Hyndburn MP raises concerns over pollution on Oswaldtwistle brook

2:00pm Saturday 1st September 2012 in News

FEARS that a brook may be contaminated with surface water from a former chemical site have been raised by an MP.

Hyndburn MP Graham Jones is speaking with the Environment Agency, Lancashire County Council and Hyndburn Council over constituent’s fears that Lottice Brook has been contaminated by surface water on the former Nipa Laboratories site.

Correspondence between the MP and LCC has revealed the agencies concerned are investigating the possibity that disturbances at the site have affected the brook.

The land had seen a large fly infestation take hold after waste was tipped there illegally.

Mr Jones said constituents had been contacting him with their concerns and one resident had made a video of the site and sent it to him.

He said: “I have written to the Environment Agency following a video that has sent to my office.

“I have had a response from the EA and also discussed the matter with Hyndburn Council who are doing an excellent job. Things are moving forward and the two authorities should be thanked as this is a very problematic site.

“I will continue to work hard for the residents of Oswaldtwistle on this issue and have already visited the site with the various agencies”.

A response to Mr Jones’ query from LCC’s environment manager Steve Molyneux described the issue as ongoing.

He said: “The site remains a former chemical works and represents a hazard to both the environment and people. There is contaminated surface water associated with the historic use of the site and a number of more recently excavated areas.

“Surface water on site is contaminated due to the sites former use as a chemical works.

“The Environment Agency has concerns that surface water management on site is poor and drainage from the site is reaching the local stream, Lottice Brook.

“As a consequence we have put in place a sampling and monitoring regime to determine the risk and requested that the Landowner Lockgate Mount Ltd improve the situation on site to protect the stream.

“We are awaiting a full suite of results to determine the sites overall impact on the brook.”

Comments (4)

4:17pm Sat 1 Sep 12

A Darener says...

Told you, defence hopeless. Normal service resumed!
Told you, defence hopeless. Normal service resumed! A Darener

4:57pm Mon 3 Sep 12

mrscharitysweet says...

The garbage that was purported to be plastic on the waste transfer notice was known by the EA to be household rubbish since it left/ was evicted with EA's knowledge from Wigan - a license was granted by someone to move or accept this evicted organic rubbish to a historically known chemically contaminated site; it was known to be organic when it was being moved and buried disturbing unknown extremely toxic chemicals. If the brave firemen, who put themselves in danger in order to deal with the blaze on site, had the good common sense to barricade the brook with sandbags to stop chemically contaminated water reaching said brook that was obviously flowing over the land... why has the EA not seen fit to do the exact same thing currently? Requesting? of Arthur Morgan to obey and stop breaking the law? How many times? Why is the EA going to Morgan with cup in hand instead of making a formal first and last demand with ensuing immediate court action? The EA and/or council has a duty of care to the community regardless of Mr. Morgan's travel by helicopter lifestyle and should immediately seal off and signpost that site and send dear Arthur the bill. Sampling the water while allowing it to presently, obviously, continue to flow over, thru land with both known and unknown toxic chemicals contaminants beggars belief. Why is there not even one warning sign on the old cocker/Nipa war chemical site in the light of this public chemically contaminated admission? Are the council and the EA waiting for a fatality or injury to happen before something is done to prevent an accident from occurring while only brook samples are being taken - job done? It's the firemen that are again being placed at risk as it is the firemen who will have to rescue anyone or any child that falls into danger unknowingly on that open site... it wont be our MP or the EA or the council that will be attending to rescue a member of the community. Does an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure not mean anything?
The garbage that was purported to be plastic on the waste transfer notice was known by the EA to be household rubbish since it left/ was evicted with EA's knowledge from Wigan - a license was granted by someone to move or accept this evicted organic rubbish to a historically known chemically contaminated site; it was known to be organic when it was being moved and buried disturbing unknown extremely toxic chemicals. If the brave firemen, who put themselves in danger in order to deal with the blaze on site, had the good common sense to barricade the brook with sandbags to stop chemically contaminated water reaching said brook that was obviously flowing over the land... why has the EA not seen fit to do the exact same thing currently? Requesting? of Arthur Morgan to obey and stop breaking the law? How many times? Why is the EA going to Morgan with cup in hand instead of making a formal first and last demand with ensuing immediate court action? The EA and/or council has a duty of care to the community regardless of Mr. Morgan's travel by helicopter lifestyle and should immediately seal off and signpost that site and send dear Arthur the bill. Sampling the water while allowing it to presently, obviously, continue to flow over, thru land with both known and unknown toxic chemicals contaminants beggars belief. Why is there not even one warning sign on the old cocker/Nipa war chemical site in the light of this public chemically contaminated admission? Are the council and the EA waiting for a fatality or injury to happen before something is done to prevent an accident from occurring while only brook samples are being taken - job done? It's the firemen that are again being placed at risk as it is the firemen who will have to rescue anyone or any child that falls into danger unknowingly on that open site... it wont be our MP or the EA or the council that will be attending to rescue a member of the community. Does an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure not mean anything? mrscharitysweet

5:10pm Mon 3 Sep 12

joobyboo says...

I totally agree with mrscharitysweet, this site should have warning signs and the fencing/wall fixed to prevent children going on it. It is a very dangerous site to be left as it is, something needs doing now NOT after an accident!
I totally agree with mrscharitysweet, this site should have warning signs and the fencing/wall fixed to prevent children going on it. It is a very dangerous site to be left as it is, something needs doing now NOT after an accident! joobyboo

3:54pm Sat 8 Sep 12

mrscharitysweet says...

To graham.jones.mp@parl
iament.uk, june
Hotmail Active View
VID 20120824 00000

Play video
**** to wikileaks: war chemicals leak 2012 – s.o.s.- Oswaldtwistle part 1
00:08:05
Added on 26/08/2012
175 views


Dear Sir:

1. My name is Mrs. Charity Sweet and I presently live in Church Kirk which I understand is also classified as Oswaldtwistle. I am moving, in two weeks time, near a nature reserve, again in Oslwadtwistle, and will forward my postal details in due course.

2. Regarding ‘internet trolls’ and ‘keyboard warriors’, I would not worry yourself as you are being paid by the tax payer to deal with real, living and breathing human beings and communities of families.

3. Thank you for writing on my behalf to the Environmental Agency and I disagree that the language was OTT as it was an honest response to the shock I was feeling at what I seeing, with my own eyes, at the Nook lane Cocker/Nipa WAR CHEMICAL PLANT site in the community of Oswaldtwistle.

4. I note that you have stated that the Lancashire Council have had “little to do with” “this”.
a) My first question is exactly what “little” bit have they done – what has been their role?
b) Has the Lancashire Council been privy to or instrumental in any licensing matters regarding Arthur Morgan’s land or Blakely’s?

5. To be perfectly blunt, it is the known and unknown toxic chemical pollutants that are grossly obvious and abundant on site that are my concern.
a) Why did the EA give permission and under what authority for Blakley’s to dig up known chemically contaminated rubbish and move it on?
b) Was the site recieving said chemically contaminated rubbish from Oswaldtwistle aware that it was toxic chemically contaminated household rubbish – key word toxic?
c) Did the site recieving said contaminated Ossie rubbish have the proper ‘status’/license to be legally allowed to dispose of said rubbish?

6. I have forwarded your email to June Smith as she has been the one doing the majority of the work in the community in bringing this issue to the forefront of public attention for the benefit of the entire community as well keeping the community up to speed on what is happening.

7. While I am pleased that the rubbish has been moved, not at the expense of the tax payer, I am somewhat alarmed that there has been not one precautionary measure placed in three weeks time on site regarding the presence of dangerous chemical contaminants and the obvious dangerous nature of two large open pits.
a) Can you please qualify and quantify exactly what health and safety regulations should be applied to such a site?
b) Can you please explain why no precautions have been taken, to date, to secure and signpost this chemically contaminated site?

8. As a mother I would presume that it would be normal practice to appropriately surround, seal off and signpost this dangerous site; especially in light of the properly controlled and exercised demolition currently happening on the land directly beside… it makes a rather stark contrast.

9. Since August 17, 2012, it’s been some three weeks time since Blakely’s left Arthur Morgan’s land in a right awful state and not even one warning or public notice sign?

10. Thank you for your time and due dilligence in these very important matters of what I reasonably conclude to be gross negligence of war chemicals and please pass on my questions and concerns, in response to your email, to Mr. Steve Molyneux at the EA.

11. I will respond to Steve’s response to my video in due course and look forward to your complete response to this email and my questions.

Sincerely,

Mrs. C. Sweet

> From: graham.jones.mp@parl
iament.uk
> To: charitysweet@hotmail
.co.uk
> CC: julie.milligan@parli
ament.uk
> Subject: RE: https://www.youtube.
com/watch?v=CesMoRP_
lz0&feature=plcp cocker/ nipa sire – nook lane
> Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 08:39:32 +0000
>
> Hi,
>
> First of all it would be more helpful if you could provide a name and address. There has been a high increase in ‘keyboard warriors’ and ‘internet trolls’ who want to abuse people anonymously and make callous malicious claims so it is reassuring to know someone’s identity.
>
> I have written on your behalf to the Environment Agency and asked them to look at the video in which the language and tone was OTT. Lancashire County Council have had little to do with this as waste transfer; is a District Council matter (waste disposal & planning) and pollution is an EA issue. Your County Councillor is most likely to be Peter Britcliffe.
>
> Best regards
>
> Graham Jones MP
>
>
> Below is the response to your video that I have received;
> 28 August 2012 15:11
> Thanks Graham
>
> Although Blackley’s Waste has now been removed from the site, sadly it’s not the end of the Environment Agency’s or other regulatory organisations involvement here at Nook lane. The site remains a former chemical works and represents a hazard to both the environment and people. The video shows contaminated surface water associated with the historic use of the site and a number of more recent excavated areas. Information we are aware of following our inspections. I’ve looked through the video and there are an number of points to pick up and clarify. Most importantly, although the waste has been cleared the site is a formal chemical works, it remains hazardous and we would not wish that residents to be encouraged to enter for their own interest. The landowner may consider that this could be trespass also.
>
> Access to the site and the hazard represented by the excavated areas.
> This is a cause of concern and as a consequence the Health & Safety Executive (HSE) have served formal enforcement notices on the landowner, Lockgate Mount Ltd requiring them put in place measures to restrict access. I’ve copied Mike Sebastian (HSE principal inspector) into this email. The HSE lead on this issue and should be able to add more detail here.
>
> Contaminated water and site drainage
> Surface water on site is contaminated due to the sites former use as a chemical works (the black water). The Environment Agency has concerns that surface water management on site is poor and drainage from the site is reaching the local stream, Lottice brook. As a consequence we have put in place a sampling and monitoring regime to determine the risk the site presents to water in Lottice brook and requested that the Landowner Lockgate Mount Ltd improve the situation on site to protect the stream. We are still awaiting an action plan from the landowner, if this is not forthcoming we may serve formal enforcement notices.
>
> We are awaiting a full suite of results to determine the sites overall impact on the brook and currently talking with Hyndburn Council to determine if site should be designated as contaminated land.
>
> Please be rest assured that we take this matter seriously, however this is a complex site with a history of chemical production and associated contamination over decades. It is the landowners responsibility to ensure that people and the environment are protected. Nevertheless, we are not anticipating that all the issues associated with past contamination will be resolved quickly.
>
> I hope this answers the questions you have had following the video? If I can provide any more detail or assistance, or you wish to visit the site with our officers, please let me know.
>
> Best Regards
> Steve
>
> Steve Molyneux
> Environment Manager, Lancashire
>
>
>
> ____________________
____________
> From: Charity Sweet
> Sent: 27 August 2012 15:08
> To: JONES, Graham
> Subject: https://www.youtube.
com/watch?v=CesMoRP_
lz0&feature=plcp cocker/ nipa sire – nook lane
>
> all problems have been satisfactorily resolved in Ossie? please watch the below video from on site as many many many others are now doing
>
> https://www.youtube.
com/watch?v=CesMoRP_
lz0&feature=plcp
>
>
> ____________________
____________
>
> UK Parliament Disclaimer:
> This e-mail is confidential to the intended recipient. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Any unauthorised use, disclosure, or copying is not permitted. This e-mail has been checked for viruses, but no liability is accepted for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail.
To graham.jones.mp@parl iament.uk, june Hotmail Active View VID 20120824 00000 Play video **** to wikileaks: war chemicals leak 2012 – s.o.s.- Oswaldtwistle part 1 00:08:05 Added on 26/08/2012 175 views Dear Sir: 1. My name is Mrs. Charity Sweet and I presently live in Church Kirk which I understand is also classified as Oswaldtwistle. I am moving, in two weeks time, near a nature reserve, again in Oslwadtwistle, and will forward my postal details in due course. 2. Regarding ‘internet trolls’ and ‘keyboard warriors’, I would not worry yourself as you are being paid by the tax payer to deal with real, living and breathing human beings and communities of families. 3. Thank you for writing on my behalf to the Environmental Agency and I disagree that the language was OTT as it was an honest response to the shock I was feeling at what I seeing, with my own eyes, at the Nook lane Cocker/Nipa WAR CHEMICAL PLANT site in the community of Oswaldtwistle. 4. I note that you have stated that the Lancashire Council have had “little to do with” “this”. a) My first question is exactly what “little” bit have they done – what has been their role? b) Has the Lancashire Council been privy to or instrumental in any licensing matters regarding Arthur Morgan’s land or Blakely’s? 5. To be perfectly blunt, it is the known and unknown toxic chemical pollutants that are grossly obvious and abundant on site that are my concern. a) Why did the EA give permission and under what authority for Blakley’s to dig up known chemically contaminated rubbish and move it on? b) Was the site recieving said chemically contaminated rubbish from Oswaldtwistle aware that it was toxic chemically contaminated household rubbish – key word toxic? c) Did the site recieving said contaminated Ossie rubbish have the proper ‘status’/license to be legally allowed to dispose of said rubbish? 6. I have forwarded your email to June Smith as she has been the one doing the majority of the work in the community in bringing this issue to the forefront of public attention for the benefit of the entire community as well keeping the community up to speed on what is happening. 7. While I am pleased that the rubbish has been moved, not at the expense of the tax payer, I am somewhat alarmed that there has been not one precautionary measure placed in three weeks time on site regarding the presence of dangerous chemical contaminants and the obvious dangerous nature of two large open pits. a) Can you please qualify and quantify exactly what health and safety regulations should be applied to such a site? b) Can you please explain why no precautions have been taken, to date, to secure and signpost this chemically contaminated site? 8. As a mother I would presume that it would be normal practice to appropriately surround, seal off and signpost this dangerous site; especially in light of the properly controlled and exercised demolition currently happening on the land directly beside… it makes a rather stark contrast. 9. Since August 17, 2012, it’s been some three weeks time since Blakely’s left Arthur Morgan’s land in a right awful state and not even one warning or public notice sign? 10. Thank you for your time and due dilligence in these very important matters of what I reasonably conclude to be gross negligence of war chemicals and please pass on my questions and concerns, in response to your email, to Mr. Steve Molyneux at the EA. 11. I will respond to Steve’s response to my video in due course and look forward to your complete response to this email and my questions. Sincerely, Mrs. C. Sweet > From: graham.jones.mp@parl iament.uk > To: charitysweet@hotmail .co.uk > CC: julie.milligan@parli ament.uk > Subject: RE: https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=CesMoRP_ lz0&feature=plcp cocker/ nipa sire – nook lane > Date: Thu, 30 Aug 2012 08:39:32 +0000 > > Hi, > > First of all it would be more helpful if you could provide a name and address. There has been a high increase in ‘keyboard warriors’ and ‘internet trolls’ who want to abuse people anonymously and make callous malicious claims so it is reassuring to know someone’s identity. > > I have written on your behalf to the Environment Agency and asked them to look at the video in which the language and tone was OTT. Lancashire County Council have had little to do with this as waste transfer; is a District Council matter (waste disposal & planning) and pollution is an EA issue. Your County Councillor is most likely to be Peter Britcliffe. > > Best regards > > Graham Jones MP > > > Below is the response to your video that I have received; > 28 August 2012 15:11 > Thanks Graham > > Although Blackley’s Waste has now been removed from the site, sadly it’s not the end of the Environment Agency’s or other regulatory organisations involvement here at Nook lane. The site remains a former chemical works and represents a hazard to both the environment and people. The video shows contaminated surface water associated with the historic use of the site and a number of more recent excavated areas. Information we are aware of following our inspections. I’ve looked through the video and there are an number of points to pick up and clarify. Most importantly, although the waste has been cleared the site is a formal chemical works, it remains hazardous and we would not wish that residents to be encouraged to enter for their own interest. The landowner may consider that this could be trespass also. > > Access to the site and the hazard represented by the excavated areas. > This is a cause of concern and as a consequence the Health & Safety Executive (HSE) have served formal enforcement notices on the landowner, Lockgate Mount Ltd requiring them put in place measures to restrict access. I’ve copied Mike Sebastian (HSE principal inspector) into this email. The HSE lead on this issue and should be able to add more detail here. > > Contaminated water and site drainage > Surface water on site is contaminated due to the sites former use as a chemical works (the black water). The Environment Agency has concerns that surface water management on site is poor and drainage from the site is reaching the local stream, Lottice brook. As a consequence we have put in place a sampling and monitoring regime to determine the risk the site presents to water in Lottice brook and requested that the Landowner Lockgate Mount Ltd improve the situation on site to protect the stream. We are still awaiting an action plan from the landowner, if this is not forthcoming we may serve formal enforcement notices. > > We are awaiting a full suite of results to determine the sites overall impact on the brook and currently talking with Hyndburn Council to determine if site should be designated as contaminated land. > > Please be rest assured that we take this matter seriously, however this is a complex site with a history of chemical production and associated contamination over decades. It is the landowners responsibility to ensure that people and the environment are protected. Nevertheless, we are not anticipating that all the issues associated with past contamination will be resolved quickly. > > I hope this answers the questions you have had following the video? If I can provide any more detail or assistance, or you wish to visit the site with our officers, please let me know. > > Best Regards > Steve > > Steve Molyneux > Environment Manager, Lancashire > > > > ____________________ ____________ > From: Charity Sweet [charitysweet@hotmai l.co.uk] > Sent: 27 August 2012 15:08 > To: JONES, Graham > Subject: https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=CesMoRP_ lz0&feature=plcp cocker/ nipa sire – nook lane > > all problems have been satisfactorily resolved in Ossie? please watch the below video from on site as many many many others are now doing > > https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=CesMoRP_ lz0&feature=plcp > > > ____________________ ____________ > > UK Parliament Disclaimer: > This e-mail is confidential to the intended recipient. If you have received it in error, please notify the sender and delete it from your system. Any unauthorised use, disclosure, or copying is not permitted. This e-mail has been checked for viruses, but no liability is accepted for any damage caused by any virus transmitted by this e-mail. mrscharitysweet

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree