Waste Code of Practice – ‘one year on’

Frank Evans

2

Outline of presentation

Waste Code of Practice: interpretation, lessons learnt, feedback, evolution, next steps

Landowner perspective

Background to Code of Practice (how, why)

Principles and scope of Code

Benefits

Progress

Lessons learnt one year one

Implications for Cluster

Next steps (including Direct Transfer and Fixed Soil Treatment facilities)

3

You’ll know us by one name or another!

19901986 1997 1999 2000 2002 2005

BritishGas

Centrica

BG BG Group

Lattice

Centrica

BG Group

National Grid

National GridTransco

Central Electricity Generating Board

National Grid

Power Gen

National Power

Nuclear Electric

LatticeProperty

BritishGas Property

BGProperty

National GridProperty

SecondSiteProperty

BritishGas plc

4

National Grid Perspective - Landowner

Manages environmental risks associated with its gasworks portfolio (both surplus and operational land) and electricity-related sites.

Operates both in UK and US

Historical use of sites

Remediation programme sustained for c.15 years

Sale of surplus property and significant contribution to UK Brownfield regeneration

High % materials re-use in remediation programme

Leading user of remediation technologies

5

What I am talking about

6

Who – When - Where?

CL:AIRE (chair)

Environment Agency

English Partnerships

Industry representative:

SAGTA

EIC

HBF

Launched in Sept 2008

England & Wales only

Represents the further work cited in 2006 Environment Agency document ‘The Definition of Waste: Developing greenfield and brownfield Sites April 2006’

Field-tested on Cluster pilot project in England

7

Why did we need the Code?

8

First two Cluster sites

Satellite Site

Leven Gasworks

LTTD Treatment Area

Post-treatment validation

15,000t

6,000t 15,000t

1,000t

20,000t

20,000t

1,000t

5,000t

Hub Site

Dundee Gasworks

1,000t

9

Scope of CoP: Principle Considerations

Excavated soils – both contaminated and uncontaminated

Risk-based

Does not undermine Waste Framework Directive

Definitive point at which Waste ceases to be waste

Lines of evidence

Suitability

Quantity

Certainty

Materials Management Plan

Review and Declaration by Qualified Person (QP)

Reality recorded via Verification Report on completion

Aligns with CLR11 process

10

Existing scope of Code of Practice

Site of origin

(CLUSTER Donor site)

Re-used on site of origin with out

treatment.

Re-used on site of origin

following treatment

On site Treatment

(EP)

CLUSTER Hub site

Cluster receiver site

Movement as waste

Movement as non-waste

11

Future scope of Code of Practice

Site of origin

(CLUSTER Donor site)

Receiver Site

Direct transfer and use on another site

Re-used on site of origin with out

treatment.

Re-used on site of origin

following treatment

On site Treatment

(EP)

CLUSTER Hub site

Cluster receiver site

Fixed soil treatment facility

12

Benefits

Increased re-use of excavated soils with consequential savings on transport miles and natural resources

Waste ceases to be waste before backfilling as opposed after backfilling.

Important when backfilling at another site (e.g. Cluster)

Helps to reduce the ‘blighting’ factor associated with waste licensing

Direct Transfer opportunities have the potential to:-

allow greater flexibility in material reuse

create a step-change in best practice and value-solutions

13

Step Change

Time

Value

Continuous improvemente.g. better remediation techniquesQuicker analytical methods etc.

Step-change in Improvemente.g. Code of Practice

14

Progress one year on

Training and registration

No. of trained individuals = 220

No. of registered qualified persons = 70

Applications

No. of declarations with Environment Agency = 17

15

Reasons for rate of uptake

Lower levels of Construction activity

Exemptions remain as alternative (for the moment)

Waiting for trained individuals to provide services

Others waiting for process to mature before using

16

Lessons learnt one year on

Improvement to format of Materials Management Plan

Number of Frequency Asked Questions (51 no.)

Qualified Person

Cluster

Verification reports

Relevant factors

Aggregates protocol

17

What it means for Cluster?

1. A to B. 4000 m3 for treatment

2. From A. 2000 m3 to landfill

3. B to A. Return 4000 m3 treated for backfill

4. B to A. 2000 m3 of surplus stockpile for backfill

5. C to B. 3000m3 for treatment

6. B. to C. 3000 m3 surplus stockpile for backfill

7. From D. 3000m3 to landfill

8. B to D. 3000 m3 of treated soils (originally from C)

Site B

Site A

Site C Site D

Landfill

Landfill

18

Constraints to Cluster

Used to be Definition of Waste

Now waste issue largely unlocked

Exchange of materials remains important variation

Direct transfer

Main constraints now

Planning regulations

Perceptions of waste management centres

Inclusion of sites that are not part of a pre-defined Cluster

Multi-landowner contractual arrangements

19

Complexities of Cluster

20

Direct Transfer

Proposals drafted by steering group for consideration by Environment Agency

Similar to re-use at site of origin

Materials meet relevant criteria

Holder of material to be satisfied

Signed declaration from Qualified Person

Either Donor or Receiver site can own process

21

Fixed Soil Treatment Facilities

Could operate as a Cluster site under current CoP but commercially inefficient

Role for operator as holder of the waste

Cease to be waste prior to dispatch

Most efficient if can be producing specification-grade materials

Use Direct Transfer approach in short-term

22

Next steps and concluding thoughts

Direct Transfer and Fixed Soil Treatment Facilities

Use following changes to how exemptions are used

Greater use of Code across sector

Market-development in provision of Qualified Person services

Evolution and integration of material management plans and site waste management plans

Overlaps with other Construction sector activities

Celebrate and build on success

Better regulation. EA engagement. Cross-sector support

Delivering sustainability. Solution not a problem

23

Accessing Code of Practise

CoP is freely available on CL:AIRE website www.claire.co.uk

QP training is offered by CL:AIRE. Contact Kirstie McCulloch cop@claire.co.uk

CL:AIRE maintain register of attendance on QP training.

CL:AIRE is the recognised registration body for QP.

Example of Materials Management Plan to be on www.claire.co.uk

FAQs - EA web site (about code and regulatory position)

FAQs - CL:AIRE web site (generated from training events and steering group re: practical aspects of use of code)

Thank you for your attention