I refer to the Envirocentre Report and accompanying letter dated 24 August 2001, a copy of which was sent to Mr Jim Dewar of Renfrewshire Council.
As you know, the Envirocentre report was critical of the Cass report and the way in which remediation costs were calculated. Section 2 headed "Background" contains the following extract:
"Following the meeting with Renfrewshire Council on 8 June 2001 where the above findings were discussed, it was recommended that a more detailed review of the Cass document be undertaken to ascertain the full extent of the shortcomings with regard to the Report in general and with particular regard to the remediation costs provided. Renfrewshire Council, by way of their letter of 12 July 2001, authorised Envirocentre to undertake the following tasks:
A review of BAE Systems outline remediation strategy.
A review of the site closure, decommissioning and fencing option (with no remediation or development), primarily to assess whether it would comply with the contaminated land regime. Renfrewshire Council also agreed that further funds would be available for a review of the remediation costs provided for the Cass Report, which cannot be carried out until the relevant documentation for the Bishopton, Chorley and Waltham Abbey sites is made available by BAE Systems."
I would like to know:
Who in Renfrewshire Council authorised the Envirocentre to undertake the tasks described in the above extract?
In the letter dated 12 July 2001 what did Renfrewshire Council authorise the Envirocentre to do?
Was the "detailed review of the Cass document" referred to above carried out? When and by whom?
What follow up action was taken to carry out the tasks referred to above (i.e. a review of BAE Systems outline remediation strategy and a review of site closure, decommissioning and fencing option with no remediation or development etc)?
Did Envirocentre or any other independent body carry out these tasks? When?
What reports/papers/documents/correspondence (written, email, fax or any other form) have been produced as a result of the above, by Envirocentre or by any other body?
What funds were made available by Renfrewshire Council for the review of remediation costs as referred to above and was this review carried out?
Was the relevant documentation for the Bishopton, Chorley and Waltham Abbey sites made available by BAE Systems as mentioned above?
Upon receipt of any reports/documents/correspondence from Envirocentre were these reports/documents/correspondence circulated within Renfrewshire Council and what responses were received?
Upon receipt of any reports/documents/correspondence from Envirocentre were these reports/documents/correspondence circulated to any other bodies and what responses were received?
Given that various shortcomings were identified in the original April 2001 Cass report did Renfrewshire Council commission/authorise any independent body to review the December 2002 Cass Report before approving this document as a background report to the Alteration to Structure Plan?
When were the Envirocentre report(s) reported to the Planning Board?
Why were these Envirocentre report(s) not referred to in the 22 March 2005 report to the Planning Board or in any of the reports to Planning Board regarding Structure Plan Alteration 2005 as they would have provided important independent background information? The March 2005 report specifically referred to April 2001 Cass report. So why were the criticisms of this report not also made known?
Under Freedom of Information Act, I would like to request copies of all reports/documents/papers/correspondence (written, email, fax or by any other means) relating to the above points.
A further extract from the EnviroCentre report states:
"It is stated that both Renfrewshire Council and SEPA are represented on the Bishopton Working Group. However, only Renfrewshire Council are represented and therefore only Renfrewshire Council have had an opportunity to review the outline site remediation strategy discussion paper. There is potential for the site to be classed as a "special site" in terms of the Contaminated Land (Scotland) 2000 Regulations, and therefore regulated by SEPA. The development of a remediation strategy therefore prior to full consultation with SEPA could be regarded as premature. SEPA's omission is all the more significant given Renfrewshire Council’s lack of comment on the proposed outline remediation strategy. It is recommended that SEPA are provided with a copy of the discussion paper as soon as possible as their comments will be vital in the early planning stages."
I would like to know:
Did Renfrewshire Council send SEPA the Outline Site Remediation Strategy discussion paper or a copy of the Envirocentre report? If so, when did Renfrewshire Council send the discussion paper and a copy of the Envirocentre report to SEPA?
When and at what stage in the planning process did Renfrewshire Council invite SEPA to join the discussions regarding Bishopton ROF remediation strategy?
Why did Renfrewshire Council make no comment on the proposed outline remediation strategy detailed in the April 2001 Cass Report?
Under Freedom of Information Act, I would like to request copies of all reports/documents/papers/correspondence (written, email, fax or by any other means) relating to the above points.
