Tip site contaminated – for now!

A MAJOR, three month environmental study in and around the former Gatewarth landfill site at Warrington has concluded that it does meet the definition of contaminated land.
However, environmental compliance consultants SKM Enviros, who carried out the study on behalf of the Environment Agency (EA), and the borough council, say new Government guidance expected later this year, may change the situation.
They suggest the EA may recommend deferring a decision on designating the site as contaminated until the new statutory advice is implemented.
This worries local environmental campaigner John Mulhall (pictured)
He said: “This sounds as if they are going to move the goalposts. In other words, the land is contaminated now, but it may not be when the new guidance is implemented!”
The survey was carried out for the Environment Agency and Warrington Borough Council.
Contractors drilled boreholes and installed groundwater and gas monitoring wells across the tipped area at Penketh and around the edges of the site to gather information
Mr Mulhall has claimed that radioactive materials from UKAEA Risley and the Capenhurst uranium enrichment plant near Chester, were dumped on the site many years ago.
He has linked this with the unexplained deaths of fish in the St Helens Canal and the death of new trees planted in the area.
The site investigation involved shallow soils, landfill waste, superficial deposits and the underlying sandstone – the main aquifer.
Shallow soil contamination was not proven at levels to affect human health. But surface water pollution was found in the Penketh, Sankey and Whittle Brooks and in the River Mersey, although in limited areas and minimal concentrations.
Although the site could produce significant quantities of landfill gas, migration beneath the St Helens Canel towards adjacent residential estates seemed unlikely, say the consultants.
Although the EA might wish to further monitoring, it was unlikely to prove any significant possibility of significant harm.
The consultants say it is unlikely that underlying polluted groundwater will be used for potable supply and the contamination will steadily attenuate over time. There is no evidence that the site has caused widespread pollution of surface waters and treatment facilities are in place where the highest levels of contaminates were identified.
Taking into account all factors, the seriousness of pollution in the area is considered to be “relatively low.”