Amended 19/6/2012  You are here: Jubilee River Home Page > Jubilee River - key facts > Kingsmead Quarry - 0196 > How to contact me > Jubilee River guided tours

UNDER CONSTRUCTION

               < PREVIOUS PAGE        NEXT PAGE >    KINGSMEAD QUARRY INDEX >

Kingsmead Quarry - Questions to EA (and answers)

Further list of questions for Environment Agency - 16 April 2012

Please find below some more questions for your consideration.

Kingsmead Quarry Questions - compiled by Ewan Larcombe - 16 April 2012.

What is the precise source and nature of the material?

What are the short and long-term effects on the lakes, watercourses and groundwater?

How much material in excess of the permitted quantity had been imported to Kingsmead Quarry site?

Was the site owner advised by the lessee in advance of the importation?

Had the site owner given permission to the lessee to import material?

Was the site owner both aware of and in agreement with the arrangements?

A detailed financial flow analysis is required that corresponds to the significant quantity of material transported both into and away from the sites.

Who is required to sign the transportation paperwork?

Who has the duty to oversee the transport arrangements?

What quantity of material was subsequently removed from the Kingsmead site, and where did it go to?

Who owns and/or leases the Sutton Farm site.

What about rules on the storage – impermeable lining – fencing – signs etc

ISO 9000/9001?

 

e-mail received from Environment Agency dated 1 May 2012

Dear Ewan

Thank you for your enquiries of 10 and 16 April regarding Kingsmead Quarry. 

We do not hold any reports on this case. There is a case summary, which is attached. No reference was made by the Environment Agency in court relating to submissions of Councillor Rayner. The Environment Agency are not responsible for Health and Safety issues. Regarding the material being removed from the site, Rooma Horeesorun has dealt with this matter in previous responses. The material was removed to our satisfaction. The site was inspected shortly afterwards and there was no evidence of any lasting issues, apart from a very faint residual odour which had completely gone within one month. In my opinion, no testing or further remediation is necessary.

What is the precise source and nature of the material?

The material came from Vertal Ltd in Mitchim, Surrey. Vertal treat food waste with an accelerated aerobic composting process which produces three principal waste streams. One of these is a liquid digestate, which is the material that was deposited at Kingsmead. The digestate is highly organic in nature and has been landspread at a number of locations to improve agricultural land.

What are the short and long-term effects on the lakes, watercourses and groundwater?

There are unlikely to be any long term effects on any waterbodies. There was no evidence that the material had reached nearby still waters or watercourses. Impact on groundwater is highly unlikely as the material would rapidly bio-degrade once in the ground.  

How much material in excess of the permitted quantity had been imported to Kingsmead Quarry site?

The exemption allowed 1250 tonnes. However, 4801 tonnes were actually deposited at Kingsmead, which is 3551 tonnes in excess.

Was the site owner advised by the lessee in advance of the importation? Had the site owner given permission to the lessee to import material? Was the site owner both aware of and in agreement with the arrangements?

The Environment Agency does not hold this information.

A detailed financial flow analysis is required that corresponds to the significant quantity of material transported both into and away from the sites.

This is not a request for information.

Who is required to sign the transportation paperwork?

Normal Duty of Care rules would apply, so the holder (or a representative) would be expected to sign the Waste Transfer Note each time the waste was transferred to a new holder. This was complied with for the initial transfer from Vertal to Carcarc, but was lacking thereafter. We have over 300 Waste Transfer Notes from Vertal and Carcarc Ltd. These offences against Carcarc and J Rayner & Sons were dropped due to more serious offences.

Who has the duty to oversee the transport arrangements?

The Environment Agency and local authorities regulate the transport of waste through the Duty of Care Regime.

What quantity of material was subsequently removed from the Kingsmead site, and where did it go to?

4801 tonnes (less losses for evaporation etc) were eventually removed from the site. This material went to two farms near Maidenhead, but in both cases the correct permits for landspreading were in place.

Who owns and/or leases the Sutton Farm site.

Our records show that the land is owned by J Rayner & Sons Ltd.

What about rules on the storage – impermeable lining – fencing – signs etc

The material was a waste being stored under a paragraph 7 exemption. The storage conditions which applied were as follows:

“(4) Secure storage, at the place where it is to be used, of not more than 1,250 tonnes of waste intended to be used for a treatment falling within sub-paragraph (1) or (2), if –

(a) the waste is stored at distance of at least:

(i) 10 metres from any watercourse

(ii) 50 metres from any spring or well, or from any borehole not used to supply water for domestic or food production purposes, and

(iii) 250 metres from any borehole used to supply water for domestic or food production purposes;

(b) no waste is stored within 0.3 metres of the top of any open storage container or within 0.75 metres of the top of an earthbank tank or lagoon; and

(c) the waste is stored for no more than 12 months.”

ISO 9000/9001?

I am unsure what this is in reference to.

I have answered your questions as fully as possible. I hope this is helpful to you.

Kind regards

Tracy Nash
Environment Management - Team Leader
Colne Catchment

Apollo Court, Bishop Square Business Park, St Albans Road West, Hatfield, Hertfordshire. AL10 9EX.
Telephone: 01707 632626