UNDER PROBE The MT Glenn Guardian docked at Alava Pier on Subic Bay. ROBERT GONZAGA/INQUIRER CENTRAL LUZON
SUBIC BAY FREEPORT—The finding that the ship waste dumped by a US Navy contractor into Subic Bay was not hazardous pertains to just one incident, the chief of the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority (SBMA) said on Tuesday, indicating that the contractor is not yet off the hook.
In fact, the US Navy contractor Glenn Defense Marine Philippines Inc., is in for a “deeper investigation,” SBMA Chairman Roberto Garcia told the Philippine Daily Inquirer in an interview.
In another interview with ANC, Garcia said the SBMA would ask Glenn Defense to explain the wastes it had previously collected and how these were disposed.
Garcia said the SBMA wanted to be sure Philippine regulations were followed.
Garcia said the results of the SBMA Ecology Center’s initial investigation showed that ship waste dumped into the bay last month by MT Glenn Guardian, a vessel operated by Glenn Defense, was not hazardous.
But tests conducted by Subic Water and Sewerage Co. showed the organic contents of the waste were “beyond permissible limits,” according to the utility’s spokesperson, Herman Habacon.
Subic Water tested a sample provided by the SBMA Ecology Center for domestic strength, Habacon said, but found it to be of industrial strength.
An Inquirer source said that industrial grade waste was hazardous and its disposal in Philippine waters was a violation of the Department of Environment and Natural Resources (DENR) Administrative Order No. 35 setting standards for the disposal of wastewater.
Environment Secretary Ramon Paje on Monday said that the DENR had not yet accepted the finding that the waste dumped by the Glenn Guardian into Subic Bay was domestic waste and not hazardous.
Paje said the DENR was still waiting for the report of the Philippine Coast Guard, the agency tasked with the implementation of standards and regulations pertaining to environmental protection in Philippine seas.
Conflicting findings
Two senators on Tuesday said that the conflicting findings made a Senate inquiry into the alleged pollution of Philippine waters more imperative.
Senators Gregorio Honasan and Loren Legarda also said the statements of retired Vice Admiral Mateo Mayuga, CEO of Glenn Defense, at a news conference on Monday that the waste was pretreated and therefore not hazardous could be premature.
“How can he say this early that the waste was pretreated? My question is, whose side is he on?” said Honasan, vice chair of the Senate defense committee.
Legarda, chair of the Senate foreign relations committee, said Mayuga’s claim ran counter to the reports that the waste dumped in Philippine waters by Glenn Defense was “toxic.”
“Assuming that the initial report about the waste being toxic is incorrect, why would the Subic Bay Metropolitan Authority and the Department of Environment and Natural Resources claim otherwise”? Legarda said.
The safeness of wastewater poured into Philippine waters “cannot be assumed,” she said.
Senators Miriam Defensor-Santiago, Aquilino Pimentel III and Legarda filed separate resolutions on Monday asking the Senate to investigate the alleged dumping of hazardous waste in Subic.
House probe
Glenn Defense may also be facing an investigation in the House of Representatives.
Bayan Muna Rep. Teodoro Casiño on Tuesday filed a resolution asking the House foreign affairs committee to investigate the controversy.
Casiño said Glenn Defense should not use the Visiting Forces Agreement (VFA) as cover for its wrongdoing.
Senator Santiago has suggested the termination of the VFA, which she believes has been violated in the pollution at Subic that is being blamed on Glenn Defense.
Lawyers for Glenn Defense have invoked the VFA in fending off an SBMA investigation, but the Department of Foreign Affairs (DFA) and Santiago say the agreement covers only visiting US armed forces, not civilian contractors.
At the news conference on Monday, Mayuga acknowledged that his company was not covered by the VFA.
Glenn Defense Marine Philippines is the local operator of the Singapore-based contractor that handles domestic waste from US Navy ships.
“We service only US Navy ships, but we are not in any way included in VFA arrangements,” Mayuga said.
SBMA’s Garcia said the agency would thoroughly review Glenn Defense’s waste collection and dumping methods.
“We’re compiling all the records of their operations, going back [to], maybe, 2011,” Garcia said. “[The] ecology and seaport [departments] are compiling everything. And based on what we find, we’ll submit a final report to Malacañang and the Senate when the hearings begin.”
No permit
An SBMA ecology team, acting on a “hazard alert,” boarded the Glenn Guardian on Oct. 15 and found the tanker carrying 189,500 liters of domestic waste and 760 liters of bilge water (water mixed with oil and grease) removed from the US Navy ship Emory Land docked at a pier in Subic.
The captain of the tanker told the team that the waste would be dumped 37 kilometers off Subic. The team said Glenn Defense had no permit from the government to dump the waste in Philippine waters.
In a statement, the SBMA said the bilge water collected by Glenn Defense from American ships docked on the bay last month was hauled by an accredited waste hauler and taken to an accredited waste treatment plant.
“We are still in the process of determining if all oily/bilge water has been treated properly and is covered by the necessary certificates of treatment,” the SBMA said.
The “raw untreated domestic waste water,” however, was discharged “in the high seas, approximately 17 nautical miles (31 kilometers) from the nearest land point,” it said.
The dumping area, it said, was “beyond the minimum 12 nautical mile (22 km) boundary set in the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (Marpol).”
Garcia said that according to the ship log of the Glenn Defense vessel, “they dumped the waste 17 nautical miles off shore.” It was signed by the ship captain.
Asked if the SBMA has a way to verify the claim, Garcia said, “No, we cannot track that.”
“The ship log is a very important thing. If they falsified that, it’s very serious. But they seem to have a designated dumping site. They showed three locations, adjacent to each other, where they dumped the waste,” he said.
Initial findings
Garcia stressed that the statement the SBMA released on Monday was “only the initial findings and just about the incident in October.”
He said the review he ordered would include how Glenn Defense collected, treated and dumped the waste from the nuclear submarines that docked in Subic Bay in the last few months.
Glenn Defense, according to Garcia, is the exclusive contractor of the US Navy and it serviced the nuclear submarines that docked here during the recently concluded military exercises between Philippine and American troops.
Garcia also clarified that the SBMA was still investigating whether the oily wastes collected from US vessels were treated before they were dumped.
“We’re looking at records as to how much they collected, and whether these had all been treated, before these were dumped,” he said.
“We are coordinating with other concerned agencies to verify compliance with other regulatory requirements [that] may be related to this matter. A formal report will be issued subsequently,” the SBMA statement said.
No VFA invocation?
Garcia also reacted to Mayuga’s statement that Glenn Defense did not invoke the VFA to avoid an SBMA investigation.
Garcia said: “You have a copy of their (Glenn Defense’s) letter. They spent three-fourths of that letter invoking their exemption under the VFA. They retreated. They have apparently changed their tune.”
Garcia said the letter from Glenn Defense’s lawyers, along with the final investigation report, would be submitted to the Senate at the opening of the investigation. With reports from Cathy Yamsuan and Christian Esguerra