Fibre Excellence Tarascon: The Government Sends ADEME; Liquidators Fight Back

© Fibre Excellence Provence

Who is responsible for securing the Fibre Excellence Provence plant in Tarascon? The government has urgently called on ADEME and accused the court-appointed liquidators of ?negligence.? The liquidators have responded strongly.

Tensions are rising over the former Fibre Excellence Provence pulp mill. In light of the risks identified at the Seveso site in Tarascon, in the Bouches-du-Rhône department, the government has entrusted ADEME with ensuring the site?s safety. This decision has been accompanied by serious accusations against the court-appointed liquidators, who are responding point by point.

Since production ceased in late April and the paper mill was liquidated last July, large quantities of wood and chemicals remain in storage at this Seveso-designated site near the Rhône River

On September 15, the Inspectorate for Classified Facilities and ADEME inspected the premises. They found wood, hazardous products, and waste scattered throughout the site. Among these items were liquid hazardous wastes, primarily liquids.

In particular, the fire protection system and the wastewater treatment plant must be brought back online. According to the Ministry of Ecological Transition, several orders?including emergency measures, formal notices, and requisition orders?have not been carried out by the liquidators.

The government is accusing the liquidators...

Mathieu Lefèvre, Minister Delegate for Ecological Transition, has therefore authorized the prefect of Bouches-du-Rhône to call on ADEME under the terms of a "pressing urgency" , he states in a press release. A prefectural order mandating the work must assign the operations to him.

And the ministry isn't going easy on the court-appointed liquidators. " "For weeks now, the liquidators' negligence has been hindering the implementation of the emergency orders, followed by the formal notices and requisition orders." ", accuses Mathieu Lefèvre.
The minister also warns that "The amount of the invoice will, of course, be sent to the liquidators."

A claim that they strongly dispute.

... who reply, "We had suggested ADEME"

The co-liquidators stated in a press release that they had learned of the decision through the media. Above all, they assert that they themselves had proposed to the DREAL, several days earlier, that ADEME be called upon, given the scale of the operations still to be carried out and the resources available as part of the liquidation.

"To portray ADEME's intervention today as an emergency response by the government to an alleged 'negligence' on the part of the liquidators is therefore to reverse the chronology of events." . They add: "The ministry is thus turning a solution proposed by the liquidators themselves into evidence against them."

Since their appointment, they say they have organized the shutdown of the site, maintained constant monitoring, installed fire suppression systems, and begun the gradual removal of the products.

They also refuse to take responsibility for the environmental conditions at a factory that they only took over when it was liquidated.

A sit-in at the site on September 17

Another point of contention: the events of September 17. According to the liquidators, several dozen people entered the factory without authorization. Sophie Binet, general secretary of the CGT, accompanied by members of the media, also entered the site to hold a press conference.

In the afternoon, former employees reportedly reconnected equipment to the power supply and restarted certain facilities. Realtec, the company in charge of technical operations, then withdrew its crews, believing it could no longer ensure their safety.

"These facts were brought to the government's attention in real time," they point out. According to them, their absence from the ministerial statement "fundamentally changes our understanding of the situation and everyone's responsibilities."

Finally, the disagreement concerns payment for the operations entrusted to ADEME. The liquidators respond that "No decision taken unilaterally by the government can, by the mere assertion of a ministerial statement, create a personal debt for which the court-appointed representatives are liable."

More articles on the theme