· Roadstone are allowed to retain on-site ‘inert’ material which if was to be exported off-site would have to go to a lined landfill facility.
· They are allowed to place this ‘inert’ material into unlined excavated areas that are close to or in contact with the watertable and/or surface water.
· If Roadstone applied for a lined ‘inert’ landfill to import this same material at this location, it is likely that they would be refused. If this material was acceptable here in the first place, why didn’t the EPA grant them an inert waste licensed landfill so at least the areas into which this material was to be placed would have a barrier between it and the watertable.
· If anybody applied to accept this material in any part of the county, there would be a requirement as a minimum a natural or man-made barrier.
· If the EPA believes that they have refused Roadstone a licence for a landfill, how can they then increase the acceptable limit values that relate to a lined landfill?
· The derogations allowed to these limit values are not allowable under EU Council Decision 2003/33/EC.

Perhaps the EPA did bow to pressure after all????

Regards
Bug1