Yes Chris, permitting regime/EDRs.
An age ago I recall that during a Part2A Capital Fund bid EA/Defra stated
that they would not accept sites post 1996?? (not sure of exact date? but
it was in the 1990s). They indicated that contaminated sites post this date
should be dealt with under Planning.
Regards Nattalie
Nattalie Kennedy MSc. BSc. (Hons) PgC.
Scientific Officer (Contaminated Land)
Environmental Control
3rd Floor, Wesley House
St Helens
WA10 1HE
01744 676397 office
07881 416538 mobile
From: "Taylor, Christopher" <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask],
Date: 28/07/2014 14:09
Subject: Re: Gov't Sale of Fracking Licenses
Sent by: Contaminated Land Management Discussion List
<[log in to unmask]>
Hi David
I thought that the Part 2A regime was created to deal with the legacy of
historic contamination. Wouldn’t contamination that occurs in the future be
dealt with under the relevant permitting regime and/or the Environmental
Damage Regs?
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/environmental-damage-prevention-and-remediation-regulations-2009-guidance-for-england-and-wales
Regards
Christopher Taylor
Enforcement Officer
Regulatory Services
Brent Council
Tel: 020 8937 5159
Fax: 020 8937 5150
www.brent.gov.uk
From: Contaminated Land Management Discussion List [
mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of David
Jackson
Sent: 28 July 2014 13:50
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Gov't Sale of Fracking Licenses
Frank
In order that sites are returned to pre-development conditions presumably
they will undergo a “baseline assessment” and that samples of soils and
groundwater will be tested for the chemicals (and natural substances and
radio-nuclides (NORM)) which may be used and encountered during the
fracking process. Hence, a comprehensive list of substances will still
need to be created.
If the clean-up does not return the site to pre-development baseline levels
(just like IPPC) it would still have to satisfy Part 2A assessment and
would still be required to be demonstrably suitable for any subsequent
development later on down the track, so the derivation of C4SL and GACs
would still be required – hence my question(?).
Best wishes to all,
David E Jackson
Sometime freelancer
From: Contaminated Land Management Discussion List [
mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of F J
Westcott
Sent: 28 July 2014 13:40
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: Re: Gov't Sale of Fracking Licenses
Off the top of my head, and without delving into the permitting
requirements for Fracking, I would guess that any eventual clean up
requirement of a fracking wellhead site will be established on the basis of
the EU industrial Emissions Directive, i.e. return the site to its pre
existing condition, rather than through Part IIA.
Therefore neither C4SLs nor GACs will have any relevance (at least that's
one thing we wont need to argue about!)
If a list of chemicals is to be put together, it should of course include
any substances in the formation to be fracked that might be liberated, as
well as fracking chemicals themselves - presumably that is what Tony is
referring to.
I welcome any
Regards
Frank Westcott
westenviro.com
Technical Solutions for Sustainability and Brownfield Development
Magnolia House, 15a Fore Street, Roche, St Austell, Cornwall PL26 8EP
0330 330 8015
07973 616197
[log in to unmask]
This e-mail may contain privileged and confidential information and/or
copyright material which is intended only for the addressees named above.
Access to this email by anyone else is unauthorised and copying,
distribution
or any action taken in reliance on it is prohibited and may be unlawful.
Westenviro does not warrant that any e-mail messages and attachments
are free from viruses or other defects and accept no liability for any
losses resulting from infected email transmissions.
On 28 Jul 2014, at 13:23, Tony Windsor wrote:
Don't forget to include NORMs on the list. We had detectable levels in
Quebec but, not at concentrations of toxicological significance. I would
suspect the "list" will vary depending on the fracking agents used and the
formation in question though.
Tony Windsor M.Sc., P.Eng
Tony Windsor
On 28 July 2014 05:30, David E Jackson <[log in to unmask]>
wrote:
Dear All
In preparation for the deluge of "fracking applications" anticipated now
expoloraory licenses are being marketed for sale, I thought it might be
helpful to regulators, planners and practitioners to prepare a definitive
list of "Chemicals of Potential Concern" associated with fracking
practices.
I would be grateful if those that known, could point me in the direction of
a list(s) (I've seen a number of lists on US and Wikipedia type webpages)
of fracking chemicals and more importantly their respective C4SL/GAC for
soils, and health and ecological surface and ground-water screening
standards.
I would anticipate that such a list would be used to set appropriate
operational acceptance criteria, to inform post operational clean up, and
determined suitability of the sites for future uses (and possible Part 2A
determination), thereafter?
Best wishes,
David E Jackson
Sometime Freelancer
----------------------------------
DISCLAIMER
1. Any opinions or statements expressed in this e mail are those of the
individual and not necessarily those of Darlington Borough Council.
2. This e mail and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
solely for the use of the intended recipient. If you receive this in error,
please do not disclose any information to anyone and notify the sender at
the above address.
3. Darlington Borough Council's computer systems and communications may be
monitored to ensure effective operation of the system and for other lawful
purposes.
4. Although we have endeavoured to ensure that this e mail and any
attachments are free from any virus we would advise you to take any
necessary steps to ensure that they are actually virus free.
--
The use of Brent Council's e-mail system may be monitored and
communications read in order to secure effective operation of the system
and other lawful purposes.
"This e-mail and any file transmitted with it are confidential, subject to copyright and intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they are addressed.
It may contain privileged information.
Any unauthorised review, use, disclosure, distribution or publication is prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy and delete the message and all copies from your computer. "
|
