Agenda item

Motion submitted by Councillor Boden regarding the use of industrial bottom ash aggregates (IBAA).

Councillor Boden presented his motion regarding the use of Industrial Bottom Ash Aggregates (IBAA), Councillor Sennitt Clough seconded the motion, and it was opened for debate.

Members made comments as follows:

·         Councillor Nawaz stated that he will support the motion, but questioned whether there is a recent report which has been conducted by the Environment Agency (EA) concerning the investigation and analysis as to the constituents that have been deposited. He added that if one has not been undertaken would it be possible for the Council to make a request of the EA to conduct a more recent investigation to determine the various organic and inorganic constituents of IBAA which has been deposited over the last few years as well as the current operations. Councillor Nawaz asked whether it would be possible for that report to be presented in such a way that it can be easily interpreted with clear indications of the normal expected levels in the environment and in the soil and what is actually present. He added that he would also like the report to incorporate the pollution caused by noise, smell and dust and to include the levels of those that can be accepted and if the levels exceed acceptable levels can the EA take some action.

·         Councillor Miscandlon stated that it is his understanding from recent investigations that IBAA and IBA is banned in some European Union countries, and it is not permitted to be used in any construction or in domestic areas and he feels that it is a matter which needs to be addressed.

·         Councillor Taylor made the point that IBAA is transported via lorry, and it has different size particles which are predominantly dust. He added that if the EA are stating that none of this can go anywhere near a water course then, in his view, it may be toxic in some form and, therefore, be a danger to humans. Councillor Taylor expressed the view that he would, therefore, like to see a higher authority than the EA deal with the issue properly and he will fully support the motion but feels that the right answers and information need to be provided by an agency higher than the EA.

·         Councillor Roy stated that it would appear that IBAA has been present on the site for a lengthy period of time and he questioned whether there is any information held which indicates whether there has been any contamination of nearby watercourses, how it is being stored as well as whether there is any risk to the local wildlife or residents who live in the vicinity. He added that he will happily support the motion and those local residents should be provided assurances that everything is being done by the Council to look into the issue.

·         Councillor Gerstner stated that there were a number of conditions which were placed on the planning application in regard to the environmental impact of IBAA and it appears that a number of those conditions have not been adhered to. He questioned who the enforcer should be with regards to ensuring that the conditions are in place and added that it is his understanding that part of the application was retrospective and had already been started which meant that the Planning Committee found themselves in a difficult position.

·         Councillor Booth stated that he will support the motion, however, in his view, it appears that the emerging Local Plan has not been included within the detail and he asked whether it is something that should have been considered as another mechanism to try and enforce or reduce the use of the IBAA and the policies of the emerging Local Plan should be developed to restrict the use of IBAA as much as possible.

·         Councillor Carney referred to the EA and their relationship with farmers and landowners and added that he is surprised with regards to their position statement as the EA can be strict with farmers regarding the use of any fertilisers and growth promoters. He added that he recalls an instance, which was before the pandemic ,where a farmer was using wash water used to take soil off of vegetables from a local vegetable processing plant to spray it on his fields as a way of re-using wastewater and getting soil, and nutrients back into the land, however, he was subjected to action from the EA for his use of that water. Councillor Carney stated that the EA is very relaxed with some sectors, however, in other cases their sanctions are very harsh.

·         Councillor Sennitt Clough acknowledged the points raised by Councillor Nawaz and explained that IBAA is deemed by the EA to be a waste derived from incinerator bottom ash after most ferrous and nonferrous metals and other wastes have been screened out or otherwise removed. She explained that it is a heterogeneous material that can commonly consist of concrete, ceramics, glass, brick, clinker metals and fused materials, but can include materials from batteries, sanitary products and other hazardous or toxic products. Councillor Sennitt Clough stated that it is a material that is prone to be dusty, that creates an unpleasant odour, and that should not be allowed to leach into water courses or sources. She made the point that the EA states that the use of IBAA in construction is a deposit of waste for recovery and a groundwater activity which should be carried out under an environmental permit, however, for licensing purposes, Cambridgeshire County Council (CCC) appears on at least some occasions to be treating IBAA as a product rather than as waste, and thus subject to far weaker controls and protections.  Councillor Sennitt Clough stated that she would like Council to:

1. express concern about unregulated or weakly regulated use of unbound IBAA in all circumstances in Fenland, especially given that this is a flat, marshy, agricultural region of the UK, so particularly vulnerable to leachate and water table pollution issues 

2. seeks assurances from the EA that its Regulatory Position Statement RPS247 not be extended beyond 31st January 2025, or that, if it is extended, the conditions under which the extension is granted are tightened to give greater assurance that the use of unbound IBAA will not cause (nor will be likely to cause) pollution of the environment or harm to human health.

3. requests that the Council’s Environmental Health raise with both CCC and the EA the concerning apparent categorisation (at least on occasion) of IBAA as a product rather than as waste by CCC, and that the Council presses CCC to formally recognise IBAA as a waste product.

4. resolves that the Council confirms it treats IBAA as a waste and that, in any potentially relevant planning applications at this Council, it is asked if unbound IBAA is proposed to be used and that the Council notifies the EA in all cases if unbound IBAA is proposed to be used. 

5. recognises that the EA is the subject matter expert and lead agency for IBAA and calls on CCC formally to recognise that the EA is the subject matter expert and lead agency for IBAA. 

6. resolves that the published EA FAQ sheet entitled "Incinerator Bottom Ash (IBA) and Incinerator Bottom Ash Aggregate (IBAA) FAQs" should be sent by the Council to all its councillors, to Parish & Town Clerks within Fenland and to relevant Council employees so that they are fully aware of this issue, and that CCC be requested to send the FAQ to their councillors and relevant council employees.

7. agrees additionally that this motion be sent to the EA, to CCC, to Stephen Barclay MP in his capacity as MP and to Stephen Barclay MP in his capacity as Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs.  

Councillor Boden summed up and stated that there have been many good points made by members and referred to the comments made by Councillor Nawaz expressing the view that he believes that he may have mixed two separate problems up with one being the depositing of non-conforming waste in the area of Saxon Pit and the second being the use of some of the products which are coming from a factory within Saxon Pit which are being used as IBAA in the environment. He added that in both cases there have been investigations by the EA and in the first case the investigations have been ongoing for a long time and in the second instance the results are still to come forward as a result of their investigation.

Councillor Boden referred to the point made by Councillor Roy with regards to having confidence that no contamination has taken place and that whilst it is already a known fact that the material has not been stored correctly, there is concern with regards to the risk to wildlife and residents and he hopes that any risk has been minimal and that if the EA had seen anything that was dangerous then they would have taken immediate action to ensure actions were stopped. He added that it is still unacceptable that IBAA is located so close to a watercourse when clearly the regulations state that it should not be used in that way. He stated that the point that Councillor Miscandlon made is correct as there are several countries in the European Union who have banned IBAA totally, however, this country’s regulations should be observed and be vigilant about ensuring that the regulations are used effectively and efficiently.

Councillor Boden agreed with the point Councillor Taylor made with regards to taking our concerns to a higher level than that of the EA and was covered in point 7 indicated by Councillor Sennitt Clough by raising the issue to Stephen Barclay MP in his capacity as this area’s MP as Secretary of State for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. He referred to the comment from Councillor Booth with regards to the emerging Local Plan and agreed to discuss that with Councillor Mrs Laws and officers to ascertain whether this is something that can be achieved due to the ever-changing regulations.

Councillor Boden referred to the comments from Councillor Gerstner and Councillor Carney concerning enforcement and stated that is a separate issue which does cause a problem and there is inconsistent enforcement of regulations by the EA and not just in this area. He agrees that enforcement is an issue but beyond what the motion seeks to achieve and encouraged members to vote in favour of it.

Member approved the motion.

(Councillor Miss French and Councillor Mockett left the meeting at 5.12pm following this item)