An attempt by a company to export hazardous waste cables illegally to China was thwarted when one of the containers carrying the waste leaked before arriving at the port, drawing attention to the load.
Bury St Edmunds Magistrates’ Court heard yesterday (Thurs) that the leak resulted in a high state of alert requiring the attendance of Suffolk Fire Service with officers in chemical protection suits and breathing apparatus and evacuation of the area around the parked vehicle.
Residents downwind of where the container parked at Risby in Suffolk were notified and advised to stay indoors and keep windows closed.
Mrs Miriam Tordoff prosecuting said the company responsible, All Metal Recovery Ltd (AMR), failed to comply with legislation, including the Transfrontier Shipment Regulations and had tried to export to China waste that was banned from going there, although the company claimed it did not realise that it was breaking the law.
The company was fined the maximum penalty of £15,000 and ordered to pay full prosecution costs of £7,649.61 after pleading guilty to three offences relating to the incident.
Mrs Tordoff said the matter had come to light when the container transporting the waste to the Port of Felixstowe was seen by a following driver to be leaking liquid.
Driver Geoffrey Barton pulled in to a lay-by and saw black oily liquid leaking from underneath the doors and from underneath the container which very quickly formed puddles on the ground. It had also covered the wheels and brakes so he moved it to a safer place at a lorry park at Risby near Bury St Edmunds and called the emergency services.
Magistrates were told that paperwork did not identify what the liquid might be and the driver did not know so a state of high alert was declared and four fire crews attended the scene. Fire officers were concerned that it might contain polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) which can harm the environment or cause damage to health. Oil absorbent booms were placed across the entrance to the container.
The Environment Agency was also alerted and told the driver that without the relevant waste carriage documents he could not move the vehicle. Officers instructed the company to take the container back to its premises in a safe way without further leakage.
Investigations found that AMR contracted Priority Freight Midlands Ltd to make the logistical arrangements for transporting what the company described as ‘scrap metal’ to China and five containers were ordered.
Priority Freight contracted a shipping company Yang Ming to ship the waste to China, they provided the containers and contracted haulage company James Kemball Ltd to transport them in the UK. Kemball contracted G ‘n’ J owned by Geoffrey Barton, the driver of the container lorry.
The description of the waste started as ‘scrap metal’, was changed to ‘scrap grade’ and ended up as ‘general cargo’, a generic description given for security reasons to prevent the load from being at risk of theft and to protect the driver. But it meant the emergency services did not know what the leaked liquid was likely to be.
Tests by Stephen Phipps, an Environment Agency chemist, showed the presence of mineral oil and polynuclear aromatic carbons (PAHs) which indicated coal tar, a category 1 carcinogen which is hazardous. (PCBs were not found in the samples).
In Mr Phipps’ opinion, cable oil which provides insulation in high voltage underground cables, had leaked out and dissolved the tar from the outer insulation. The presence of oil and/or tar meant the cable should have been classified as hazardous waste.
Mrs Tordoff told magistrates this type of waste is banned from export to non-OECD (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development) countries, of which China is one.
She said the risks to the environment and health as the liquid leaked was serious and increased by the complete lack of any waste description confirming that the waste contained hazardous substances. The waste should have been tested or sampled before being transported.
‘Those who operate in the waste business should be aware of all the relevant legislation, including the transfrontier shipment regulations. Exporting banned waste to China impacts on those businesses who operate legitimately and do not export banned waste,’ she said.
Ian Clark, operations manager of All Metal Recovery Ltd at the time of the incident, told investigating Environment Agency officers the waste cables originated from a scrap metal company in Iceland and had been bought on the basis of its copper and lead content.
He said he had not noticed any contamination or staining on the ground when the waste was loaded at their yard and drew the conclusion that the reason there was a leak from the lorry was that the sun warmed up the cable in the container causing the covering to melt.
Clark said the recycling company in China, Alco Resources, advertised that they took cables. He said exports of different grades of cables had been made before but his company had only been aware of the TFS Regulations since the investigation. Someone with experience in the waste industry has since been employed to advise on waste aspects.
In mitigation the company explained that a representative had attended the incident scene immediately and had dealt with all the Environment Agency’s requests including arranging to transport the waste back to their site. The company had also recompensed the fire service for their time and James Kemball Ltd for the clean-up work they had carried out and the loss of earnings of the driver, Mr Barton. This totalled £19,000. Since the incident the company was now fully versed in the Transfrontier Shipment Regulations. The company is also now under new management.
Sentencing, Chair of the Bench Mrs Meg Clibon said that the magistrates had seriously considered committing the company to the crown court for sentence but had retained jurisdiction on the basis that the company had no previous convictions and had entered guilty pleas. She said that the offences were “quite clearly serious with a great potential for harm”. The very vague description of the waste had made it difficult for the incident to be managed. The court took into account the voluntary reimbursement of costs made by the company but also ordered the company to pay £600 compensation to Mr Geoffrey Barton, the driver, for the distress and trauma the incident had caused him.
After the hearing Environment Agency crime investigator Phil Henderson said: ‘This case highlights the problem of illegal waste exports leaving the UK to destinations where environmental safeguards and controls are not as rigorous as those here. It is of great concern in this case that there was a leakage of hazardous material from the container which not only had the potential to harm the environment but also human health.
‘These reckless attempts to send our waste abroad illegally are being targeted as a key priority for our enforcement teams and we hope that the ultimate penalty imposed by the court serves as a deterrent to this company and others’.
ALM pleaded guilty to:
1. On 27th March 2007, and by virtue of Article 16(1)(b) of the Waste Shipment Regulation EC 259/93, you shipped waste namely cables containing oil and coal tar in circumstances deemed to be illegal traffic under Article 26(f) of the Waste Shipment Regulations EC 259/93
Contrary to Regulations 12(1) and 15(1) of the Transfrontier Shipment of Waste Regulations 1994.
Fined £5,000
2. On 27 March 2007 you, being a person who imports, produces, carries, keeps, treats or disposes of controlled waste, failed to comply with the Duty of Care imposed by Section 34(1) and (5) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990 in that on the transfer of waste, you failed to ensure that there was transferred such written description of the waste as would have enabled other persons to avoid a contravention of Section 33 of the said Act and to comply with the Duty under Section 34(1) of the said Act as respects the escape of waste.
Contrary to section 34(1)(c)(ii) and 34 (6) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990
Fined £5,000
3. On 27 March 2007 you, being a person who imports, produces, carries, keeps, treats or disposes of controlled waste, failed in your duty to take all such measures applicable to you in that capacity as were reasonable in the circumstances in that you failed to prevent the escape of waste, namely waste mineral oil and coal tar, from your control.
Contrary to section 34(1)(b) and 34 (6) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990
Fined £5,000
