Environmental monitoring
The Environment Agency undertakes inspections of the site to ensure the permit is being complied with to ensure that the works are fit for purpose. They also monitor the groundwater and gas. The Council has no powers to regulate how works are undertaken.
Site inspections by the Environment Agency take place quarterly.
As part of the Environmental Permit, the Operator is required to install and maintain a series of Boreholes. The purpose being to monitor ground water in specific locations to ensure that the site is not causing any risks to public health or the environment. BH05 is a borehole required under the Permit and is on Council land.
In 2019 the Council requested monitoring data from the Environment Agency relating to the boreholes required by the Permit. Based on analysis of this data, the Council raised concerns with the Environment Agency regarding the validity of some data, with reason to believe false data may have been submitted for BH5. The challenge was based on information which suggested the borehole may have been at least damaged, if not inoperable. This was raised formally with the Environment Agency who committed to undertake an investigation.
In 2020 the Environment Agency provided an update to confirm that following their investigation, ‘no evidence was found to support these allegations’. Further information can be found within the Environment Agency’s frequently asked questions [updated June 2022]: 2022-june-final-update-faqs.pdf (environment-agency.gov.uk)
On 30 April 2021 the site operator made a formal request to the Council to reinstate groundwater borehole BH05 (GW5), which is on Council land. The Council asked the Environment Agency to confirm what would happen if the borehole was not reinstated, given the monitoring information provided from this is a pre-operational condition of the environmental permit. The Environment Agency responded that:
- the reinstatement of the borehole is preferable but not essential to the monitoring of any impacts from the landfill site, as an initial monitoring programme was in place for at least one year in advance of the site development of phase 2
- failure to reinstate the borehole is not critical in terms of permit regulation as there are sufficient up-gradient and down-gradient groundwater monitoring boreholes on site to assess any potential groundwater impact
- having the borehole operational offers benefits in terms of monitoring any impact of groundwater from the site.
It is clear therefore that a decision to refuse permission to reinstate the borehole on Council land would not prevent the site from reopening. On this basis, the Council gave authorisation at that time for the reinstatement of groundwater borehole BH05 (GW5) on Council land.
The current position with regards to BH05 is that it is not in place and the Operator is required to seek the permission of the Council to reinstall it.
In January 2024, a monitoring report completed by the Environment Agency was provided to the Council. This report appeared to indicate that the Environment Agency had informed the operator that the reinstatement of BH05 was critical and would be required prior to operations on site commencing. This appeared at odds with the public position referred to above and the Council Leader therefore wrote to the Environment Agency to seek urgent clarification. The response provided by the Environment Agency seemed to reinforce the position that the borehole is now in fact necessary and would be required as part of the permit conditions.
The Council may be legally required to permit the reinstallation.
In relation to BH05, the Councils position is one which seeks to prioritise public health and the local community. Should the Council be able to choose whether the borehole is reinstated and should the lack of the borehole lead to tipping at the site not recommencing, then this is the Council's preferred outcome, and it would not allow for the reinstallation. If failure to reinstate the borehole would not prevent tipping at the site from recommencing, however the borehole would provide better protection for public health and the local community, then the Council would support reinstatement.
At the current time there is no scientific evidence that would enable the Council to undertake additional testing to support the Environment Agency’s statutory role.