Multinational waste firm defends its record as Government action sought

Plans for one of the largest landfills ever in this State inevitably provoked local fears

Plans for one of the largest landfills ever in this State inevitably provoked local fears. These are coloured by memories of pollution in various guises on people's doorsteps, of persistently contaminated water and of living with scarred landscape which was sometimes so polluted it could not be farmed.

An Irish legacy of poor waste disposal also plays on the minds of members of Silvermines Action Group (SAG); notably, many badly-managed dumps, frequently operated at levels exceeding capacity. There are concerns, too, for the future of the Silvermines area as it is forced to switch from agriculture towards tourism. Mining is a spent local industry.

These issues aside, the debate goes beyond classic feelings of "not in my back yard". Many are motivated by what they consider to be the poor environmental record of Waste Management Incorporated (WMInc), the parent company of Waste Management Ireland (WMI); so much so that SAG wants the Government to decide if the company should be allowed to operate here.

Mr Pat Keane, who worked for 11 years with a mining company in Silvermines, typifies this view: "A policy issue arises: should we allow Waste Management into Ireland?"

READ MORE

The Department of the Environment has shown no inclination to answer that question, and indicated the merits or otherwise of the project are for Tipperary North Riding County Council to determine.

Within the US alone between 1980 and June 1992, the company paid out $39.4 million in environmental penalties; some $11.5 million of this was payment to environmental funds and projects after various settlements. By 1996, however, US penalties amounted to $671,865.

In the "San Diego Report" of 1992 on the WMInc's environmental record and business dealings, the district attorney of San Diego County, Mr Edwin Miller, concluded that WMInc had been involved in practices which "suggest an unseemly effort to manipulate local government for its own business ends".

He continued: "If unchecked these practices, like other more direct forms of improper attempts to gain influence, may have a corrupting impact on local government and lead to decisions unsuitable to the best interests of the public."

Greenpeace in 1991 stood over its belief that WMInc "often supported stricter pollution control measures because they tended to generate more business for the company without really going to the source of the problem."

Rather than support legislation to reduce the generation and toxicity of waste, the company "focuses on stricter landfill laws which squeeze out competitors, which in turn enhances monopolisation of [the] waste collection, processing and disposal industry," it alleged.

WMInc was indicted by the San Bernardino County district attorney's office in California in October on 23 counts, after the office had investigated the Rail-Cycle Project, a WMInc plan to locate a "mega-trash dump" at a desert location near Cadiz in a joint venture with the Santa Fe Railway Company.

In 1997 the Indiana Department of Environmental Management blocked the expansion of a hazardous waste landfill run by Chemical Waste Management, a wholly-owned subsidiary of WMInc, in Fort Wayne, after a 10-year campaign by local residents.

WMInc says it is one of the largest businesses of its kind in the world, with a 1998 turnover of $9 billion, and that it has a sound environmental record overall.

"Operating in one of the most highly regulated industries in the US, its sheer size and the rapidity of its growth meant it is almost inevitable that judgments will have been made against it at some time. But we make our breaches public," said Mr Mark Gilligan, WMI development manager. "Compliance failures" are listed on the company website.

The argument that WMInc is a big company and that there will be mistakes as a consequence "is an appalling one," says Mr Paddy Mackey, a director of Voice environmental group. "We have severe doubts about the suitability of such a company coming to Ireland. We don't need a polluting multinational using outdated technology to deal with Ireland's waste-management problems."

WMInc's entry to the Republic underlines the need for "good character" environmental legislation, whereby a bad record would mean companies were not allowed to operate, he added.

Environmental standards WM adopted worldwide were often higher than those required by the countries in which they operate, Mr Gilligan said. Any development in Silvermines would adhere to the current draft of the EU directive on landfill waste, which would not be fully implemented until at least 2008.

No hazardous waste would be processed at the facility. "We are proposing to develop facilities for the recycling, transfer and landfill of non-hazardous waste only, household and industrial waste," he said.

On WMInc's environmental record in the US Ms Cherie Rice, vice-president for investor relations, stressed that last July USA Waste Services acquired the company.

All events or issues raised by The Irish Times "transpired prior to our acquisition of the company. As such, and with new executive management running the new Waste Management, we believe these past issues have little relevance to the future performance of the company."

The San Diego Report was "a poorly-researched effort," undertaken by "known opponents of the company and certain of its projects," she said.

WM had long enjoyed strong relationships with governments across the US and around the world. "Virtually all of these were entered into only after careful investigation of the company by the municipality."

On the San Bernardino indictment, the company had "pledged co-operation" with the investigating office. With litigation pending, it would not say more at this time.

On being subjected to "bad boy" legislation, Ms Rice said that at the conclusion of this matter the US Attorney's office issued a letter advising other federal, state or local government bodies that no personnel "above site level" knew about or participated in any of the unlawful activity.

"There was no evidence suggesting this activity caused any physical harm to the public. The US EPA concluded no debarment or suspension of CWM from future government work was warranted."