FINAL INEOS CHLORVINYLS ENERGY FROM WASTE CHP PLANT ...

FINAL
INEOS CHLORVINYLS ENERGY FROM WASTE CHP PLANT LOCAL LIAISON
FORUM
At the sixth meeting of the Local Liaison Forum (LLF), Wednesday 13 January 2010, The Heath,
Business Park, Runcorn
Present
Mr Philip Watts - Operational Director, Environmental & Regulatory Services, Halton Borough
Council
Cllr Dave Cargill - Ward Councillor, Norton South Ward, Halton Borough Council
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe - Ward Councillor, Mersey Ward, Halton Borough Council
Cllr John Bradshaw - Ward Councillor, Daresbury Ward, Halton Borough Council
Cllr Margaret Ratcliffe – Ward Councillor, Heath Ward, Halton Borough Council
Mr Ralph Owen - Resident Representative for Mersey Ward, INEOS Site Community Forum
Ms Tracey Rimmer - PPC/RSR Team Leader Cheshire, The Environment Agency
Mr Jon Baker – Project Control Manager, BIS Industrial Services Limited
Mr Alan Trueman, TPSCo Limited
Mr Ian Barlow - Project Director, INEOS ChlorVinyls
Mr James Allman - Energy Business Manager, INEOS ChlorVinyls
Ms Eileen Wilson-McKenzie - Energy from Waste Commercial Manager, INEOS ChlorVinyls
Miss Janet Ward - PR & Communications Officer, INEOS ChlorVinyls
Apologies for absence
Cllr Alan Lowe - Ward Councillor, Halton Lea Ward, Halton Borough Council
Cllr Mike Hodgkinson – Ward Councillor, Heath Ward, Halton Borough Council
Cllr Mark Dennett - Ward Councillor, Grange Ward, Halton Borough Council
Ms Sharon McAteer - Public Health Development Manager, Halton & St Helens Primary Care
Trust
Ms Lisa Bailey, The Health & Safety Executive
Mr Craig Welsh - PR & Communications Manager, INEOS ChlorVinyls
Agenda
Item 1. Welcome Ian Barlow
Item 2. Review of minutes from previous meeting Ian Barlow
Item 3. Review of action log from previous meeting Ian Barlow
Item 4. Construction update and EPR application Ian Barlow/EA
Item 5. Residents' concerns regarding rail traffic noise at properties Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe
on Picow Farm Road
Item 6. Local Liaison Forum press release Janet Ward/All
Item 7. Update on EfW section of the INEOS ChlorVinyls website Ian Barlow
Item 8. 2010/2011 LLF meeting dates Janet Ward
Item 9. Any other business All
Item 10. Review of actions Secretariat
Item 1
Mr Barlow welcomed the group to the sixth meeting of the Local Liaison Forum and passed on
apologies for those who could not attend. A brief overview of the meeting agenda was also
provided.
Page 1

Mr Barlow extended an additional welcome to representatives who were attending the meeting for
the first time including Cllr Margaret Ratcliffe (as deputy for Cllr Mike Hodgkinson), Tracey
Rimmer, Alan Trueman and Jon Baker.
Item 2
The Minutes from the previous meeting were accepted as an accurate record by all.
Item 3
The Group reviewed the action log from the previous meeting and confirmed that most actions had
been completed and those outstanding would be handled as follows:
Action 1 – Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe to provide feedback on mercury contamination map and return the
map to INEOS by the end of February 2010.
Action 2 – Mr Welsh to continue discussions with the Environment Agency (EA) regarding
improvement of the visibility of the EPR application on the EA website by the end of February
2010.
Cllr Bradshaw enquired why the EPR application keeps being changed, and wanted to establish
whether the application is for 'waste incineration' or 'Energy from Waste'.
Ms Rimmer confirmed that the wording on the description of the EPR application is lifted directly
from legislation. The application is for the operation of the plant and therefore the appropriate
description is 'disposal of non-hazardous waste by incineration'.
Cllr Bradshaw questioned whether INEOS Chlor was therefore seeking a permit for an incineration
plant or an Energy from Waste plant.
Ms Rimmer confirmed that INEOS Chlor would be permitted for an incineration plant.
Mr Barlow outlined the two different categories of incineration legislation and explained that
INEOS is happy for the application to be categorised as incineration.
Cllr Bradshaw queried whether the application should be classified under the 'Thermal Power
Station' category as this supports the requirement for the plant to supply power to the INEOS Chlor
operations.
Mr Barlow explained that the development should be classed as an 'incineration plant' as opposed
to a 'Thermal Power Station' due to the fact that if no waste were available the plant could not use
other fuel sources e.g. gas, therefore it is totally reliant on the incineration of Refuse Derived Fuel
and is therefore not a thermal power station.
Cllr Bradshaw enquired why the EA had readvertised the EPR application and whether this was
because of the reclassification.
Ms Rimmer explained that the readvertisement was purely due to an administrative matter to
clarify the address at which the relevant application documents could be viewed. The original
advert gave an incorrect address so the EA has re-advertised the application and extended the
consultation process, however the process has not stopped.
Page 2

Action 3 – Mr Barlow confirmed that the prevailing wind directions in the local area are West and
South, with the two being equally as strong. Contrary to popular opinion the prevailing wind
direction is not South Westerly. The HIA has been checked and is correct. Mr Barlow added that
this data is taken from Liverpool and Manchester airports.
Action 4 – Mr Barlow confirmed that this action is still progressing and that feedback would be
provided at the March meeting, this action will therefore be carried forward.
Item 4
Mr Barlow gave a presentation providing an update on recent and upcoming construction activity
at the Energy from Waste development site.
Mr Barlow also provided a brief update to the group regarding the current status of the EPR
application.
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe enquired whether the recent works had included strengthening Picow Farm
Road in light of the new access road/road junction/increase in traffic.
Mr Barlow confirmed this was the case.
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe asked who would be responsible for Picow Farm Road going forward,
particularly if there was an accident.
Mr Barlow confirmed that Halton Borough Council will regain ownership and ongoing
maintenance of Picow Farm Road once all construction work on the new service road is
completed. Halton Borough will then carry out the final resurfacing of Picow Farm Road, which
will be funded by INEOS.
Cllr Bradshaw asked why INEOS is progressing with construction work and investing such large
sums of money to build a plant when it has not obtained the necessary EPR certificate.
Mr Barlow clarified that, from experience, INEOS believes it has everything in place to ensure that
there will be no major issues with obtaining the necessary environmental permit. The regulations
are quite clear and the Company is confident that the Energy from Waste CHP plant conforms with
these regulations. In addition, it is not uncommon for INEOS to start work prior to such permits
being granted, as this is the most time effective way of progressing a development in light of the
timescales involved. INEOS recognises there is a slight risk with this strategy, but the Joint
Venture Management Company has agreed that this as the right way forward.
Ms Rimmer also provided an update on the progress with the EPR application and the process
going forward.
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe asked the EA to clarify the parameters of the environmental permit,
specifically whether it covers matter such as traffic and transport.
Ms Rimmer confirmed that traffic and transport outside the plant boundary is not covered by the
EPR regulations. In considering the permit application the Agency will look only at the operation
of the installation itself and any emissions that arise as a result. Anything outside the installation is
not in the Agency's remit.
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe commented that this did not make sense.
Page 3

Mr Barlow added that the process was in fact two distinct parts, the planning process including all
the various elements outside of the plant, including traffic and transport, and the environmental
permitting process (EPR), which is purely the plant's operating permit.
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe reiterated that he believed this did not make sense to exclude traffic and
transport from the environmental permit.
Cllr Bradshaw stated in response that although Halton Borough Council has the power to take
action against INEOS if operation of the Energy from Waste CHP plant creates a noise or odour
nuisance, this can only be done in retrospect, i.e. once there is a known problem
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe voiced his disagreement with the position stated by Cllr Bradshaw in that he
believes Halton Borough Council has all the necessary information it needs to deal with these
potential issues now.
Mr Watts confirmed that Halton Borough Council could not address an issue that does not exist
now but may exist in the future.
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe stated that the Environment Agency appears only concerned with
environmental issues that occur within the plant boundary and added that every Company he had
worked for had strived to be a good neighbour. For INEOS to be a good neighbour they have to
consider issues that affect local residents. INEOS should not have a negative impact on its
neighbours.
Mr Barlow confirmed that these types of issues will be addressed by INEOS and that Halton
Borough Council would be the enforcement authority should any problems arise.
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe enquired whether INEOS would take action if noise were being caused by a
third party delivering material to the Energy from Waste CHP Plant.
Mr Barlow agreed that INEOS did want to be a good neighbour and would endeavour to address
such an issue, as this would be as a direct result of operation of the Energy from Waste CHP plant.
Cllr Bradshaw stated that local residents were not aware of the Environment Agency’s ‘Drop-In’
session schedule for 27 January 2010 and enquired what the process was for promoting this event.
Ms Rimmer responded by confirming that it was an open session and no pre-bookings were
required.
Cllr Bradshaw stated that the local residents action group HAGATI believed it would have the
opportunity to speak to local residents at this event.
Ms Rimmer confirmed the purpose of the event was to help residents understand the application
and permitting process and permitting officers would be on hand to answer questions that residents
may have. The HAGATI group will not have the opportunity to make a presentation at this
session.
Cllr Bradshaw asked again how this event was being advertised.
Ms Rimmer confirmed that a press release was being issued to promote the session, notices would
be displayed in local libraries and that MPs and council members had been advised. Ms Rimmer
stated that the Agency was in favour of distributing information as widely as possible, for example
by leafleting, but costs had to be considered and as a result this option has been discounted.
Page 4

Cllr Bradshaw commented he believed the leafleting option would be reasonably inexpensive and
that he would be willing and able to deliver leaflets to the residents of Weston Point.
Ms Rimmer confirmed that irrespective of the cost, different rules cannot be adopted for different
applications and carrying out a leaflet drop for this application would set a precedent for future
applications.
Cllr Bradshaw enquired whether the LLF then could facilitate a leaflet drop to local residents.
Mr Barlow confirmed that the consultation process is clearly set out in the regulations and this is
the process the EA is following.
Cllr Bradshaw asked what the Forum could do to promote this event. His view is that the Forum is
in place to give people the opportunity to have their say on the project and the only way this could
happen was that if events of this type are promoted fully.
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe added he believed that as a good neighbour INEOS should support this
request.
Cllr Bradshaw proposed that INEOS fund the leaflet drop as a good neighbour.
Action: INEOS to review whether it appropriate to fund and facilitate a leaflet drop to local
residents to promote the EA drop in session. INEOS to confirm to local councillors by
Monday 18 January.
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe stated he believed that INEOS was already carrying out communications to
local residents regarding the project and enquired whether this was correct.
Miss Ward confirmed that INEOS is in regular communication with local residents concerning
ongoing construction works. This is primarily by letter, but also via the Company's website. Ms
Ward clarified that ongoing communication regarding construction matters is limited to only those
residents living close by who may be directly affected.
Cllr Cargill asked where the drop in session was being held.
Ms Rimmer confirmed that it was being held at Pavilions, Sandy Lane, Runcorn.
Item 5
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe thanked INEOS for providing time on the agenda for him to raise the matter
of rail noise experienced by owners of five properties situated near to the railway junction adjacent
to Picow Farm Road. Cllr Ratcliffe read a statement from one of the residents and the Forum was
then played a recording of the noise it is alleged is experienced by the local residents.
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe voiced his concern that residents of these properties are already being affected
by rail noise and this would only get worse when the number of trains increases due to the Energy
from Waste project. He stated INEOS, as a good neighbour, should do something now to address
this issue.
Mr Barlow stated that the squealing noise that could be heard on the recording could be generated
by rail wagons carrying caustic soda. These wagons have a fixed axle. The wagons that will be
used to transport the fuel to the Energy from Waste plant will incorporate 'bogeys' to allow the
axles to twist with the bend, which greatly reduces noise.
Page 5

Mr Barlow stated that INEOS had carried out measurements of the rail noise in the area that
concurs with the resident’s assessment that the existing trains are noisy (measuring 86 DBA at its
peak). This is however not related to the Energy from Waste CHP project and as such should be
raised at the INEOS Site Community Forum, not the Energy from Waste Local Liaison Forum.
Mr Barlow continued by stating there are British Standards relating to rail noise and there is also a
condition within the planning permission for the Energy from Waste CHP prescribing there should
be an acceptable level of noise at night, with levels limited to around 51 – 55 DBA maximum as an
average.
Cllr Bradshaw questioned whether it was appropriate to average out noise levels, for example if
there was one very noisy train per week this would be lost in the data?
Mr Barlow stated his belief that averaging out data is an accepted method of measuring rail noise,
however he recognised he was not a specialist in this area.
Mr Watts confirmed that the parameters for measuring noise are specified in BS 745 and this gives
specific details of how noise should be monitored and measured.
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe enquired where, in relation to the proximity of the railway track, had the
INEOS noise measurements been taken.
Mr Barlow confirmed that the noise measurements were taken at the facade of the properties on
Picow Farm Road
Cllr Margaret Ratcliffe enquired whether it would be possible for Halton Borough Council’s
Environmental Health Department to investigate this complaint.
Mr Watts confirmed that the recording of the rail noise has already been passed to the Council’s
Environmental Health Department for investigation.
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe enquired whether a representative from INEOS would also be visiting Mr
Melarangi to address his concerns.
Mr Watts confirmed that the Council would certainly visit Mr Melarangi and if it is proved that
there is a breach of the noise regulations then the Council will install a noise monitor and
appropriate action will be taken against INEOS. Mr Watts has requested a Council Noise Officer
to go down to the area in question and monitor noise levels. Councillors will be informed of the
outcome in the next few days.
Action: Halton Borough Council to undertake investigation into existing rail noise issue and
communicate the findings to the residents and elected members.
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe questioned whether newer wagons with improved technology would really
eliminate the rail noise and whether something needed be done now to test this theory before they
are used.
Mr Watts confirmed that existing noise issues can be addressed by the Council but potential future
issues cannot be addressed until such time as they arise, which they may not.
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe asked whether the Forum really believed there would be no noise created by
the trains carrying the fuel to the Energy from Waste CHP plant, and in doing so restated his belief
that action should be taken now to address residents' concerns.
Page 6

Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe commented that the issue with noise at Mr Melarangi’s property has in his
view made the property unsellable.
Mr Barlow stated that industry data for modern trains was used in calculating the noise levels in
the Environmental Statement. The Secretary of State has put conditions on the permission and
these have to be met. If not the Council has the power to take action.
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe enquired whether Mr Watts was prepared to have a meeting with Cllr Ernest
Ratcliffe and Cllr Bradshaw to progress the matter of the existing noise issue further.
Mr Watts confirmed that he was.
Action: Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe, Cllr Bradshaw and Mr Watts to arrange meeting outside of the
Forum.
Cllr Bradshaw voiced his concerns that the success rate of overcoming any issues would be greatly
reduced after the plant has been built and over £300 million spent, and questioned whether INEOS
would still spend over £300 million even if there were issues with noise nuisance.
Mr Barlow referred again to the planning conditions that restricted train noise.
Cllr Bradshaw stated his belied that the planning conditions prevented rail movements at night.
Mr Barlow responded by stating that the condition required INEOS to avoid night movements
where possible, however given the amount of rail traffic some movements at night were inevitable.
Mr Watts confirmed this by recounting the relevant planning condition.
Cllr Bradshaw confirmed that rail movements at night should be by exception and not as standard.
Mr Watts agreed that was the case.
Mr Barlow stated that some trains would have to come into the plant during the night and this will
be as a result of the rail schedules, and the Company has always been open about this. Night rail
movements may not be required in Phase 1, for the Manchester waste, but Phase 2 will definitely
result in some nighttime rail movements.
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe queried why Phase 2 will mean night rail movements when the planning
conditions says that night rail movements ‘so far as reasonably practicable’ would not be between
the hours of 2300-0700 hrs.
Mr Barlow confirmed that the environmental statement stated that it was highly likely that there
will be some night rail movements, but the majority would not be between 2300-0700 hrs.
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe expressed concern for the quality of life the residents who live near to the rail
track.
Mr Owen confirmed he had some communication with Mr Melarangi in the past on this matter and
had responded accordingly. Mr Owen also confirmed that INEOS had supplied relevant
information regarding train movements and that this information had been provided to Mr
Melarangi.
Page 7

Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe commented that he believed that INEOS’ PR people should make contact
with Mr Melarangi to discuss this matter.
Mr Barlow confirmed that this issue was actually two separate issues 1) issues with the caustic
wagons that should be addressed now and 2) a potential issue with the new wagons related to the
Energy from Waste project. On point two, the Company believes there will not be an issue, but if
there is this will be dealt with by Halton Borough Council.
Mr Allman confirmed that INEOS would make contact with Mr Melarangi directly to discuss the
issues.
Miss Ward requested a copy of Mr Melargani’s statement, which Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe supplied.
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe officially requested INEOS to contact Mr Melarangi.
Mr Allman and Mr Barlow confirmed that INEOS would make contact.
Action: INEOS to make contact with Mr Melarangi and confirm action complete.
Item 6
Miss Ward confirmed that comments had been received regarding the press release and approval
had been obtained from Halton Borough Council’s Press Office. It was proposed that the press
release would be issued to the media w/c 18 January.
Action: Issue approved press release to Runcorn local newspapers w/c 18 January 2010 with
a copy of the final release copied via e-mail to representatives.
Item 7
Mr Barlow confirmed that the Energy from Waste section of the INEOS ChlorVinyls website was
now complete and any feedback or improvement suggestions would be welcome.
Item 8
Miss Ward confirmed that this meeting was the last diaried meeting. In order to start the process
of agreeing dates for future meetings a form was provided to representatives with suggested dates.
Representatives were requested to complete the form and return to Janet Ward in the FREEPOST
envelope provided as soon as possible.
Cllr Ernest Ratcliffe stated that the 2010 Council diary has not yet been confirmed so the
councillors would be unable to provide their availability after May until the Council meeting dates
had been agreed.
Action: Representatives to complete and return the 2010/2011 meeting availability forms to
the Secretariat by Monday 1 February 2010.
Action: Secretariat to send 2010/2011 meeting availability forms to those representatives who
were not at the meeting for completion by Monday 1 February 2010.
Action: Once all 2010/2011 meeting availability forms received Secretariat to confirm final
meeting dates by e-mail.
Page 8

Item 9
Mr Barlow called for members of the Forum to raise any other business
Cllr Margaret Ratcliffe requested a date by when the action regarding the leaflet drop would be
completed; bearing in mind the EA drop in session was actually taking place on 27 January 2010.
Miss Ward confirmed that this action would be complete by Monday 18 January 2010.
Mr Owen enquired whether there would be any further feedback on the Health Impact
Assessment/workshops.
Mr Barlow confirmed that INEOS wouldn’t be providing any feedback, but that the information
would be used by the EA as part of its consultation process.
Ms Rimmer confirmed that the information would be used as part of the determination process.
Mr Owen enquired whether it was safe to assume that the content is satisfactory to the Primary
Care Trust.
Ms Rimmer stated that any comment and further consultation following the draft decision would
address consultees’ comments.
Mr Owen enquired when Picow Farm Road would be re-opened.
Mr Barlow stated that there had been some delays with the construction work on Picow Farm Road
partly due to the recent adverse weather conditions. As a result the road would not be re-opened
until sometime in April, however further clarification on the exact date would be confirmed at the
next meeting.
Action: Confirm the exact date for re-opening Picow Farm Road.
Mr Owen stated that this was proving particularly difficult as Weston Road is currently closed.
Cllr Margaret Ratcliffe added that she believed this was as a result of a leak from the reservoir,
however someone was meant to be looking into this within the next day or so.
Mr Watts added that he would talk to Halton Borough Council’s Highways Department to assess
whether there was anything they could do to relieve the situation.
Item 10
The actions agreed at the meeting were reviewed and confirmed.
Meeting closed at 5.25pm
Page 9

Secretariat contact details:
Miss Janet Ward – PR & Communications Officer
Local Liaison Forum Secretariat
INEOS ChlorVinyls
Runcorn Site HQ
South Parade PO Box 9
Runcorn Cheshire WA7 4JE
Telephone: 01928 515227
E-mail: janet.ward@ineos.com
END OF DOCUMENT
Page 10