Save Spodden Valley Response to HSE/EA Press Release

As a community we are fighting to ensure the whole of Rochdale is kept safe. If we were mere 'NIMBY's' perhaps we should be expected to want the rubble to be removed as quickly as possible with no questons asked. Instead, we have been ensuring that every 't' is crossed and 'i' is dotted.

As can be read in the previous news reports on Rochdale Online - all Save Spodden Valley has ever wanted is for all the facts about the site and its rubble to be made fully public so that open, accountable and safe decsions can be made.

After considering of the request, Rochdale Council decided not to pursue an injunction. The main reason given was that Rochdale Council must be influenced by the assurances given to the HSE and Environment Agency that safe precautions are to be abided by.
 
We have taken advice from counsel on this matter: subject to the HSE and Environment Agency's assurances being 100% correct then the Council's position not to pursue an injunction appears appropriate. The problem is that we, as menbers of the public, have no way of ensuring that all the information the HSE and EA have based their opinion on is correct. If, or when, we do find there is problem - it will be too late to do anything. The rubble will have been removed - the 'dust' will have settled.
 
The suggestion given in the joint HSE/EA press release is that the rubble is to be transported "as if it is hazardous" is to be welcomed because the facts about the rubble are still not (and will not be) established.
 
It does appear that if all the safeguards described are in place properly then the public may be safe. That is good news and a credit to those officers that have ensured it is being handled properly. 
 
This whole farce may be placed squarely with the developers. Eighteen months on and they still appear to lack basic communication skills with the public, councillors and officers. There are still many questions that remain unanswered:

• How much asbestos does the rubble contain?
  3000 tonnes of rubble 8 random samples taken from the top surface of the weathered piles. 3 were positive for traces (up to 1%) asbestos BUT the methods used (MDHS77) can not be relied upon to establish if this is Hazardous waste (ie 0.1%) or not. The HSE test results only give a broad measure of contamination. 
• What happened to the rubble that has already left the site IN OPEN LORRIES? Was it tested?Where did it go to?
• According to the planning application 30,000 tonnes of former asbestos factory are due to be demolished and crushed. The planning application suggests it will be used as infill. Who will be responsible for this? 
• Are 8 samples sufficient? The landowners maintain that the 'Crush' pile is "asbestos free" How can this be substantiated?

The 'Crush' and the 'Fines' are rubble from the same building.  
 
The duty to confirm if waste is 'Hazardous' remains with the 'holder of the waste'.
 
Who is responsible for the rubble remains in question. The landowners assert that it is Federal Mogul yet the Admnistrators of Federal Mogul have denied any such responsibility.
 
The Risk Assessments and Method Statements sent in the name of Federal Mogul and held by the HSE will not be released - this denies public scrutiny. 

• Why the sudden rush to remove the rubble?
• Why were Key officers not informed about the work before a local newspaper?
• Why did Countryside Properties' press release clearly state that there had been full disclosure.
• Why did the Rochdale Observer print such a claim when they had been given notice this was not correct? 
• An independent report commissioned by Rochdale Council to examaine the paperwork submitted by the developers is due any day.  What may this report say about Best Practice and testing methodologies about the rubble?   
• Why did a Bury Council Planning Officer have to get into his car and drive to the waste site to find out what was going on?