Richard Woollard - 14-Sep-2007
- Augean Treatment Ltd has been fined a
total of £3,000 and ordered to pay
£5,079 costs for giving misleading
descriptions of waste taken to King’s Cliffe
Landfill Site in Northamptonshire on three
occasions in August and September 2004.
Corby Magistrates Court heard that under
the Environmental Protection Act accurate
written descriptions of waste are required
so that people accepting the waste know
what needs to be done with it to avoid breaking
the law.
Kings Cliffe landfill site is classed as
a hazardous waste site and is not allowed
under its Environment Agency permit to accept
any waste in liquid form or any waste which
is corrosive, flammable or highly flammable.
Augean, which until 30 May, 2006 was known
as Proactive Waste Solutions Ltd, pleaded
guilty to three offences of breaching the
Environmental Protection Act 11000.
Magistrates heard that between 17 August
2004 and 29 September 2004 the company sent
three waste consignments to the King’s Cliffe
Landfill Site which were rejected as containing
non-conforming wastes.
On each occasion the consignment note described
the waste as sludge or solid but instead
each contained substances not suitable for
the landfill site.
A charge relating to 17 Aug 2004 involved
a consignment containing a flammable liquid
consisting of creosote and a solvent containing
xylene; another sample contained oxalic
acid (which is corrosive) and a third sample
a bio degradable liquid which can produce
landfill gas.
A charge relating to 10 Sep 2004 concerned
a consignment with a container of corrosive
liquid containing hydrochloric acid. The
container bore a warning about its contents.
A third charge relating to 29 Sep 2004
concerned a consignment containing a highly
flammable liquid containing methanol.
After the hearing Environment Agency manager
John Sweeney said: ‘The Environment Agency
detected these wastes at the Kings Cliffe
Hazardous Waste Landfill Site and consequently
it was prevented from entering the landfill
and causing harm to the site liner or producing
harmful emissions from the site.
‘By bringing these cases to court we wish
to draw attention to the important role
waste producers have in properly describing
their waste and ensuring its safe disposal.
We hope in the future waste producers take
more seriously these responsibilities so
that the risk of their waste causing harm
to the environment or human health is minimised.’
Augean pleaded guilty to:
On or about 17 August 2004 at King’s Cliffe,
Northamptonshire, as a company which carries,
keeps, treats or disposes of controlled
waste failed to comply with a duty of care
imposed by Section 34(1) and 5 of the Environmental
Protection Act 11000, namely, on the transfer
of waste, you failed to secure that there
was transferred such written description
of the waste as would have enabled other
persons to avoid a contravention of any
condition of a permit granted under Regulation
10 of the Pollution Prevention and Control
(England and Wales) Regulations 2000 and
to comply with the duty under Section 34(1),
contrary to Section 34(1) (c) (ii) and 34(6)
of the Environmental Protection Act 11000.
On or about 10 September 2004 at King’s
Cliffe, Northamptonshire, as a company which
carries, keeps, treats or disposes of controlled
waste failed to comply with a duty of care
imposed by Section 34(1) and 5 of the Environmental
Protection Act 11000, namely, on the transfer
of waste, you failed to secure that there
was transferred such written description
of the waste as would have enabled other
persons to avoid a contravention of any
condition of a permit granted under Regulation
10 of the Pollution Prevention and Control
(England and Wales) Regulations 2000 and
to comply with the duty under Section 34(1),
contrary to Section 34(1) (c) (ii) and 34(6)
of the Environmental Protection Act 11000.
On or about 29 September 2004 at King’s
Cliffe, Northamptonshire, as a company which
carries, keeps, treats or disposes of controlled
waste failed to comply with a duty of care
imposed by Section 34(1) and 5 of the Environmental
Protection Act 11000, namely, on the transfer
of waste, you failed to secure that there
was transferred such written description
of the waste as would have enabled other
persons to avoid a contravention of any
condition of a permit granted under Regulation
10 of the Pollution Prevention and Control
(England and Wales) Regulations 2000 and
to comply with the duty under Section 34(1),
contrary to Section 34(1) (c) (ii) and 34(6)
of the Environmental Protection Act 11000.
