The Company

Cannock

In November 2010, there was an explosion at an Augean plant at Cannock in Staffordshire. Two workers were injured. The plant had to be closed pending an investigation into the accident. For further details see:
http://www.chasepost.net/news-in-cannock/cannock-burntwood-news/cannock-news/2010/11/11/bridgtown-plant-blast-residents-voice-fears-93633-27641538/

Fines
In 2005, Augean, along with previous owners Atlantic Waste, were fined for infringements of the site license. For further details see:
http://www.peterboroughtoday.co.uk/news/environment/firms_fined_for_breach_of_environmental_laws_1_70019

Burying radioactive waste at Thornhaugh
In 2010, Augean buried radioactive waste from the London Olympic site in its Thornhaugh quarry, just a couple of miles from King’s Cliffe. Even though this was in the midst of the controversy over its King’s Cliffe application, the company did not see fit to inform anyone on the King’s Cliffe Local Liaison Group, its so-called consultative body. For further details, see: http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/oct/26/radioactive-olympic-waste-cambridgeshire

Strange comments in consultation.
Even though it claims that its consultation has been thorough, Augean may not always have been clear about explaining its intentions:

1. Radioactivity
This pie chart appeared on a display panel at the King’s Cliffe public exhibition organised by Augean in May 2009. It also appeared in the community newsletter of the same month.

In it, Augean says that the radioactive content destined for King’s Cliffe would be ‘the bottom five per cent of the range of this type of waste currently sent to landfill in the UK.’

This would be reassuring if it were true, but it is not. The only landfill accepting radioactive waste at the time was Clifton Marsh, which was taking a limit of 100Bqs/gm, that is half the radioactivity destined for King’s Cliffe. Far from the Augean proposal representing the bottom 5%, it actually represented double that currently sent to landfill.

When challenged at the inquiry, Augean replied that it made this statement to make it easier for local people to understand.

The higher levels of LLW go only to Drigg. This is a nuclear site which is not classed as landfill but as the Low Level Waste Repository.

2. Extension
At the same exhibition, Augean also presented this claim:

At the Inquiry, Augean argued that it had made it perfectly clear to local people that it would apply for an extension of time and space:

  “9.5 Augean has been aware of the possibility of the need for a time extension for the site for a few years but due to the volatility of the
  inputs to the site did not come to a conclusion that it is highly likely until recently. It has advised the Planning Authority and Kings
  Cliffe Liaison Committee of the possibility of the need for time extension since June 2007 (AUG 3.3, Appendix 6). It has been made
  clear at public events and presentations in respect of the LLW application that the need to apply for an extension of time is a possibility.”
p.27, Proof of Evidence of Dr. Gene Wilson

Do you think you were properly consulted?