Haulage company fined for dumping construction waste on farms
CC Haulage & Sons Ltd (CC Haulage), a Devon-based haulage and site clearance company, has been fined after it was found guilty to dumping was on farmland.
When the Environment Agency attended a Farm in Tedburn St Mary, Devon in November 2016, officers identified that the haulage firm had deposited 7,820 tonnes of waste. Much of this waste was from building and construction sites. Further investigations identified that further tipping had occurred had three other farms in Devon.
The U1 waste management exemption allows holders to use certain types of waste, including specific streams from construction works, provided that its conditions are met. Conditions include a maximum tonnage that may be accepted at any site. Volumes dumped at the four farms in Devon were above these thresholds.
The Environment Agency first became aware of the offences when waste transfer notes identified CC Haulage as the source of the excessive volumes of waste at the farms. CC Haulage’s defence stated that the company had believed the farmers receiving the waste were appropriately permitted, but this had not been checked.
Penalty
CC Haulage was fined £14,000 and ordered to pay costs of £5,000. The judge also imposed a £90,000 Proceeds of Crime confiscation order against the company.
Construction firms fined for polluting groundwater with diesel
Kier Construction Limited (Kier) and their subcontractor BKP Waste Recycling Limited (BKP) have been fined after their actions lead to a groundwater pollution incident.
Kier had been commissioned to undertake redevelopment work at Christchurch Hospital. As part of the project, BKP had been appointed by Kier to drain and remove oil from an oil supply line in the hospital grounds.
Oil escaped from a poorly-made connection in the oil supply pipework, which failed during routine testing of heating systems at the hospital in November 2014. An Environment Agency investigation found that more than 11,000 litres had been released, polluting groundwater.
The case brought by the Environment Agency ultimately found both contractors guilty of negligence.
Breach
Both companies were found to have breached Regulation 38(1)(a) of the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010:
- Regulation 38(1)(a) makes it an offence to cause or knowingly permit a water discharge or groundwater activity not authorised by an environmental permit.
Penalty
Kier was fined £100,000 with £30,301 costs.
BKP was fined £10,200 with £42,851 costs.
Fines issued for waste permit breaches
Niramax Group Ltd (Niramax) has been fined for breaching its permits at two sites in the North East of England.
Fly Infestation
On 2 April 2015 a routine audit of Niramax’s facility in Washington identified a fly infestation. This was traced to two bay doors to the waste shed not operating correctly, preventing pest control measures from working effectively. Waste was also not sufficiently divided between the bays.
A second visit on 9 April 2015 found that flies remained but Niramax had taken some action to empty the waste from the bays. A third visit on 12 April 2015 found that the issues had been addressed.
Neighbouring businesses and residents spoken to by the Environment Agency confirmed the impact of the infestation.
Tyre Storage
The Environment Agency attended Niramax’ Hartlepool premises in June 2015 following dust complaints.
On 28 July 2015 an action plan was signed by the operator to address a number of permit breaches, including the application of fire prevention guidance and a dust management plan.
In February 2016 the Environment Agency reattended, identifying that the issues identified in June 2015 had not been addressed. An enforcement notice was issued on 14 June 2016, requiring that the site was cleared of tyres. On reattendance on 15 June, the amount of shredded tyre waste had been reduced, although the waste was still not contained within bays and no fire breaks were observed.
Penalty
Niramax pleaded guilty to breaching its environmental permit in Washington and failing to comply with the enforcement notice issued at Hartlepool. The company was fined £16,000 with costs of £10,000.
|