St Leonard's Court Consultation Document
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
PART IIA OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT 1990 ST LEONARD’S COURT CONSULTATION DOCUMENT PART 1 Environment Agency December 2018 Contents PART 1 Glossary A. Introduction ....................................................................................................... 9 B. Background .................................................................................................... 10 C. Ownership of SLCourt .................................................................................... 11 D. Planning history of SLCourt ............................................................................ 12 E. Development of SLCourt ................................................................................ 12 F. Determination of SLCourt as contaminated land ............................................ 12 G. Designation of SLCourt as a special site ........................................................ 12 H. Consultation under s. 78H(1) EPA before service of the Agency’s First Notice ………………………………………………………………………………………..12 I. The Agency’s First Notice ............................................................................... 13 J. Appeals against the Agency’s First Notice ...................................................... 13 K. Compliance with the First Notice .................................................................... 13 L. Changes to the regulations and guidance since 2009 .................................... 14 M. Does SLCourt still fall within the definition of Contaminated Land and Special Site? ................................................................................................................ 14 M.1 Is contamination still entering groundwater? ............................................... 14 M.2 Is there significant pollution of controlled waters? ...................................... 15 N. The need for subsequent Remediation Notices .............................................. 17 O. The Consideration of the Remediation Options (Report F1) ........................... 19 O.1 Most cost-effective option .................................................................................. 20 O.2 The evidence for contaminant migration ......................................................... 20 O.3 Remediation options .......................................................................................... 21 O.4 Treatment Options .............................................................................................. 23 O.5 The likely duration of the long term remediation ............................................ 23 O.6 Conclusion ........................................................................................................... 24 P. Possible Voluntary Remediation ..................................................................... 25 Q. Liability ............................................................................................................ 25 R. Compliance with the First Notice .................................................................... 25 R.1 Action A of the First Notice ................................................................................ 26 R.2 Action B of the First Notice ................................................................................ 26 R.3 Action C of the First Notice ................................................................................ 27 R.4 Action E of the First Notice ................................................................................ 28 2 S. Actions Proposed in Second Notice .............................................................. 28 S.1 Assess the feasibility of treating the contaminated groundwater for public water supply ...................................................................................................... 29 S.2 Assess locations in the vicinity of Bishop’s Rise and up gradient for a treatment plant and connection to the public water supply network ........ 31 S.3 Identify the best practicable technique ............................................................ 32 S.4 Assess scavenging pumping from a borehole array at Orchard Garage ... 32 S.5 Cost of scavenge pumping from an array of boreholes at Orchard Garage ............................................................................................................... 35 S.6 Estimate costs of discharge and disposal of scavenged groundwater .... 35 S.7 Report on one year’s scavenge pumping .................................................... 36 S.8 Report F1 update ............................................................................................. 36 S.9 Groundwater monitoring of the bromate and bromide plumes ................. 37 Table 1. Locations to be monitored under Monitoring Action 9 .......................... 37 Table 2. Parameters to be measured and frequency of measurement .............. 38 Table 3. Precision, bias and limit of detection for each quantity measured ........ 38 Table 4 Locations to be monitored under Monitoring Action 10.…………………39 S.10 Groundwater and surface water monitoring of the bromate plume .......... 40 S.11 Continuation of scavenge pumping at Bishop’s Rise ................................. 41 Table 5 Locations to be monitored in connection with Remedial Treatment……44 S.12 Annual Reports .................................................................................................. 45 T. Consultation .................................................................................................... 46 TABLES ....................................................................................................................... 47 Table A – Summary of monitoring locations in the First Notice .......................... 49 Table B -- Actions of the First Notice compared with proposed Second Notice ............................................................................................................................ 52 APPENDIX 1 – Draft Second Notice ....................................................................... 57 APPENDIX 2 – Analysis of Report F1 .................................................................... 84 APPENDIX 3 – First Notice ........................................................................... 111 3 PART 2 Figures Figures A-D are referred to in the main text; all Figures apart from D are referred to in Appendix 2 Figure A Location and Bromate Plume Figure B Mean Concentrations, SLCourt Figure C Mean Concentrations, all monitoring points Figure D Interrelationship between Second Notice Assessment Actions Figure E Mean concentrations, Sandridge to Hatfield Figure F Groundwater level, SLCourt Figure G Groundwater level, Sandridge to Hatfield Figure H Groundwater level, plume Figure I Pore water vs groundwater (Figure 2 from OG Investigation) Figure J J1-J4 graphs showing Agency hydrometric data Figure K Bromate concentrations and groundwater levels for GW10 Figure L Bromide concentrations and groundwater for BH2 and BH3 Figure M Bromate concentrations and groundwater levels near Sandridge Figure N Bromide concentrations and groundwater levels near Sandridge Figure O Bromide concentrations since 1980s Figure P Bromate to Bromide ratio near Sandridge 4 Glossary of terms and acronyms used in the Decision Affinity Affinity Water Limited (previously Three Valleys Water) Agency Environment Agency Agency’s First Notice Remediation Notice drafted by the Environment Agency and served on 8th November 2005. AGP The Environment Agency’s Approach to Groundwater Protection, February 2018 https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uplo ads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/692989/Envirn ment-Agency-approach-to-groundwater-protection.pdf AOD Above Ordnance Datum AP Appropriate Person (being Crest and Redland) Beechgrove Beechgrove (Sandridge) Management Limited BS EN 5667 BS EN ISO 5667 - Water quality. Sampling https://doi.org/10.3403/BSENISO5667 Chemfix Chemfix International Limited, advisers to Crest CLR11 Model Procedures for the Management of Land Contamination. Contaminated Land Report 11 Environment Agency 2004. https://www.gov.uk/guidance/land-contamination-risk- management Crest Crest Nicholson Residential Limited Draft Decision This document DWI Drinking Water Inspectorate EA Environment Act 1995 EPA Environmental Protection Act 1990 First Decision Decision Document for Agency’s First Notice First Notice Remediation Notice dated 22nd July 2009 and issued by the Secretary of State for the Environment Food and Rural Affairs 5 FW Berk FW Berk & Co (company registration number 34597 and now known as Redland Minerals Limited) GAC Granular Activated Carbon, an adsorption water treatment method IR Report by The Planning Inspectorate (reference made to individual paragraphs of that report) to the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs dated 23rd November 2007 following the Public Inquiry NNR wells Northern New River wells OG Investigation Factual report of a site investigation undertaken in April and May 2014 at Orchard Garage, Sandridge (Date: September 2014. Reference: LT/SAN/CJC/2708/01OGF). This report can be found in Appendix A of the Revised Methodology submitted as part of Action D3, referred to here as Report D3b. Plume Unless otherwise clear from the context, refers to the bromate plume Plumes The bromate and bromide plumes Public Inquiry Public Inquiry into appeals by Redland Minerals Limited and Crest Nicholson Residential plc against the Contaminated Land Remediation Notice served by