02/09/2005 - On Wednesday
31 August 2005, the company which owns a Rugby
metal fabricators was given a £5000
fine for polluting a Warwickshire brook with
oil.
Thos Storey Fabrications Limited, which owns
Lloyds UK, based on Somers Row, Rugby, pleaded
guilty at Rugby Magistrates Court to a charge
relating to causing polluting matter, in the
form of oil, to enter the Sow Brook.
The charge was brought by the Environment
Agency under Section 85 of the Water Resources
Act 1991. The company was also ordered to
pay £1000 towards costs.
Speaking after the case, an Environment Agency
spokesman said: ‘Companies handling materials
which pose a threat to the environment must
ensure they are stored and handled correctly
at all times. They must also check and maintain
their drains. Failure to do either could result
in pollution of the environment and, as we
have seen here, prosecution and a considerable
fine.
’We provide extensive and readily available
advice and guidance on pollution prevention
and waste minimisation. Companies wanting
this advice can contact us on 08708 506 506.
‘
For the Environment Agency, Patrick Howell
told the court that on 4 August 2004 an Environment
Agency officer attended the Sow Brook after
a member of the public reported a diesel pollution.
An oily iridescence was spotted on the brook
downstream of an outfall of a surface-water
sewer. Severn Trent Water officers helped
Environment Agency officers minimise the impact
of the pollution by deploying absorbent materials
and trace the pollution to a site owned by
Lloyds UK, a division of Thos Storey Fabrications
Ltd.
A Lloyds UK employee showed the Environment
Agency officer around the site. Several leaking
drums of waste and chemicals were found at
the rear of the site. The officer advised
the employee that these drums should be disposed
of immediately.
He also asked that Lloyds UK prevent the
oil in its surface-water system from entering
the Sow Brook, suggesting that the company
should arrange for a survey of its drains
to determine where it was coming from. The
company employee blocked part of the sewer
with rags.
On 6 August 2004 the Environment Agency wrote
to Lloyds UK requesting that the drums found
on the 4 August 2004 be disposed of and that
the pollution coming off its site be stopped
immediately.
On 11 August 2004, an Environment Agency
officer attended the Lloyds UK site. He saw
that the drums had been removed but oily water
was still present in the surface-water sewer.
The officer advised that the company investigate
the source of this oil.
On 19 August 2004, the Environment Agency
officer returned to Lloyds UK’s premises with
a colleague and a Severn Trent Water technician.
They undertook a pollution prevention inspection
of the site with its general manager. Oily
water was still found to be present in the
site’s drains. The Environment Agency wrote
that day to Lloyds UK requesting that the
oil be prevented from leaving the Lloyds site.
On 13 September 2004, two Environment Agency
officers attended the Sow Brook after receiving
a report of pollution. An oily iridescence
was spotted again in the area around the outfall
from the Somers Road surface-water drain.
The officers inspected the Lloyds UK site
and found that oily water was still running
through the sewer on the Lloyds site.
Another Environment Agency officer attended
the site and took a sample of the polluted
water running through the sewer. A sample
was also taken of the Somers Road sewer upstream
of where it connected with the Lloyd’s sewer;
the Sow Brook upstream of the sewer outfall;
the outfall itself; and the top of the sewer
on the Lloyds site.
On 7 October 2004, the Environment Agency
carried out a dye-tracing exercise to confirm
the link between Lloyds and the Sow Brook.
A dye was added to a stretch of sewer serving
the Lloyds site. An hour later, the dye entered
the Sow Brook via the sewer outfall.
Tests on the samples taken on 13 September
2004 showed that oil was present in the sample
taken from the sewer near the Lloyds site
contained oil. No oil was found in the samples
taken at other locations.
In mitigation, Miss Dowen of Halliwells,
representing the company, told the court that
the company took environmental issues seriously
and pointed out that there were no previous
environmental offences. She also stated that
the company had still not identified the source
of the pollution and had instigated a drain
survey prior to the incident. She concluded
by saying that the company had adopted new
procedures and had employed specialist environmental
consultants.
