Toxic-waste incinerator in the backyard: White House and church steer clear in Ohio - East Liverpool, Ohio - includes related article

National Catholic Reporter, Feb 18, 1994 by Arthur Jones

EAST LIVERPOOL, Ohio - Four year-old Alex Estell has one of the world's largest toxic-waste incinerators at the bottom of his garden. Its smokestack is about 600 feet from his bedroom window.

The incinerator is down on the Ohio River bank flood plain; the house is on a bluff overlooking it. Standing in his back yard, little Alex is eye-level with the 150-foot stack's 60-foot mark.

Von Roll USA Inc., the Swiss owner of the Waste Technologies Industries (WTI) incinerator, has permits to annually pump 7,400 pounds of lead, dioxin and other hazardous materials into the air.

Scientists have deplored the serious health risks, and Alex's parents, Bob and Sandy Estell, along with thousands of other families and 20,000 petitioners in the tristate (Ohio, Pennsylvania, West Virginia) area want it closed long before it reaches full capacity.

As a result, Alex's back yard has become what Jonathan Turley, a law professor at George Washington University (see accompanying story), calls "the central battleground for the toxic-waste incinerator permitting process."

"There is roughly a half-billion dollars on that Ohio River bank, and a great many companies and individuals have a financial interest in that incinerator going into full operation," Turley said. "Those people are willing to spend a lot of money and spill a great deal of political blood to keep the citizens from succeeding."

The hazardous-waste industry and its allies see East Liverpool and WTI as a battleground, too. They accuse environmental group Greenpeace, consumer activist Ralph Nader and Lois Gibbs of the Citizens Clearinghouse for Hazardous Waste of using the anti-WTI campaign as a fund-raiser.

A recent Waste Technologies news release states that its opponents "are running on empty, financially speaking, so they are trying to get money flowing their way."

Turley's affections are with WTI opponents in East Liverpool.

Turley, who founded the Environmental Crimes Project, based in Washington, said, "The WTI case reveals something of a noble lie in our country. Citizens are assured that the federal government will require careful permitting and operation of hazardous-waste facilities, are encouraged to participate in reviews [and are] promised that affected communities will have a voice in decisions [regarding sites and permits].

"What the WTI families did not realize was that you could prove your case, organize your community and convince your national leaders and still lose in the byzantine regulatory system. The Beltway's lawyers and lobbyists are paid to reverse such decisions in local communities.

"Ironically, the more public the outcry, the more the lobbyists and lawyers can charge to rescue investors and operators from the public whim. WTI has made a great number of people wealthy at the expense of the community of East Liverpool."

There are two questions: Is the WTI incinerator dangerous to public health? Is it, because of multiple transfers of ownership and the like, illegal?

Dangerous? In March 1993 just before the trial burn at which emissions would be measured, Federal District Court Judge Ann Aldrich, in a suit brought by Greenpeace, ordered the test burn halted on the basis that it would risk increased cancer deaths and "clearly may cause imminent and substantial endangerment to health and the environment." The 6th Court of Appeals reversed the decision on grounds of juristiction, not on Aldrich's risk findings.

Dangerous? WTI's operators say no: "The plant employs extensive emissions controls and monitoring systems that are setting the standard for the country."

Even so, in July 1992 in Weirton, W.Va., vice presidential candidate Al Gore told WTI protesters that a Clinton White House would mean a presidency "on your side for a change, instead of on the side of the garbage generators."

In December 1992, the incoming administration reaffirmed its safety-first decision to block the WTI incinerator. Those promises turned out to be clouds of political emissions, smoke quickly blown away when Clinton and Gore apparently discovered that an original financier for WTI was Jackson Stephens, an Arkansas investment banker. It was Stephens who, at the last minute, provided the rapidly emptying coffers of Clinton's presidential campaign with a $3.5 million line of credit.

The White House referred NCR to Vice President Gore's office and to the Environmental Protection Agency regarding WTI and the timing of Clinton's discovery that Stephens was involved. By press time, Gore's office had not responded to faxed questions or phone calls.

Clinton washed his hands of WTI by dumping responsibility for the WTI decision back on President Bush. Then, as Clinton and Gore looked the other way, the company received permission for the trial burn.

The Environmental Protection Agency appointee responsible for public liaison on WTI was Deputy Administrator Robert Sussman, a Clinton law school classmate and former legal counsel to the Chemical Manufacturers Association.