By Mar-Vic Cagurangan
Variety News Staff

THE deadline for the government of Guam to build a new municipal solid waste landfill is moving closer, yet the site of the new facility remains a contentious issue that sparks an endless debate on geological considerations.
The debate focuses on the least dangerous site of a new landfill—the watershed and wetlands area, or the earthquake zone.
The Department of Public Works and the Guam Environmental Protection Agency have selected a Layon property in Dandan, Inarajan as the site of a new landfill, but Democrats insist that the government consider two sites previously identified by an existing public law.
Bill 35 seeks to require DPW and Guam EPA to implement Public Law 23-95, which identified Guatali and Malaa as possible sites of a new landfill. 
“If Bill 35 becomes law, then it would move the proposed landfill from Dandan to one of the two areas listed in P.L. 23-95,” said Sen. Tina Muna Barnes, D-Mangilao, main author of the bill. 
The bill is coauthored by Minority Leader Judi Won Pat, D-Malojloj, Sens. Rory Respicio, D-Agana Heights, and Judith Guthertz, D-Mangilao.
DPW director Larry Perez described Bill 35 as “one of the many impediment legislation to prevent the construction of a legitimate U.S. EPA-sanctioned landfill; not a dump, but a landfill.”
“I won’t start a battle with the senators. I just wish these policy makers will be more constructive and more of a contributor to our landfill project instead of saying ‘don’t build it here; don’t build it there.’ They are not helping me,” Perez said.
Barnes, meanwhile, said the landfill law that identified Guatali and Malaa, which was enacted on May, 8, 1996, “has never been changed nor repealed.”
“Instead of following the law, DPW and Guam EPA have been trying to build the landfill over a large source of fresh water that we will need in the future,” Barnes said.
Democrats and environmental activists from southern villages have been warning the government against building a landfill in the Dandan property, which is located within the Inarajan River watershed.
“We cannot poison this pristine area,” Barnes said.
The Inarajan river watershed contains several sources of fresh water, including the Tinaga, Fensu and Finatasa rivers.
Bill 35 prohibits the construction of landfill “on any property located near, adjacent to or above the Inarajan river” or “within any watershed containing rivers, tributaries and wetland areas comprising potentially significant sources of fresh water for drinking, farming and other uses.”
“Everywhere in this entire island, we have wetlands, watersheds, rivers and fault lines. People use these considerations as a reasoning to not build the landfill in their backyard,” Perez said.
“It’s almost impossible to build a landfill anywhere on island. But because it has to be done, we have to make a decision on the Layon site after doing all the studies,” he added.
Perez maintained that the Layon site was selected based on scientific and engineering studies, environmental impact assessment, and a thorough planning that cost millions of dollars. “Now, politicians are saying they don’t want it in Layon,” he said.
Perez said preliminary studies made on Guatali and Malaa found that these sites were deficient. “If you put plastic liners on these sites, they will fail because they are located within a fault line,” he said.
Barnes, however, won’t buy Perez’s argument which she said “doesn’t really make sense.”
“Every area picked for a landfill is going to require some mitigation. If they build the landfill in Dandan, they will have to mitigate for the watershed and they will build a new mountain of trash instead of digging into the ground. How is that huge expense different from mitigating for earthquake activity?” she asked.
“The entire island is located in an earthquake zone. Wherever we build, it’s going to have to withstand earthquakes,” Barnes said.
Besides the deficient nature of Guatali and Malaa, Perez said the two sites are too small for the requirement of a legitimate landfill.
He also said that the company that owns the properties required the government to install an incinerator “which will forever hold the people of Guam and the government of Guam in debt for a certain amount of trash.”
Perez said changing the landfill site from Dandan to Guatali and Malaa “will require extra reinforcement and more money” to start the whole process again.
“Somebody has to pay the bill. Is Senator Barnes recommending how she will pay for it?” Perez asked. “When you have people doing quarterbacking even though they are not involved in the consent decree or in the whole process, I have a reservation to even have a dialog with them.”
The Ordot Dump is due for closure on Oct. 23, along with the construction of a new landfill.
The closure of the Ordot dump and the construction of a new solid waste municipal landfill are mandated by the federal consent decree which resulted from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s lawsuit filed against Guam government for violation of anti-pollution laws.
Last month, the U.S. EPA gave Guam an ultimatum to close the Ordot landfill “as soon as possible” due to concerns about the increasing level of air pollution caused by persistent fires and the unabated health hazards brought by the dump. Federal officials rebuked DPW for missing deadlines set by the consent decree.
Perez said DPW is in the final stages of the landfill design.
Although landfill construction may not be completed by October, the department will “make the good faith commencement on the project” by then.
But he expects the Ordot dump closure and the landfill construction to be completed before the end of the year.