A Case Study

1. How the NPHS supports the LHB to discharge its statutory function with regard to Integrated Prevention and Pollution Control (IPPC) A Case Study

2. Overview of session • Background to IPPC • IPPC and the LHB • IPPC and the NPHS • Introduction to the case study • Initial action • Steps taken by the NPHS on behalf of the LHB • Outcomes • References • A list of Acronyms

3. Background to IPPC • Integrated pollution and prevention control (IPPC) is a regulatory system set up to protect the environment from emissions from industrial processes into air, water and land • The role of Regulator in IPPC is either the Local Authority or the Environment Agency, depending on the size and nature of the industrial process

4. Background to IPPC cont. • The IPPC system has to ensure that industrial processes take an integrated approach to the control of pollution • The regulatory system has recently been expanded (2000) to include an environmental and health impact assessment from industrial processes • Consultation is a statutory function of a Regulator

5. IPPC and the LHB • Flintshire LHB is a statutory consultee under the 1999 Environmental Protection Act and the Pollution Prevention and control Regulations 2000 • The consultation process offers the LHB an opportunity to comment and advise on aspects of industrial processes that may have an impact on public health • It can influence the management of the environment in order to prevent and/or minimise adverse health effects

6. IPPC and the LHB cont. • Legislation requires a response to the Regulator within 28 days of receipt of the documentation to statutory consultees • Whilst there is no obligation to respond to the IPPC the LHB needs to be sensitive to any local concerns and demonstrate a commitment to identify and respond to issues that may impact upon the health of the local population • Responses by the LHB will become a matter of public record via the register held by the Regulator.

7. IPPC and the NPHS • In this context LHB’s are supported in discharging their statutory function as a consultee by the National Public Health Service (NPHS) • The NPHS work in partnership with the Health Protection Agency (HPA), seeking out expert advice and information on behalf of the LHB • In addition to this a Memorandum of Undersrtanding1 exists between the HPA, DEFRA, NPHS, DoH, WAG the Food Standards Agency (FSA) and the Environment Agency (EA) 1 (Department for Environment and Rural Affairs 2005)

8. IPPC, the NPHS and partnership working • The Memorandum of Understanding sets out the arrangements under which partner organisations will co-operate in addressing environment- related health protection issues. • Within Wales collaborative working between organisations involved in public health has been further strengthened by the establishment of a Chemicals in Wales Network2, with partners including the NPHS, HPA and Food Standards Agency (FSA) signing a Compact agreement. • The purpose of the network is to improve the protection of public health in Wales in relation to chemical events 2 .Welsh Assembly Government (2005).

9. Introduction to the Case study • As a statutory consultee with responsibility for the health of the population of Flintshire the LHB would be notified of any changes to the use, operation or production processes of industrial or commercial properties subject to the 1999 Act, in its locality

10. Castle Cement, Padeswood • On the 2nd March 2005 Flintshire Local Health Board (LHB) were notified by the regulator, the Environment Agency (Wales) that an enforcement notice had been served on Castle Cement works at Padeswood. • The notice suspended operation of Kiln 3 following consideration of stack monitoring results for dioxin emissions from kiln 3 during 2004

11. Requests to the LHB for advice • Meetings were convened on March 2nd and March the 9th respectively between representatives from the LHB, NPHS and EA to discuss the nature of the enforcement notice • On 11th March, 2005, Flintshire LHB received a letter from the Environment Agency (Wales) requesting advice on the likely impact of the dioxin emissions on human health.

12. Initial action • The NPHS advised on the content of a draft press statement prepared by the EA for release on the 3rd March • The LHB requested the NPHS to act on their behalf to assess any likely impact of the dioxin emissions on human health.

13. Steps taken by the NPHS March 2005 – March 2006 • NPHS engaged the support of the Chemical Hazards and Poisons Division of the Health Protection Agency (HPA). • NPHS subsequently convened an Advisory Group of professionals to consider data and information related to dioxin emissions from Castle Cement. • To enable appropriate advice to be given to the LHB, the NPHS requested the Environment Agency (EA) to provide relevant information to the Advisory Group

14. Data and information requested • NPHS requested EA to provide: • >monitoring and modelling data related to emissions to air from kilns 1,2 and 3 • > any relevant environmental sampling (e.g. food or soil sampling) that had been undertaken.

15. Advisory Group requests • Chronological details of all sampling and monitoring undertaken • Reliability of the sampling undertaken • Details of organisations involved in the acquisition and analysis of the samples. *To Note the NPHS does NOT undertake any monitoring or sampling processes in relation to IPPC

16. Who provided information • Environment Agency Wales. • Castle Cement. • Food Standards Agency.

17. Steps taken by the NPHS cont. • The NPHS formally convened the Advisory group on four occasions during the 12 month period of assessment • In order to make a comprehensive assessment the advisory group considered the information provided in relation to : >Sources of dioxins >Pathways for dioxins >known effects on health

18. NPHS action cont. • NPHS gave regular updates and briefings to the LHB • NPHS met with regional and national representatives from the EA and HPA during the course of the assessment process • NPHS gave regular briefings and updates to WAG

19. Outcomes • The NPHS, supported by the Advisory Group, prepared and issued an Advice statement* to the EA on behalf of the LHB in March 2006 • This was in response to their original request for advice on likely health impact as a result of elevated dioxin emissions from Kiln 3 during 2004 • The NPHS prepared a press statement on behalf of the LHB *Received by the Board in March 2006

20. References • [1] Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (2005). Memorandum of Understanding between the Health Protection Agency, the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs, the Department of Health, Welsh Assembly Government, the Environment Agency, the National Public Health Service for Wales and, once established, the Government Decontamination Service (GDS). DEFRA • [2] Welsh Assembly Government (2005). Chemicals in Wales Network. Compact Agreement. Welsh Assembly Government, Cardiff.

21. Acronyms • DEFRA – Department for the Environment and Rural Affairs • EA – Environment Agency • FSA – Food Standards Agency • HPA – Health Protection Agency • IPPC – Integrated Pollution and Prevention Control