Whether Dandara removed all contaminants from the Castle Quay site before starting work and the nature of the contaminants

1240/5(4745)

WRITTEN QUESTION TO THE MINISTER FOR PLANNING AND ENVIRONMENT BY DEPUTY A.K.F. GREEN OF ST. HELIER

ANSWER TO BE TABLED ON MONDAY 21st SEPTEMBER 2009

Question

Could the Minister confirm :

1. whether Dandararemoved all containmentscontaminants from the Castle Quays sitebefore starting work;
2. that heis satisfied that Dandara ensured that there was no contact between contaminants in the side walls and floorofthe excavation pit and the seawater as it flooded in and outof the site;
3. the precise chemical makeupof the contaminants;
4. whereand how this contaminated material wasdisposedof?

Answer

1. T h e developerremoved materials from the excavation after completion of retaining wallsto the side of the site. This was followed by the load bearing pileswhichwereintended to support the structure. The removal of materials wasthereforean integral part of starting work.
2. T h e historicdisposalof ash at the west of Albert site, part ofwhich is theCastle Quays site, was carried out in 2 ways. Initially it was codisposedwithgeneral construction wastes and then later itwasdisposed of in "ashcoffins" or trenchesdugabove the mean high watermark. The latter, duetoit's positioning in respect of this high water mark is unlikely to have come into contact with watersas the deputy describes and the former was removed as the excavation progressed. The materials in question would have historically been subject to tidal inflow and outflow priorto any excavationsand the removalof theses materials wouldthereforehaveconstituted a netenvironmental benefit to the WestofAlbert area.
3. T h is information will be copiedandforwardedto the Deputy at the earliestopportunity.
4. T h e materials were disposedof in the ashcellsat the LaCollettereclamation site. They were removed from the castle quayssiteby covered lorry and tipped in the hydraulically independent and purposely designedcellsattheTTSoperated facility.

Will the Minister also  -

1. confirm what monitoring ofwaterquality,ifany, has taken placein the adjacent marina, St.Aubin'sBay and on/in the development site?
2. advise whohas carried out this monitoring and whatindependent verification has taken place?
3. provide the full data as supplied from the States laboratory or from anyother source to Harboursand the Departmentfor Planning and Environment.

1. M o n i toring for the determinands in the table below has takenplace in the adjacentmarina from December2007 to the present.  The departmenthas this data in hard copy and will forwardcopies to the Deputy atthe earliest opportunity.

Arsenic (g/l) Cadmium (g/l)

Chromium (g/l)

Copper (g/l)

Lead (g/l)

Mercury (g/l)

Nickel (g/l)

Selenium (g/l)

Zinc (g/l)

Sulphate (mg/l)

pH

EPH (C10-C40 g/l) Total PAH (EPA 16 g/l) Phenanthrene (g/l) Fluoranthene (g/l) napthalene (g/l) acenaphthene (g/l) pyrene (g/l) anthracene (g/l)

Bathing water monitoring is undertaken between May and September annually and the data is uploaded on a weekly basis to the department's website.  The link is as follows:

http://www.gov.je/PlanningEnvironment/Environment/Environmental+Protection/BathingWater.htm

Heavy metal uptake in marine indicator organisms has been monitored since the early 1990's and the department will copy a report which can be submitted with the other data requested.

2. T h e marinamonitoringwascarried out bythesitedeveloper and was analysed independently by the States Analyst.

B a th i ng water monitoring is carried out by Environmental Protection, it is analysed by the States Analyst and it is independently verified by CREH, the Centre for Research into Environment and Health.

H e a v y metal uptake has been sampled by Planning and Environment, analysed by the States Analyst and

the resultant report independently assessed by CREH.

3. T h iswillbeforwardedat the earliest opportunity.