MEDICAL STATEMENT OF OBJECTION

Statement of Objection to Planning Proposal SUT/APF/616/60

Energy from Waste Incinerator (EfW) including Infrastructure for
Combined Heat and Power (CHP), Incinerator Bottom Ash (IBA)
Processing Plant with Outside Storage Area, and Air Pollution
Control Residue (APCR) Disposal Facility, Visitor and Office
Accommodation and Landscaping within the Sutton Courtenay
Resource Recovery Park

Dr Angela Jones MA BM BCh DCH DRCOG DFFP MRCGP
Dr Denis Gibbs DM FRCP
Dr Janet Darling MB BS LRCP MRCS DRCOG MFFP
Professor Eila Watson BSc PhD
Dr Andy Greenfield MA PhD

Context:

This objection has been prepared by a small group of local health professionals from Appleford and Sutton Courtenay. We do not profess to have any specialist expertise in the area of air pollution or waste management. However, as medical practitioners and scientists, we are trained to assess scientific evidence and we have looked critically at the current literature and produced an argument that we feel combines
common sense, acknowledged fact and up-to-date evidence on this complex issue. As responsible professionals, we have avoided introducing arguments that cannot be substantiated by the scientific literature but have nonetheless come to the view that we must enter our formal objection to the planning proposal.

We understand that some of these matters will also be addressed at the Environmental Permit (EP) stage, and had WRG, as is acknowledged best practice, submitted the EP and the planning application together, much trouble might have been avoided. Further, had the applicants, Waste Recycling Group (WRG) ensured that the Human Health Risk Assessment (HHRA) had been completed and submitted by the time that the planning application was submitted, rather than on the day that public consultation
formally closed, we would have had a better opportunity to include these issues in our original objections and to obtain advice on its content. We consider these failures to have been detrimental to the consultation process. In our view they suggest that WRG have a poor understanding of and respect for the rights and needs of the local population regarding the issue of public health.

As it is, we do not feel it appropriate that the addressing of the health implications of this proposal can be delayed to the eventual EP process and request that our objection on the grounds of negative effects on environmental health, should be duly noted and considered as part of the process of determining the planning application.

Download the objection here.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *