Park Gang-su, Mayor of Mapo District, Holds Press Conference on the 28th: "No Answer but Complete Cancellation" & Initial Site for Gangdong Area Metropolitan Resource Recovery Facility Was Godeok and Gangil in Gangdong District & Site Selection Committee Lost Objectivity, Illegal Formation Renders Installation Invalid
[Asia Economy Reporter Park Jong-il] On the 28th, Park Gang-su, Mayor of Mapo-gu, strongly stated at a press conference urging the withdrawal of the site selection for the Metropolitan Resource Recovery Facility that there are serious and clear defects in the composition of the site selection committee, and that the final site candidate selection decided by the illegally formed committee is naturally invalid.
Despite the ongoing exposure of the illegality and unfairness of the Metropolitan Resource Recovery Facility Site Selection Committee through the media and others, follow-up procedures are proceeding instead of a complete cancellation.
This press conference was held to check the unfairness and impropriety in the site selection process of Mapo-gu and to strongly urge the withdrawal of the site selection in order to prevent growing anxiety among residents and unnecessary social conflicts.
At this event, Mayor Park informed the facts about ▲ the lack of transparency and violation of laws by the site selection committee ▲ the concentration of undesirable facilities in Mapo-gu ▲ the violation of regional distribution equity in the installation of waste treatment facilities, emphasized the role of the city council, and publicly requested the reduction of the budget related to the incinerator.
Before starting, he also expressed regret over the current situation where a critical issue directly related to residents' health and safety is being distorted into "incinerator politics."
Mayor Park stated that to understand why the unfair and improper site selection was made, one must look back at the initial plan related to the installation of the Metropolitan Resource Recovery Facility, which was the "Gangdong Area Metropolitan Resource Recovery Facility Installation Plan" established during the tenure of the late Mayor Park Won-soon (July 2, 2018).
He added that for some reason, this plan was suspended.
Although the installation site was confirmed as the public housing districts of Godeok and Gangil in Gangdong-gu at the time of the initial plan in 2018, the final candidate site was reversed to Mapo-gu in 2022.
Mayor Park explained the composition of the site selection committee, saying, "The committee claims that everything was fairly decided through a transparent discussion process, but if there is a defect in the committee itself, the story changes."
Out of a total of 10 members, 7 were recommended by the Seoul Metropolitan Council's Environment and Water Resources Committee. A city council member from Gangdong-gu, which had been promoted as the installation site for the incinerator since 2018, was appointed as a final member of the site selection committee. Meanwhile, Gangdong-gu, a strong candidate site, was excluded from the final candidates.
Mayor Park strongly demanded, regarding the various suspicions raised about the committee mostly composed of members recommended by the city council, "The city council must now exercise all appropriate authority and fulfill its role and responsibility," and "Since it has the authority to review and approve the Seoul city budget, it should reduce the budget related to the incinerator to lead the withdrawal of the site selection."
He pointed out the illegality of the committee for violating the "number of committee members" and "number of appointed public officials," and for not including any Mapo-gu residents among the resident representatives, thus not following the committee composition method stipulated by relevant laws.
Since the committee was established on December 15, 2020, Mapo-gu's position is that the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Promotion of Installation of Waste Treatment Facilities and Support for Surrounding Areas (hereinafter referred to as the Enforcement Decree), Article 7, Appendix 1-2, revised on December 8 and effective December 10, should be applied.
Mapo-gu denied both Seoul City's claim regarding the installation date (December 4, 2020) and the application of the "transitional measures" in Article 2 of the Enforcement Decree's supplementary provisions. The supplementary provision refers to the composition of committees "installed" at the time of enforcement, and the "installation date" here means the date when members were appointed and the first meeting was held, so December 15 is effectively the installation date of the committee.
In particular, Mayor Park emphasized that the absence of Mapo-gu residents among the committee members, despite Mapo-gu being the final candidate site, is also a serious defect.
He raised his voice that the committee composition with serious and clear defects is invalid, and the final site candidate selection decided by the defective committee's resolution is naturally invalid as well.
Mayor Park stated, "Forcing repeated suffering on residents of one area, which other districts do not experience, is nothing but a threat demanding sacrifice under the guise of mature civic consciousness," and clarified his position that opposition to additional incinerator installation is not regional selfishness but a rightful claim concerning the fundamental principles of "regional distribution equity" and "residents' health and safety" regarding undesirable facility installation.
As an explanation, he strongly criticized the decision for blatantly violating the equity of waste treatment facility installation by citing ▲ the concentration of six undesirable facilities including a hydrogen station with explosion risk ▲ 43% of Seoul's air pollutants being generated in Mapo-gu ▲ the fact that 15 out of 25 districts have no waste treatment facilities.
He also raised suspicions about the evaluation criteria for candidate sites. Seoul City had disclosed the reasons for selecting Mapo-gu as a candidate site, including ▲ no residents living within the indirect influence zone (within 300m) ▲ no need for urban planning facility designation ▲ ease of relocation measures and land acquisition ▲ efficiency of waste heat utilization.
However, Mayor Park said, "These items inevitably give high scores to areas like Mapo-gu where incinerators already exist," and added, "The detailed evaluation criteria were first approved at the 5th committee meeting, but the evaluation items were changed five times afterward, and for some reason, the detailed changes and reasons have not been transparently disclosed."
He reiterated a strong stance on withdrawing the incinerator site selection, saying, "I clearly state that there is no answer other than a complete cancellation of the Mapo-gu site selection, which is fraught not only with clear procedural defects but also with unfairness, inequality, and impropriety."
Finally, representing 370,000 Mapo-gu residents, Mayor Park said, "What Mapo-gu residents want is not a regional landmark, a large-scale benefit facility, or support funds, but simply to enjoy a healthy and safe daily life in a pleasant environment with family and neighbors."
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Press Conference Statement by Park Gang-su, Mayor of Mapo-gu
○ Hello, I am Park Gang-su, Mayor of Mapo-gu.
○ The Seoul Metropolitan Resource Recovery Facility Site Selection Committee
selected Mapo-gu as the final candidate site on August 25,
made a surprise announcement on August 31,
and on September 15, disclosed the feasibility study process and results.
○ Despite the ongoing exposure of the illegality and unfairness of the committee with decision-making authority over site selection through the media,
follow-up procedures are continuing instead of a complete cancellation,
○ and some are even turning this critical issue concerning residents' health and safety into "incinerator politics,"
a regrettable situation.
○ Therefore, to inform the media of the unfairness in the site selection process, including the biased recommendation of committee members by the Seoul Metropolitan Council,
and the resulting anger of residents,
and to strongly urge the withdrawal of the site selection once again,
we have prepared this press conference today.
○ Mapo-gu has long suffered from various undesirable facilities,
and this suffering continues today.
○ These include the Dangin-ri Thermal Power Plant built in 1930 and undergrounded in 2013,
Nanji Landfill, which buried 80 million truckloads of metropolitan garbage from 1978 to 1993,
an oil reserve base installed without residents' knowledge from 1978 and closed in 2000,
the Mapo Resource Recovery Facility with a 750-ton capacity built in 2005 and operating for 17 years,
the Sangam Hydrogen Station completed in 2010,
and the Sangam Hydrogen Fuel Cell Power Plant built in 2017,
making a total of six sites.
○ Among these, the hydrogen station, although equipped with safety devices,
is a facility with a very high risk of explosion.
○ For example,
in 2019, a hydrogen storage tank explosion at the Gangneung Technopark Venture Factory Research Institute
resulted in 2 deaths and 6 serious injuries,
a major accident.
○ Although the storage tank was a low-pressure container of 6 bar,
it caused a huge impact on buildings 150 meters away,
with estimated property damage of about 34 billion KRW.
○ Considering this explosion power of a low-pressure container,
what if the Sangam Hydrogen Station, which was secretly doubled in storage capacity during the late Mayor Park Won-soon's tenure in 2019,
currently equipped with two 900 bar and eight 450 bar tanks, explodes?
○ Based on the Gangneung explosion accident,
the storage tank pressure at Sangam Hydrogen Power Plant and Station is over 150 times higher at 900 bar,
and the impact radius in case of explosion would be over 8 km,
making it no exaggeration to call it a bomb that could cause fatal human and property damage throughout Mapo-gu.
○ Despite enduring decades of suffering from odors, dust, fallout, and explosion risks solely for the public good of Seoul,
Mapo-gu and nearby residents are not even compensated for their sacrifices,
and now a 1,000-ton capacity incinerator is to be additionally installed,
which is nothing short of a bolt from the blue!
<43% of Seoul's Air Pollutants Generated in Mapo-gu>
○ During the installation of various undesirable facilities,
it is often emphasized that modern technology ensures safety and environmental issues,
but the reality is often different.
○ According to the Ministry of Environment's 2021 Air Pollutant Management System for Business Sites,
out of 25 chimneys installed in Seoul's business sites,
4 are located in Mapo-gu,
and the annual air pollutants emitted there account for 43% of Seoul's total.
○ Looking at the numbers in detail,
one thermal power plant emits 169,368 kg, 31% of Seoul's total 533,897 kg,
and the 750-ton capacity Mapo Resource Recovery Facility emits 59,398 kg, 11%.
○ This alone makes Mapo-gu residents sufficiently anxious.
Adding a new 1,000-ton capacity incinerator will mean that from 2026,
Mapo-gu will incinerate 1,750 tons daily, accounting for 55% of Seoul's total 3,200 tons of waste.
○ Are Mapo-gu residents not Seoul citizens or Korean nationals?
After seeing such statistics, one cannot help but ask whether the committee's decision was fair and reasonable,
and whether the health and safety of Mapo-gu residents were considered even once.
<15 Seoul Districts Have Zero Representative Waste Treatment Facilities>
○ Even more shocking is the overall status of waste treatment facilities in Seoul.
○ Except for Eunpyeong-gu, which operates its own incinerator among 25 autonomous districts,
20 districts have no incinerators,
and including food waste and sewage treatment facilities,
15 districts have no waste treatment facilities at all.*
*Status of undesirable facilities in Seoul's autonomous districts
Incinerator (Metropolitan)
Thermal Power Plant
Food Waste Treatment
Sewage Treatment
No Undesirable Facilities
Mapo, Nowon, Yangcheon, Gangnam
Mapo
Dongdaemun, Dobong, Songpa, Gangdong
Jungnang, Gangseo
15 districts
○ Can the demand for a complete withdrawal of the incinerator installation be called regional selfishness?
○ Absolutely not. Even though Mapo-gu residents are Seoul citizens,
forcing them to repeatedly suffer what other districts do not is nothing but a threat demanding sacrifice under the guise of mature civic consciousness.
○ This site selection result blatantly violates the fundamental principle of waste treatment facility installation,
which is to prevent concentration in specific areas and ensure installation equity.
○ Then, why was such an unfair and improper site selection made?
To confirm this, let's look at the initial plan and process of the Metropolitan Resource Recovery Facility.
○ Seoul City first established the "Gangdong Area Metropolitan Resource Recovery Facility Installation Plan" in July 2018 during the tenure of the late Mayor Park Won-soon.
○ For some reason, this plan was suspended, and in May 2019, the "Metropolitan Resource Recovery Facility Site Selection Promotion Plan" was established.
Announcements and re-announcements for site selection were made in May and September of the same year, but no autonomous district applied.
○ The site selection process stalled until December 2020, when the site selection committee was formed,
which held 11 meetings until August 25, 2022, and selected Mapo-gu as the final candidate site.
○ Although the initial plan in 2018 confirmed the installation site as the public housing districts of Godeok and Gangil in Gangdong-gu,
the final candidate site was reversed to Mapo-gu in 2022.
<70% of Committee Members Recommended by Seoul Metropolitan Council>
○ The committee claims that everything was fairly decided through a transparent discussion process,
but if there is a defect in the committee composition itself,
the story changes.
○ Most importantly, the Environment and Water Resources Committee, a standing committee of the Seoul Metropolitan Council, exerted biased influence on the composition of the site selection committee,
which Mapo-gu cannot overlook.
○ The Seoul Metropolitan Resource Recovery Facility Site Selection Committee consists of 10 members including the chairman,
○ excluding two experts recommended by Seoul City and one Seoul City official,
two city council members and three resident representatives recommended by the Seoul Metropolitan Council,
and two experts recommended by those resident representatives,
making 7 members, or 70% of the committee, recommended by the Seoul Metropolitan Council's Environment and Water Resources Committee.
○ Perhaps due to the structure where most committee members are decided by the Seoul Metropolitan Council,
a city council member from Gangdong-gu, which had been promoted as the installation site since 2018, was appointed as a final committee member unfairly.
○ If this resulted in excluding Gangdong-gu, a strong candidate site, from the final selection,
can this be dismissed as an unreasonable speculation?
○ Given the various suspicions raised about the committee mostly composed of members recommended by the Seoul Metropolitan Council,
what has the Seoul Metropolitan Council done until now?
It is a situation where the issue cannot be ignored.
○ The Seoul Metropolitan Council is the people's hall that works on behalf of citizens' will.
This means that legislative activities should be conducted for the entire Seoul City, not for a specific district.
○ Therefore, the Seoul Metropolitan Council must now exercise all appropriate authority and fulfill its role and responsibility,
○ and since it has the authority to review and approve the Seoul city budget,
I strongly and publicly request here that the entire budget related to the Metropolitan Resource Recovery Facility be cut.
○ A bigger problem is the violation of laws.
○ The Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Promotion of Installation of Waste Treatment Facilities and Support for Surrounding Areas, the legal basis for the committee's establishment, was revised and enforced on December 10, 2020,
but its supplementary provision Article 2 states that committees established at the time of enforcement shall follow the previous regulations.
○ The term "committee established at the time of enforcement" means
▲ members were appointed and their terms started,
▲ the chairman was elected,
▲ the committee's operating regulations were approved,
completing the basic structure to operate as a committee,
meaning a deliberative body capable of making decisions on agenda items with members participating.
○ Therefore, since 10 members were appointed and the first meeting was held on December 15, 2020, this is the installation date of the committee, and the revised Enforcement Decree should be applied,
which is also confirmed by Seoul City's press release on December 15, 2020, titled "Site Selection Committee Launched on the 15th."
○ According to the revised law on committee composition,
the committee should consist of 11 to 21 members including the chairman,
with 2 to 4 public officials or employees from waste treatment facility installation agencies,
and 3 to 6 resident representatives living near the waste treatment facility.*
*Comparison before and after revision of the Enforcement Decree of the Act on the Promotion of Installation of Waste Treatment Facilities and Support for Surrounding Areas
Category
Number of Members
Appointed Public Officials
Resident Representatives
Before Revision
Up to 11 including chairman
1 public official from city/province
3 resident representatives selected by city/province
After Revision
11 to 21 including chairman
2 to 4 public officials or employees from waste treatment facility installation agencies
3 to 6 resident representatives living near the facility
Current Committee Status
10 members
1 public official
3 resident representatives (no Mapo-gu residents)
○ However, the Metropolitan Resource Recovery Facility Site Selection Committee consists of 10 members including the chairman,
with only 1 public official from the waste treatment facility installation agency,
and none of the 3 resident representatives are Mapo-gu residents.
○ Administration must follow laws and principles,
and violating them means the effectiveness is not recognized, which is common sense.
○ Therefore, the committee with serious and clear defects is invalid,
and the final site candidate selection decided by the defective committee's resolution is naturally invalid.
○ The evaluation criteria for candidate sites are also full of suspicions.
○ According to the committee minutes,
at the 5th meeting held on May 20, 2021,
it was decided that additional weight should be given to the four districts with existing incinerators.
○ At the 8th meeting on March 31, 2022,
it was decided to reflect the "regional distribution fairness" of the Metropolitan Resource Recovery Facility,
derived as one of the resident acceptance measures through the "2021 Seoul Public Discussion," in the site selection.
○ Despite several discussions emphasizing the importance of considering the redundancy of metropolitan resource recovery facilities,
only 0.3 points out of 100 were deducted for existing incinerator facilities, which is absurd.
○ On the other hand, items such as the status of residential areas within the indirect influence zone of 300m,
legal conflicts and urban planning permits,
relocation measures and ease of land acquisition, and waste heat utilization efficiency
are items where areas like Mapo-gu with existing incinerators inevitably receive high scores.*
*Mapo-gu scores by evaluation item
Category
Score
Residential area within 300m indirect influence zone
9 points
9 points
Legal conflicts and urban planning permits
5 points
5 points
Relocation measures and land acquisition ease
3 points
2.8 points
Waste heat utilization efficiency
2 points
2 points
○ Moreover, after initially approving detailed evaluation criteria at the 5th meeting,
the evaluation items were changed five times,*
resulting in the current biased criteria,
raising suspicions that the answer was predetermined as Mapo-gu and the criteria were tailored accordingly.
*Changes to candidate site evaluation criteria
? (May 20, 2021) 5th meeting: Approval of detailed evaluation items and scoring criteria
- Need to consider overlapping or adjacent installation in four districts with incinerators and apply weighting
? (August 26, 2021) 6th meeting: Adjustment of evaluation items and scoring criteria
? (March 31, 2022) 8th meeting: Reflection of 2021 Seoul public discussion results in evaluation criteria
- Content: Regional distribution fairness of undesirable facilities (incinerators, food waste treatment, sewage treatment)
? (May 27, 2022) 9th meeting: Change of candidate site evaluation items and scoring criteria
- Approval of original evaluation item names, partial revision of scoring criteria
? (June 30, 2022) 10th meeting: Approval of 2nd candidate site selection criteria (draft)
? (August 25, 2022) 11th meeting: Revision of 2nd candidate site selection criteria (draft)
○ Furthermore, the committee has not transparently disclosed the detailed changes and reasons for these revisions for some reason,
which only increases suspicions.
○ Additionally, without efforts to reduce waste and disperse treatment facilities by local governments,
concentrating incinerators in specific areas is nothing but administrative convenience.
○ Incinerators are not a panacea for waste treatment.
Thorough recycling and separation can reduce more than half of the current waste.
○ In fact, investigations of waste in volume-based waste bags show many recyclables such as paper and plastic mixed in.
○ Instead of only incineration and landfill as in the past,
reuse of recycled resources and crushing technology should be actively introduced and utilized.
○ As explained above, the Mapo-gu site selection, fraught with clear procedural defects, unfairness, inequality, and impropriety,
has no answer other than a complete cancellation.
○ What Mapo-gu residents want is not a regional landmark, a large-scale benefit facility, or support funds.
They simply want to enjoy a healthy and safe daily life in a pleasant environment with family and neighbors.
○ In this season of abundant harvest and joyful festivals under clear skies,
our Mapo-gu residents are plunged into deep despair and loss.
○ Why do our good residents have to protest at the incinerator at night with their children during the Chuseok holiday?
Why do our innocent residents have to go to the incinerator every night for lawful resistance?
Why do our pure mothers have to come out with strollers under the scorching sun and protest loudly in front of the district office?
○ Administrative trust is collapsing due to a wrongly buttoned button,
and unnecessary social conflicts are intensifying, so
the site selection process must be reset to the starting point.
○ To this end, I emphasize once again that the Seoul Metropolitan Council, as a supervisory and check institution for administration, must take the lead in withdrawing the site selection,
○ and I, along with 370,000 Mapo-gu residents, will closely watch whether the new Metropolitan Resource Recovery Facility site candidate selection is conducted through legal and transparent procedures.
○ Finally, I, Park Gang-su,
have been mayor for only three months and still have many shortcomings.
But when I received the certificate of election, I promised the residents
to be a servant of the residents and follow their orders.
○ I may break, but I will make sure that the health and safety of Mapo-gu residents do not break,
and I will protect Mapo-gu from undesirable facilities.
○ Thank you.
© The Asia Business Daily(www.asiae.co.kr). All rights reserved.
