Contact
Helena Chemical hearings: clearing the air or corporate smokescreen?
Helena’s facility in Mesquite.
Although it may seem obvious to the folks who have to breathe the air and drink the water in Mesquite, Helena Chemical company – despite a history of air and groundwater violations – doesn’t understand why it must operate with an air quality permit. Helena is now holding public hearings with the Environmental Improvement Board to explain why it is appealing the NMED’s ruling that their operations require regulation. The next meeting is Wednesday.
A history of violations
In July 2008 Helena Chemical company agreed to pay $208, 331 to settle the 10 air quality permit complaints issued against their Mesquite fertilizer plant by the New Mexico Environment Department. From an NMED press release about the settlement:
“Helena must pay a considerable penalty for violating state air quality laws that any responsible business owner would find reasonable to follow,” said NMED Environmental Protection Division Director Jim Norton.“We will continue to monitor the company to ensure its operations do not endanger residents or the environment.”
Seven inspections conducted by the department’s Air Quality Bureau between March and June 2007 (only four months!) uncovered 10 violations of the Air Quality Control Act, Air Quality Control Regulations and Helena’s air permit with the department. Here’s a summary of the alleged violations:
- allowing emissions from the facility to escape outdoors
- having a malfunctioning chute that allowed emissions to escape during product loading
- failing to follow best engineering practices by keeping doors open while off-loading fertilizer into trucks; failing to keep the south haul road swept to control dust
- failing to conduct compliance tests of regulated equipment on schedule
- failing to notify the department of the installation of new equipment
- failing during two periods of time to monitor differential pressure in inches of water across the dust-collection system
- neglecting to conduct inspections of building enclosures and keep records of those inspections
- failing to use proper methods of observing emissions during various operations
- neglecting to maintain daily and annual production rates for emissions limits
Clearly, Helena has a history of air quality violations. Why does it think it no longer needs to have their air quality regulated?
He said, she said
Despite this history of environmental violations, Helena Chemical filed a notice of intent in October 2008 informing the NMED that it didn’t need an air quality permit anymore – in other words, it believes it no longer needs to be regulated. According to an October 2008 Las Cruces Sun-News article, here’s their justification for not needing the permit:
“Based on our low level of emissions, the existing air quality permit is unnecessary and creates confusion between NMED and Helena in establishing the appropriate regulatory standards and procedures for our dry fertilizer storage facility in Mesquite,” said Ed Brister, director of regulatory compliance and engineering for Helena.
Brister’s claim is based on the findings of a study – paid for by Helena Chemical – by the Center of Toxicology and Environmental Health. State Environment Secretary Ron Curry responded with the following:
“Managers of Helena cannot decide whether they need a permit. We determine that… This baseless and audacious announcement is a waste of state resources. Helena is a flagrant violator of state and federal air quality laws and must be brought into compliance.”
An April 10 Albuquerque Journal article about Helena’s groundwater cleanup violations mentions that NMED denied Helena’s request to operate without an air quality permit. Although no explanation for the denial is provided in the article, it seems to me that Helena’s history of environmental violations makes it a strong candidate for continued regulation.
Public hearings
The first meeting was held last week in Santa Fe and the next meeting will be held at noon Wednesday at the Parish Hall of Our Lady of Perpetual Help, 125 Mesquite Drive, Mesquite.
Helena Chemical company has betrayed the public trust in multiple instances, beyond what I’ve outlined in this post. Hearings like this seem like the perfect opportunity for citizens committed to healthy communities to send a clear message to corporations with a significant history of violating our environmental standards (like Helena) that they require regulation. Will the public and the EIB rebuff Helena’s “audacious” requests or will it be business as usual?
If you get a chance, head down to Mesquite Wednesday and speak up for our right to live in safe and clean communities.
Nick Voges is the blogger behind NMPolitics.net’s Zeitgeist. E-mail him at nick@nmpolitics.net.
8 comments so far. Scroll down to submit your own comment.
Leave a response
You must be logged in to post a comment.
MJM – I worked for a large corporation in an executive capacity for thirty years. I think I am pretty knowledgeable about corporate matters and its decision-making process.
Hemingway may I ask if you ever worked in the private sector? Ever made a payroll, ever worked in the “real” world aka the private sector? Corporations like government is run by human beings. Neither is perfect. You seem to believe that somehow government is alturistic, all knowing, able to solve all our problems. Please show me a specific example. Having worked on both sides of the fence, I find the private sector to be more responsive to the general needs of society. It would be nice to get the politics out of public service. Also to have a few folks with a bit of business experience. Wishful thinking with EIB and NMED.
No one on the EIB, NMED, or any of the other Richardson crony bureaucracies was elected by anyone. At least corporate officers are elected by the owners. That is the problem here. Behnd closed doors, unilateral, secret decisions is what is gong on in Santa Fe at the EIB and NMED. These bureaucracies are stacked with people who see the world one way and share the same political biases. That’s why I do not trust them, they are accountable to no one.
Corporations are the most undemocratic institutions in America. At least we elect our public officials. As Abraham Lincoln stated: “I see in the near future a crisis approaching that unnerves me and causes me to tremble for the safety of my country. Corporations have been enthroned, an era of corruption in high places will follow, and the money-power of the country will endeavor to prolong it’s reign by working upon the prejudices of the people until the wealth is aggregated in a few hands and the Republic is destroyed.” This statement is truly prophetic!
“Corporations need regulation by government because they fail to care about people. Their only care is making money.” Really? In my experience, lust for power and control is just as corrupting as money. I might opine that government only cares about their power and control over our lives, not people’s best interests, but that would be far too much of a generalization. Only some do, as the same with corporations. The question is, do you trust appointed political bureaucrats more than corporations? I don’t, but apparently some do.
Sorry, just noticed a typo. “Corfporations” should not have a “f” . Meant corporations.
Thanks for the very informative article. Yes, they need an air quality permit and they are just trying to do everything they can to not have to clean up their act. Companies of all sorts have made messes in NM and have not been held accountable to clean up after themselves. Who suffers? We, the citiizens of NM, do!! Cofrporations need regulation by government because they fail to care about people. Their only care is making money.
The requirement for a permit is a statutory matter, either they have to have one or not. Why not let the law decide this after the company has a chance to make their case? Just because they have been fined by the NMED does not mean they have to have a permit by law. They should have their day in court, they have that right in America’s system. No governmental bureaucracy like the NMED or EIB, nor bureaucrat like Curry, has the right to operate outside the law just because they think it says something. They should be required to prove the law applies here, as they have operated under that assumption to this point without being challenged. Just because they assumed it doesn’t prove it, neither do fines they imposed using that assumption which may in fact be in error under the strict definitions of the law. I would not trust NMED, Curry, nor the EIB as far as I could throw them. They are appointed political entiities with an agenda, not necessarily watchdogs for the “public good”. Make them prove they have the power to unilaterally decide what is needed where ever they say. Just their word on it is not good enough in America, we are a nation of laws and democracy. Why would anyone just automatically decide the government bureaucrats are right and business is wrong? That is a level of trust for government I cannot fathom nor understand.