 |
 |
If it is inappropriate to issue new SGVs, this is because it would be inappropriate to use them if they were to be issued. If it is inappropriate to use a new SGV, it must be inappropriate to use an old SGV, since both are calculated on the same basis. Inappropriate for what? That is the question. The answer is inappropriate to determine under Part IIA. As we have all worked out some time ago. They have a value in that soil concentrations below the SGV give no cause for concern. However, it is not possible to tell from an SGV alone if a soil concentration exceeding the SGV is safe or not safe. This second point appears to be the reason for putting them on hold. In which case, it seems a bit of a knee-jerk reaction given that the first point is still valid and more SGVs would help in that respect. Unless there is an even worse skeleton lurking in the cupboard............. Regards, Kevin Privett. Dr Kevin Privett Geo-Environmental Associate Hydrock Consultants Ltd Over Court Barns Over Lane Almondsbury Bristol BS32 4DF Tel: (01454) 619533 Fax: (01454) 614125 [log in to unmask] Cell phone: (07799) 430870 Offices in Bristol, Plymouth, Northampton, Stoke-on-Trent. www.hydrock.com Disclaimer The information in this e-mail is confidential and may be read, copied or used only by the intended recipients. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any perusal, use, distribution, copying or disclosure is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error please advise us immediately by return e-mail at [log in to unmask] and delete the e-mail document without making a copy. Whilst every effort has been made to ensure this email is virus free, no responsibility is accepted for loss or damage arising from viruses or changes made to this message after it was sent. -----Original Message----- From: Contaminated Land Management Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Guppy, Steve Sent: 07 April 2006 13:52 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: CLEA update Bulletin No.3 I see no change in the current situation other than its unlikely to be resolved soon. My only concern is that some developers and the like misinterpret this latest news and suggest that it is no longer appropriate to use existing SGVs. They clearly still have a role and it would have been useful if the bulletin had indicated this. Perhaps its not too late for revised version of Bulletin No.3 to make such a statement? Regards Stephen Guppy Team Leader - Scientific Services Pollution & Safety Environmental Health & Consumer Protection Southampton City Council * 023 8083 4166 * 023 8083 3075 * [log in to unmask] > This e-mail is intended for the addressee only. If you are not the intended recipient, please be aware that the unauthorised use or disclosure of the information it contains, or the unauthorised copying or re-transmission of the e-mail are strictly prohibited. Such action may result in legal proceedings. If the e-mail has been sent to you in error, please accept our apologies, advise the sender as soon as possible and then delete the message. Under the Freedom of Information Act 2000 / Data Protection Act 1998, the contents of this e-mail, whether it is marked confidential or otherwise, may be disclosed. No employee, Councillor or agent is authorised to conclude by e-mail any binding agreement with another party on behalf of Southampton City Council. The Council does not accept service by e-mail of court proceedings, other processes or formal notices of any kind without specific prior written agreement. E-mails to and from Southampton City Council may be monitored in! accordance with the law. Protect the environment - only print if absolutely necessary - avoid wasting paper -----Original Message----- From: Contaminated Land Management Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Ivens, Rob Sent: 07 April 2006 13:17 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: CLEA update Bulletin No.3 Andrew/etal the task force already had a meeting of about 45 interested parties- consultants landowners, and industry representatives. 7 local authorities were there. I got a belated invite because of some stats work we were doing with ESI. The task force were looking at> 1. Sampling- how much data do you need to collect/how do you ensure your data is satisfactory to make a decision that an action level is exceeded. 2. the CLEA model. 3. resources- I went to 1 and two. 1. Sampling- The results from the sampling was that people needed a linked piece of guidance that could help make decisions about the uncertainty in their data and how to improve it. so some improved stats tests but more importantly something that pulls the user through a process of testing and improving the data set. 2. The CLEA model- the thing I found most interesting here was the idea that their ought to be consideration given to pulling the tox uncertainties through the model so that decisions on iffy tox data would be more transparent. Other people may have picked up other issues So much to read. So Little Time Rob Ivens MVDC- 01306 879232 -----Original Message----- From: Contaminated Land Management Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Andrew Bent-Marshall Sent: 07 April 2006 13:05 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: CLEA update Bulletin No.3 I agree this is frustrating.... But will we really notice much difference, at least in the short term? We weren't exactly being overwhelmed with new Tox and SGV reports anyway. My main concern is that, whilst all parties accept that better guidance is required, there is never any indication of timescales. If previous experience is anything to go by the review process could take a number of years....and this all coincides with the BVPI's, which are aimed at improving progress on Part IIA! On a positive note, does this present an opportunity for Contam Land Officers across the country to influence future guidance? I don't want to step on anyone's toes in the task force, but should we be consider some kind of national response to this, perhaps coordinated across the Cluster Groups? Maybe the task force has this in hand already (please advise)? Any comments on this are welcome. Andy Bent-Marshall Principal Land Quality Officer - London Borough of Hounslow Tel: 020 8583 5062 Fax: 020 8583 5134 www.hounslow.gov.uk Please do not print this e-mail unless absolutely necessary and RECYCLE printed copies when no longer needed. -----Original Message----- From: Contaminated Land Management Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Jonathan Parr Sent: 07 April 2006 11:32 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: CLEA update Bulletin No.3 Tears hair out in frustration! Let unnaceptable intake = LOAEL and then they can get on with it! This is a ridiculous situation to be in; why should they stop publishing them because of a Part IIA problem, SGVs as they are are fine for Planning! Jon -----Original Message----- From: Contaminated Land Management Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of David Fountain Sent: 07 April 2006 11:25 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: Re: CLEA update Bulletin No.3 leaves us waiting, waiting, waiting not the best news. Dave Fountain Contaminated Land Officer East Staffordshire Borough Council Tel: 01283 508848 Fax: 01283 508890 -----Original Message----- From: Contaminated Land Management Discussion List [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Jo McMillan Sent: 07 April 2006 11:23 To: [log in to unmask] Subject: CLEA update Bulletin No.3 Any comments on this mornings news from the Agency? http://www.environment- agency.gov.uk/commondata/acrobat/bulletin_3_1343154.pdf Where does this leave us now? Regards Jo This e-mail and files or other data transmitted with it are confidential and intended solely for the use of the individual to whom it is addressed. If you are not the intended recipient, disclosure, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying is strictly prohibited and you must not take any action in reliance upon it. Please notify the sender immediately and delete the message. Any views or opinions presented are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of East Staffordshire Borough Council unless explicitly stated otherwise. East Staffordshire Borough Council may monitor the contents of e-mail sent and received via its network for the purposes of ensuring compliance with its policies and procedures. East Staffordshire Borough Council does not enter into contracts or contractual obligations via electronic mail, unless otherwise explicitly agreed in advance in writing between parties concerned. The Council believes in being open with its information and the contents of this e-mail and any replies may be released to a third party requesting such information at a future date. Email Disclaimer is: http://www.blackpool.gov.uk/EmailDisclaimer/ This message has been scanned by F-Secure Anti-Virus for Microsoft Exchange as part of the Council's e-mail and internet policy. _____________________________________________________________________ This message has been checked for Viruses by the Message Labs Control Centre. _____________________________________________________________________ Hounslow Council routinely monitors the content of e-mails sent and received via its network for the purposes of ensuring compliance with its policies and procedures. The contents of this message are for the attention and use of the intended addressee only. If you are not the intended addressee, or the person responsible for delivering it to them, you may not copy, forward, disclose or otherwise use it or any part of it in any way. To do so may be unlawful. If you receive this e-mail by mistake please advise the sender immediately. Where opinions are expressed they are not necessarily those of the London Borough of Hounslow. ____________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.star.net.uk ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ This e-mail has been scanned for all viruses by Star. The service is powered by MessageLabs. For more information on a proactive anti-virus service working around the clock, around the globe, visit: http://www.star.net.uk ________________________________________________________________________