Objection letter to WSCC

County Development Division

West Sussex County Council

Chichester PO19 1RG

July 8, 2009

Dear Sir/ Madam

Application: WSCC/024/09/NM

I should like to object to the application for the permanent processing of green waste at the above site. The grounds for my objection are that of the five years during which green waste has been processed, for almost three years there have been problems of odour reaching my property and the properties of other residents in Marsh Lane and Merston.

On many occasions during that period, in my judgment, and some occasions can be confirmed by the Environment Agency, the operators of the site have been in breach of the Environment Agency Waste Management Licence Reference: EAWML/10126 dated November 25, 2003 paragraph 5.3.2 which states:

‘All emissions to air from the specified waste management operations on the site shall be free from odours at levels as are likely to cause pollution of the environment or harm to human health or serious detriment to the amenity of the locality outside the site boundary, as perceived by an authorised officer of the Agency.‘

The site began operations in September 2004. In 2005 there was no odour. Odour first began to be perceived from outside the site in March 2006 and the first complaint was received by the EA in May of that year. The emission of odour appears to have coincided with the introduction of salad waste into the waste stream from Nature’s Way Foods. This started in the winter of 20005/2006.

From May 8, 2006 I have kept a daily log of odour as perceived by me from my property and in Marsh Lane.

There was odour for many days that summer and I reported to the EA on a number of occasions. As a result of my intervention, the EA, WSCC (Waste management officers), site operator KPS and owner Langmead Farms, agreed action plans that included investment in new equipment for shredding and turning. There was some improvement for a period but odour continued into 2007 when I started meetings with KPS, the EA and later Langmead Farms. These meetings continued in 2008 and 2009.

The initial focus was on improved monitoring. Later trials were conducted on the use of two inoculants. One produces an odour to suppress composting odour, and another, BAT506, increases the amount of oxygen in the windrows and reduces the need for turning. Frequency of turning the windrows has been roughly correlated with the emission of odour. There was no conclusive evidence of improvement that could be attributed to the use of either inoculant.

In 2009 so far the incidence of odour is far less than in previous years. But there are still days when it is bad and I reported an incident to the EA as recently as July 6. A resident emailed me on June 17 to ask’ if something can be done with the awful smell that is coming from the composting facility. This has been going on for sometime now and it is really unpleasant.‘

Why there has been an improvement this year no one knows. Nothing different is taking place on the site as far as I am aware. Volumes are a little lower but not by much. Weather conditions, never major factors, are little changed year on year. It may be, as Langmead Farms might claim, that it is because of improved management of the composting process that includes full compliance with the PAS100 standard, the vetting of waste before admission to the site to ensure it is not anaerobic, the careful monitoring of moisture and temperature levels during the decomposition process and the management of the site to ensure that for example water from salad waste is not left lying to become anaerobic. Langmead Farms will also say that keeping the proportion of salad waste, currently 15% of the waste stream, to the correct level and certainly not above 30%, is important.

All this may be true but we have no clear cut evidence. Nor do we know whether the improvement so far achieved, and there is room for more, is sustainable. Lacking that assurance I request that until the owner can demonstrate the odour free operation of the site for an extended period, not just a few months, approval for the permission to be made permanent be withheld.

An additional concern on the horizon is the health risk in terms of bio aerosols if the redundant church and school room of St Giles get converted to offices or residential accommodation. This is a possibility within the next three to five years. The property is well within the 250 metre range of the composting site. Any such development could call in question the whole basis of composting on the existing site.

Stephen Quigley,

Member for North Mundham and Oving

Chichester District Council

Resident of The Old Parsonage,

Merston, Chichester PO20 1DZ