Plainfield Trash Facts

The facts on the proposed trash plant
Plainfield, Connecticut

The Evidence

The Evidence: Primary Sources and Studies

This is the full evidence library for the site. Every claim we make traces to a numbered source below, ranked strongest first: government records and peer-reviewed research before technical reports, and news reporting last.

Read the record yourself. The index that follows lists government filings, Connecticut statutes with section numbers, EPA Superfund site profiles, USGS water studies, a Connecticut Supreme Court opinion,14 and peer-reviewed studies on what gasification and incineration ash and wastewater carry.2324 Each entry is named, dated where known, noted for what it establishes, and pointed to a working link.

How we source

The Sourcing Standard

This is a resident information project, and accuracy is the entire point. Sources are chosen in a deliberate order of preference, strongest first, and every load-bearing figure carries the highest tier available.

  • Tier one, primary and official records. Government documents you can read directly: Connecticut DEEP and Siting Council filings, the Connecticut General Statutes, EPA Superfund site profiles, USGS water studies, and court opinions.
  • Tier one, peer-reviewed science. Published, peer-reviewed research on gasification and incineration ash, leaching, and wastewater.
  • Tier two, technical and expert-organization reports. Agency guidance and technical analyses from established bodies, including EPA fact sheets and legal filings by the Conservation Law Foundation and Earthjustice.
  • Tier three, independent news coverage. Reporting from Connecticut and national outlets, used for events, quotes, votes, and dates. News is supporting only and never the sole basis for a scientific or quantitative claim.

Company marketing materials are not treated as neutral sources. This site describes the proposal as its subject and rests its numbers on the public record, so the developer’s own promotional pages are not cited.

Read the record

How to Check Any Claim

Wherever a figure or statement appears on this site, a small superscript number follows it, like the one at the end of this sentence.6 That number matches an entry in the library below. Open the link, and you land on the original source.

The permitting facts trace to two authorities in particular. A waste plant of this size needs both Connecticut DEEP permits and a certificate from the Connecticut Siting Council under state law,11 and DEEP may not permit a facility processing mixed municipal solid waste unless it first makes a written determination that the facility is needed for the state’s disposal needs.12 The environmental and precedent facts trace to federal records, including Plainfield’s own Gallup’s Quarry Superfund site,15 and to peer-reviewed measurements of what incinerator and gasifier residues contain.2324

Sources by tier
TierWhat it coversSources
Official & regulatoryCT DEEP, CT Siting Council, Connecticut statutes, a court opinion, EPA Superfund, USGS, drinking-water report22
Peer-reviewed sciencePublished studies on incinerator/gasifier ash leaching and gasification wastewater2
Technical & expert reportsEPA guidance and fact sheets; GAIA, Earthjustice, and Conservation Law Foundation analyses5
News coverageIndependent reporting from Connecticut and national outlets18

Questions and answers

About This Evidence Library

Where do the facts on this site come from?

Every factual claim links to a numbered source in the library below. The site relies first on primary and official records and peer-reviewed studies, then on technical and expert-organization reports, and only then on independent news reporting for events, quotes, and dates.

Are these primary sources?

Most are. The library leads with government records, Connecticut statutes, a state Supreme Court opinion, and peer-reviewed research you can read directly. Where a fact comes from reporting, the news article is linked, and where an official document exists behind the report, that is linked too.

Do the scientific sources describe this exact plant?

No. The peer-reviewed studies and EPA guidance describe the general behavior of incinerator and gasifier ash, leachate, and wastewater, and comparable facilities on the public record. They are cited as evidence about the process and about precedent, not as predictions about this specific site.

Why don’t you link the developer’s own website?

This site treats the proposal as its subject and cites the public record. Company promotional materials are not neutral sources, so the factual claims here rest on government filings, peer-reviewed research, and news coverage instead.

How do I check a specific number?

Find the small superscript footnote next to the claim, match its number to the entry in this library, and open the link. Each source is named and points to a working URL.

Can I suggest a correction?

Yes. Accuracy is the whole point of this project, and corrections backed by a primary, peer-reviewed, or official source are welcome through the About page.

The full library

Every Source, in One Place

A tiered, deduplicated, annotated bibliography of the evidence behind this site. Official and regulatory records come first, then peer-reviewed science, then technical and expert-organization reports, then news. Each entry names the source, notes what it establishes, and links to it. Every link was checked and reachable at the time of writing.

1. Official & regulatory sources

Connecticut DEEP and Siting Council filings, the Connecticut General Statutes, a Connecticut Supreme Court opinion, EPA Superfund site profiles, USGS water data, and the local drinking-water report.

  1. Connecticut DEEP, “Connecticut’s Aquifers” — establishes that stratified-drift deposits, including those of the Quinebaug River basin, are the state’s most productive aquifers, while bedrock typically yields only enough for individual domestic wells. portal.ct.gov/DEEP
  2. Connecticut DAS and DEEP, press release, “DAS and DEEP Announce Improvement to Quinebaug Trout Hatchery,” 2023 — establishes that the Plainfield hatchery draws 1,290,816,000 gallons of groundwater a year from 12 wells around the clock, and that a state project aims to reduce stress on the aquifer. portal.ct.gov/das
  3. Connecticut DEEP, “Environmental Justice Public Participation Plan,” SMART Technology Systems LLC, Norwich Road / Black Hill Road, Plainfield (PDF) — establishes that the state is treating the SMART site as an environmental-justice case requiring an approved public-participation plan before any permit application. portal.ct.gov (PDF)
  4. Connecticut DEEP, SMART Technology Systems, LLC, response to the Materials Management Infrastructure Request for Information (PDF) — the developer’s own filing on the state solid-waste planning record, and the primary official source for the company’s stated design. In it SMART describes “gasification technology in place of burn technology” rather than mass-burn incineration, claims recovery of “99% of metals” and “98% of glass,” refuse-derived fuel and anaerobic digestion, carbon capture with conversion of CO2 to a “food grade” product, a capacity factor “greater than 90%,” and a claim to Class I renewable status. These are the developer’s own stated figures on the regulatory record, presented here as the company’s claims, not as verified outcomes. The throughput, output, jobs, tax-revenue, and timeline numbers the company has given publicly are corroborated in reporting at sources 31 and 35 below. portal.ct.gov (PDF)
  5. Connecticut DEEP, Office of Adjudications, Proposed Final Decision on the Wheelabrator Putnam ash landfill, Putnam, CT, 2021 (PDF) — establishes that this Quinebaug River ash landfill receives residue from Connecticut trash-to-energy plants and documents first-time PFAS sampling required of its leachate. portal.ct.gov (PDF)
  6. Connecticut DEEP, Office of Adjudications, “Public Act 25-84 and Initiating the Hearing Process” — establishes that a petition of at least 25 persons filed during the comment window can compel a hearing on a DEEP permit. portal.ct.gov/deep
  7. Connecticut DEEP, draft NPDES permit CT0030473, Plainfield Renewable Energy LLC (PDF) — the discharge permit for the existing wood-biomass plant in Plainfield, which discharges cooling-water blowdown to the Quinebaug River. epa.gov (PDF)
  8. Connecticut Siting Council, “Applications and Other Pending Matters” — establishes that no SMART, O&G, or Plainfield gasification docket is currently listed, meaning no Certificate application has been filed. portal.ct.gov/CSC
  9. Connecticut Siting Council, “Public Hearing Participation” — explains how residents take part in a Siting Council proceeding and how party and intervenor status work. portal.ct.gov/CSC
  10. Connecticut Siting Council, Docket 470B, NTE Killingly (Killingly Energy Center) — the case record for the proposed Killingly gas plant, first denied then approved, and ultimately never built. portal.ct.gov/CSC
  11. Connecticut General Statutes, Chapter 277a, Public Utility Environmental Standards Act (Sec. 16-50i, 16-50m, 16-50n, 16-50p) — establishes the Siting Council certificate requirement, the hearing timeline, party status for abutters and the host town, and the standards for approval or denial. cga.ct.gov
  12. Connecticut General Statutes, Chapter 446d, Solid Waste Management (Sec. 22a-208d) — establishes that the DEEP commissioner may not permit a facility processing mixed municipal solid waste without a written determination that it is needed and will not create substantial excess capacity. cga.ct.gov
  13. Connecticut General Statutes, Sec. 22a-19 (Connecticut Environmental Protection Act), via FindLaw — establishes that any person may intervene in an administrative proceeding on the ground that conduct is reasonably likely to unreasonably pollute or impair the state’s natural resources. codes.findlaw.com
  14. Not Another Power Plant v. Connecticut Siting Council, No. SC 20464, Connecticut Supreme Court, 2022 — the reported opinion affirming dismissal of the grassroots group’s appeal of the Siting Council’s approval of the Killingly plant, illustrating the limits of a court challenge. law.justia.com
  15. U.S. EPA, Superfund Site Profile, “Gallup’s Quarry,” Plainfield, CT — a 29-acre former gravel pit on the National Priorities List since 1989; contaminants include VOCs, PCBs, heavy metals, 1,4-dioxane, and arsenic, with PFAS detected in November 2020 groundwater sampling. cumulis.epa.gov
  16. U.S. EPA, Superfund Site Profile, “Mason City Coal Gasification Plant,” Iowa — a former manufactured-gas plant (1900–1951); the April 2023 five-year review found benzene and benzo(a)anthracene increasing at some deeper-aquifer locations more than seventy years after operations ceased. cumulis.epa.gov
  17. U.S. EPA, Superfund Site Profile, “Waterloo Coal Gasification Plant,” Iowa — a former manufactured-gas plant (1901–1956) where EPA identified a “technical impracticability zone,” a formal finding that full groundwater cleanup is not feasible. cumulis.epa.gov
  18. U.S. EPA, Superfund Site Profile, “Orlando Gasification Plant,” Florida — a former manufactured-gas plant (1887–1960) where coal tar contaminated soil and groundwater with VOCs, PAHs, and arsenic. cumulis.epa.gov
  19. U.S. EPA, “National Enforcement and Compliance Initiative: Protecting Communities from Coal Ash” — establishes that coal ash can release contaminants into groundwater and drinking water and names it a federal enforcement priority. epa.gov
  20. U.S. Geological Survey, “Water Resources Inventory of Connecticut, Part 1: Quinebaug River Basin” (Connecticut Water Resources Bulletin No. 8), 1966 — the foundational federal study of the basin’s stratified-drift aquifer system. usgs.gov
  21. Connecticut Water Company, Plainfield public water system Consumer Confidence Report (PWS ID CT1090081) — establishes that the Plainfield system’s source is groundwater from the “Plainfield Wellfield.” ctwater.com (PDF)
  22. Connecticut General Assembly, Bill Status, House Bill 7004 (2025), “An Act Authorizing Municipal Referenda to Challenge Certain Permit Approvals” — the official record of the bill that passed both chambers and was vetoed by the Governor on July 8, 2025. cga.ct.gov

2. Scientific & peer-reviewed studies

Published, peer-reviewed measurements of what incinerator and gasifier residues and wastewater contain and how they behave.

  1. A. Alnajjar et al., “Advancements in Detoxification of Municipal Solid Waste Incineration Fly Ash,” Materials (Basel), 2026 — establishes that MSW-incineration fly ash is a listed hazardous waste enriched in leachable heavy metals (chromium, copper, nickel, lead, zinc, cadmium, mercury) and dioxins, and that, once leached, these metals can migrate into groundwater and soil. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
  2. “Chemometric Study of the Ex Situ Underground Coal Gasification Wastewater Experimental Data,” Water, Air, & Soil Pollution, 2012 — establishes that gasification wastewater carries polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons, benzene and its alkyl derivatives (BTEX), phenolics, ammonia, cyanides, and trace metals including arsenic and chromium. ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

3. Technical & expert-organization reports

Agency guidance and technical analyses from established bodies, used alongside the primary science above.

  1. Global Alliance for Incinerator Alternatives (GAIA / no-burn), “Waste Gasification and Pyrolysis: High Risk, Low Yield Processes for Waste Management,” 2017 — documents numerous gasification and pyrolysis plant shutdowns and notes that the European Commission’s reference document treats the combustion stage of these processes the same as incineration. no-burn.org
  2. U.S. EPA, “Interim Guidance on the Destruction and Disposal of PFAS and Materials Containing PFAS” — the current federal statement of the science and remaining uncertainties for destroying PFAS by thermal treatment, landfilling, and underground injection, noting open questions about lower-temperature combustors. epa.gov
  3. Earthjustice and the Environmental Integrity Project, “First Comprehensive National Study of Coal Ash Pollution Finds Widespread Groundwater Contamination,” 2019 — found that groundwater near 242 of 265 monitored U.S. coal plants (about 91 percent) had unsafe levels of at least one coal-ash pollutant, based on 2015 federal monitoring data. earthjustice.org
  4. Conservation Law Foundation, notice of intent to sue over the Wheelabrator Saugus, Massachusetts, ash landfill, 2017 — alleged failures in groundwater monitoring and Clean Water Act compliance at an unlined ash landfill beside the Saugus and Pines Rivers. clf.org
  5. Resource.co, “UKWIN highlights litany of gasification failures” — a waste-industry account of repeatedly failed or abandoned gasification projects, including UK operator New Earth Solutions and a Galashiels, Scotland, project that cost the local council. resource.co

4. News coverage

Independent reporting from Connecticut and national outlets, used for events, quotes, votes, and dates. Supporting only; never the sole basis for a scientific or quantitative claim.

  1. The Day, “Plainfield opposing plans for a trash to energy plant in a residential zone” (81-acre residential-zone site), open-access copy via the Foundation for Fair Contracting of Connecticut, April 2025. ffcct.org
  2. Norwich Bulletin, “Plant to convert trash to gas, electricity to be pitched in Plainfield,” via Yahoo News, March 2025 — secondary corroboration of the developer’s own stated figures, given at the company’s public presentation: Valmet gasification of refuse-derived fuel; throughput of more than 1,800 tons of solid waste per day, five days a week, which the company also states as up to 468,000 tons a year (about 9,000 tons a week); and project manager Bill Corvo’s statement that the plant would not go operational “much before 2028.” These are the developer’s figures, reported as claims; the primary official record of the proposal is SMART’s own DEEP filing at source 4 above. yahoo.com
  3. Norwich Bulletin, “‘We don’t want you here’: Plainfield residents oppose waste processing plant,” via Yahoo News, May 2025. yahoo.com
  4. Norwich Bulletin, “Here’s the status of the proposed trash-to-energy plant in Plainfield” (DEEP air permit and solid-waste plan filed; no Siting Council petition yet; town permits planned later), via AOL, April 2026. aol.com
  5. Norwich Bulletin, “Plainfield residents raise questions on SMART’s trash-to-power project” (resident concerns on traffic, growth, and fire response), via AOL, April 2026. aol.com
  6. Hartford Courant, “Connecticut Residents Object to Plans for High-Tech Trash Plant,” via Government Technology — reports the June 2025 referendum (1,148 to 125 against, non-binding) and the joint Republican and Democratic town-committee letter, and corroborates two further developer figures given by project manager Bill Corvo: “several million dollars per year” in tax revenue and a “minimum of 160 long-term jobs.” The tax-revenue and jobs numbers are the developer’s own claims; the primary official record of the proposal is SMART’s DEEP filing at source 4 above. govtech.com
  7. WFSB (CBS 3), “Plan to bring trash plant causing outrage in Plainfield,” May 2025. wfsb.com
  8. CT Mirror, “Lamont finishes review of 2025 bills with a veto” (House Bill 7004, the referendum-challenge bill, vetoed July 8, 2025). ctmirror.org
  9. CT News Junkie, “Lamont Vetoes Bill That Would Have Allowed Some Towns To Overrule DEEP By Referendum” (House passed 104–43, Senate 25–11), July 2025. ctnewsjunkie.com
  10. CT Mirror, “In CT, trash is piling up” (about 940,000 tons of municipal solid waste exported out of state in 2023 after MIRA’s closure), April 2025. ctmirror.org
  11. Connecticut Public, “After months of debate, Hartford trash-burning plant now officially closed” (the MIRA South Meadows waste-to-energy plant stopped burning trash July 19, 2022). ctpublic.org
  12. Connecticut Public, “26 Connecticut towns exiting MIRA trash collaborative, dealing another blow to agency’s future,” April 2022. ctpublic.org
  13. CT Mirror, “Killingly gas power plant, ISO-New England auction, FERC” (FERC terminated the Killingly plant’s ISO-New England capacity obligation after missed development deadlines), March 2022. ctmirror.org
  14. Canary Media, “Legal snafu over canceled natural gas plant site ensnares Connecticut energy storage project” (the Killingly gas plant was canceled and its developer no longer holds the site). canarymedia.com
  15. CT Examiner, “Lamont Rejects Plea for $330 Million of Subsidies for MIRA Waste-to-Energy Plant,” July 2020 (the state’s refusal of a bailout that preceded MIRA’s closure). ctexaminer.com
  16. Waste360, “Putnam, Conn. Commission Denies Wheelabrator Landfill Expansion” (a local wetlands commission blocked the ash-landfill expansion even after a DEEP hearing officer recommended approval). waste360.com
  17. Waste Dive, “Massachusetts Wheelabrator facility faces potential lawsuit over alleged RCRA violations” (the Saugus ash-landfill dispute over groundwater monitoring and Clean Water Act compliance). wastedive.com
  18. The Intercept, “Toxic PFAS Was Burned in Upstate New York” (PFAS-laden firefighting foam burned at the Norlite incinerator in Cohoes, NY; academic sampling found PFAS in nearby soil and water, less than 200 meters from a public-housing complex), April 2020. theintercept.com

See the questions and answers →