|
MEDIA RELEASE
FROM JOHN COLGAN RE INTEL IRELAND’S POLLUTION LICENCE ISSUE DATE 17/09/01 Last December I examined the detailed application made by Intel Ireland on 4/12/2000 to the Environmental Protection Agency for an IPCL licence to emit pollution from its factory in Leixlip. The application ran to many box files, easily fifteen feet in length, including all of the material supplied in the applicant’s previous application. Replicating and involving previous licence information is a practice which is not acceptable by planning authorities in relation to planning applications; they insist that each application can stand alone. Unnecessarily long applications discourage public enquiry and makes unnecessary work for those examining the application. . The following month a comprehensive submission to the EPA was made by me on the Cayman Islands registered company’s application. My goal was to secure conditions in the licence which would protect the wellbeing of Leixlip and neighbouring communities. The EPA has now notified me, by letter dated 13th inst, which I received today, that it proposes to grant a licence to Intel, subject to conditions. The letter indicates that any person may object to the Agency’s proposed licence (Reference number 589) provided the EPA’s head office at Johnstown Castle, Co Kilkenny, receives a written letter of objection, with a fee of £100, on or before 3rd October next. In my opinion Intel has little cause to complain about any delay at the hands of the EPA in the processing of their licence application. They, Intel, and their agents are primarily responsible for delays: • Their IPCL licence application included an Environmental Impact Assessment - in English, a discussion of the pros and cons of every environmental aspect of their proposed development - which related to what they had in mind early in year 2000 for FAB24, but they made a made switch in technology and output plans in the meantime and never provided a revised EIS to either the public or EPA with their application for a licence last December, relying on the inadequate EIS dating from around February, 2000. • On 2nd January 2001 Intel decided on substantial further changes to the proposed FAB24 and FAB14 and applied to Kildare Co Council for planning permission. As a result of ‘cock ups’ in their application, they repeated the application notice in April last and obtained a permission on 30 May 2001 from KCC. • At the present time an undated notice is hanging outside Intel indicating their intention to apply for planning permission for retention of unauthorised works which the company has done on FAB 14 and FAB24 plants. Any statement by Intel, either direct, indirect or by inuendo, such as has been conveyed by the Cathaoirleach of Leixlip Town Commissioners to the September meeting of that body, that the EPA, myself or anyone else has maliciously held up Intel’s new licence to pollute is false. As a matter of fact, the opportunity to object to the proposed licence has not arisen until now and the public has been given no more than three weeks in which to do so. It is regrettable that any suggestion of bullying either the EPA or members of the public like myself or honourable agencies like an Taisce should emanate from or be attributable to Intel Ireland. There is a due process and citizens are entitled to avail of it. I will be examining the proposed licence carefully over the next week, with the assistance of others in the community and a decision will be made on a course of action. I can say with some caution that at first glance, there are improvements in the proposed over the old licence. It is also regrettable that the people’s representative body, Leixlip Town Commissioners, should meet Intel Ireland privately and as often as they do, without a media presence, and without notification to their electorate of these meetings. It is naïve to expect a commercial interest to present an accurate or a balanced case with or without a media presence. But perhaps naivity is not the explanation? I have sought to meet with them collectively to present the other side, a community-interest view, but only in a public meeting. The Commissioners refused me. That is their right. I am confident their electorate have the measure of them. Enquiries to John Colgan, 01 6244631 |
|