmental Justice Public Participation Plan Final Report is Approved.”

SMART Technology Systems, LLC, Proposed Project Schedule, filed as Exhibit C to Connecticut Siting Council Petition No. 1719 (Primavera schedule generated 11 March 2026; the developer’s own planning document). Gives construction start 1 July 2027, substantial completion 30 June 2030, in-service date 30 September 2030 and commercial operation 31 March 2031.

Connecticut Siting Council, Schedule, Petition No. 1719 (petition received August 7, 2026), and Council correspondence of August 10, 2026. The Schedule sets: Public Comment Period Deadline September 6, 2026; Deadline for State Agency Comments September 6, 2026; Deadline for Municipal Comments September 6, 2026; Deadline to Request Party or Intervenor Status September 6, 2026; Deadline for Action October 6, 2026; Deadline for Final Decision February 3, 2027. The correspondence comprises a letter from Executive Director Melanie A. Bachman to the Town of Plainfield’s First Selectperson confirming notice under RCSA §16-50j-40 and inviting written comments by September 6, 2026; a memorandum soliciting written comments from fifteen state officials across fourteen state agencies and offices (including DEEP, DPH, PURA, DOT, the State Historic Preservation Office and the Council on Environmental Quality) by the same date; and the service list of August 10, 2026, which shows the petitioner as the only listed participant. schedule (PDF) · town letter (PDF) · state agency memo (PDF) · service list (PDF)

Connecticut Siting Council, Agenda, Regular Energy/Telecommunications Meeting, issued August 27, 2026 by Executive Director Melanie Bachman for the meeting of Thursday, September 3, 2026 at 1:00 p.m., held via Zoom remote conferencing. Petition No. 1719 is item 9, captioned “CGS §4-176 Deadline for Action – Requests for Hearing.” The agenda prints the Zoom link, meeting ID 868 2595 8246 and a dial-in number, and states that draft documents for agenda items are posted under the Meetings and Minutes tab. portal.ct.gov (PDF) Hearing requests and responses on file: Hearing requests filed in Petition No. 1719, with the Council’s acknowledgements. Council on Environmental Quality to the Siting Council, August 26, 2026 (Paul Aresta, Executive Director): under RCSA §16-50j-40(b) a hearing would be “helpful in determining any issue concerning the request for a declaratory ruling,” would give the public “a greater opportunity to express any opinions” and allow more time to review the filing; requests a hearing and, if none is scheduled, requests that comments be accepted “through at least September 25, 2026.” The Council’s acknowledgement of the same date quotes CGS §4-176(e) and states the petition “will be placed on a future Council meeting agenda to consider holding a public hearing on the matter.” State Senator Heather Somers (18th District) to the Council, August 14, 2026: opposes the petition and states that “There must be a public hearing in Plainfield, in person, before the Council takes any action on this petition.” The Council files these under “Hearing Requests.” portal.ct.gov (PE1719) Pullman & Comley, LLC (Lee D. Hoffman) for SMART Technology Systems, LLC to the Connecticut Siting Council, August 19, 2026, filed in Petition No. 1719 as comments on the hearing requests. States that SMART “is in receipt of several comments” many of which request a hearing; that “the choice of conducting a hearing is solely within the Siting Council’s discretion”; that “SMART has no objection to a public hearing being conducted for this Petition”; and that SMART “would welcome the opportunity to hear from members of the public regarding the project and to answer any questions the Council or staff may have.” portal.ct.gov (PE1719)

First Selectman Kevin M. Cunningham, Town of Plainfield, in a written account sent the same day of the Connecticut Siting Council meeting of September 3, 2026, which he attended by Zoom with the Town’s attorney, Ann Catino. Establishes that the Council granted the requests for a public hearing on Petition No. 1719; that the requests “were granted with little commentary”; that dates were not discussed and would be set by staff; that three Council members spoke, to the effect that given the size of the project it is very appropriate to hold a hearing, that one “look[ed] forward to a robust public hearing,” and that another said that given the number of requests for a public hearing it is appropriate to move forward with one; and that the Council’s next meeting is September 17, 2026, when it may take up the Town’s motion to move the matter to a Certificate proceeding and to declare the petition insufficient for failure to comply with environmental justice requirements. The three members’ remarks are relayed in the account as Attorney Catino’s report; the rest is the First Selectman’s own account. Attorney Catino practices environmental and land use law at Halloran & Sage (halloransage.com). A participant account, since confirmed by the Council’s letters of September 4, 2026, which record the grant; as of the evening of September 3 the Council had published no hearing notice, revised schedule or decision in the petition file, and the Town’s motion did not appear there. Read the account and download the original.

WINY Radio newsroom, Facebook post, evening of September 3, 2026: “The Plainfield referendum to decide whether the town should use $250,000 from its fund balance to pay for legal representation in its ongoing fight against Smart Technologies has PASSED by 770 ‘Yes’ votes, to 90 ‘No’ votes.” A news report of the count, not the Town’s certified result; the certified result replaces it here when the Town publishes it. facebook.com (WINY Radio)

Connecticut Siting Council (Melanie A. Bachman, Executive Director) to the Service List, letter of September 4, 2026, “CGS §4-176 Deadline for Action – Requests for Public Hearing”: “During a regular meeting of the Connecticut Siting Council (Council) held on September 3, 2026, the Council granted the Requests for a Public Hearing submitted for the above-referenced petition for a declaratory ruling. A schedule for the public hearing will be developed and publicly noticed in compliance with Connecticut General Statutes (CGS) §4-177(b).” The Council’s own written record of the decision. portal.ct.gov/csc (PDF)

Connecticut Siting Council (Melanie A. Bachman) to Ann M. Catino, Alan P. Curto and Richard Roberts, Halloran Sage LLP, counsel for the Town of Plainfield, letter of September 4, 2026 (35 pages with enclosures): “During a regular meeting held on September 3, 2026, the Council voted to hold a public hearing on this matter. A schedule for the public hearing will be developed and publicly noticed in compliance with Connecticut General Statutes (CGS) §4-177(b). The Council’s vote to hold a public hearing rendered the Town’s request for an extension of the public comment period deadline moot. Written comments from any interested person may be submitted within 30 days of the close of the evidentiary record.” Places the Town’s request for party/intervenor status and CEPA intervenor status on the September 17, 2026 agenda and its request for a Certificate proceeding and motion to dismiss on the October 1, 2026 agenda. portal.ct.gov/csc (PDF)

Town of Plainfield (Ann M. Catino, Alan P. Curto and Richard P. Roberts, Halloran Sage LLP), Motion for Party or Intervenor Status, Request for a Hearing and Additional Requests, filed with the Connecticut Siting Council September 2, 2026 (12 pages, scanned). Requests party status under CGS §16-50n and RCSA §16-50j-38 to 40 or, in the alternative, intervenor status; status under the Connecticut Environmental Protection Act, CGS §22a-19; in the alternative a public hearing under RCSA §16-50j-40; and an extension of the comment deadline “for an additional period of at least 75 days.” States the Town’s concerns as “noise; air and water; wildlife and traffic,” citing the state-listed species identified in the petitioner’s own species report. portal.ct.gov/csc (PDF)

Town of Plainfield (Halloran Sage LLP), Requests to the Connecticut Siting Council to Conduct a Full Certificate Proceeding in this Matter and to Dismiss the Petition due to an Existing Jurisdictional Defect, filed September 2, 2026 (21 pages, scanned). Asks the Council to “refuse substantive consideration” of the petition, arguing it “fails to satisfy the requirements for a declaratory ruling pursuant to Conn. Gen. Stat. § 16-50k(a) and is further insufficient under Conn. Gen. Stat. § 22a-20a,” that “as a threshold matter, the Petition as filed is jurisdictionally deficient because the Petitioner has not complied with the environmental justice conditions precedent to filing with the Council as set forth in section 22a-20a(b)(1)(A)-(C),” and that SMART should instead be ordered to apply for a Certificate of Environmental Compatibility and Public Need. portal.ct.gov/csc (PDF)