10 Mar 2005 : Column 1913W
Written Answers to Questions
Thursday 10 March 2005
ENVIRONMENT, FOOD AND RURAL AFFAIRS
Bridleways (Bolton)
Dr. Iddon: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what action she is taking to resolve the PROW claim regarding bridleways linking the villages of Darcy Lever, Little Lever, Kearsley and Prestolee and the township of Farnworth in the constituency of Bolton, South-East in the Croal-Irwell Valley. [217088]
Alun Michael:
Bolton metropolitan borough council was directed by the Secretary of State to determine the claim within a specified period which ended in
10 Mar 2005 : Column 1914W
November 2004. The council did not do so; instead it has sought to resolve the claim, and a second one in respect of a linked path, by persuading landowners to dedicate the routes as bridleways. At my request Defra officials have written to the council requesting details of how the council proposes to resolve the matter and its timetable for doing so. I shall review the issue in light of this response.
Air Pollution
Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs how many days of (a) moderate, (b) high and (c) very high air pollution have been recorded by each automatic monitoring station in London in each year since 1997. [212369]
Alun Michael: There are currently 113 automatic air monitoring stations in London incorporated in the Automatic Urban and Rural Network (AURN) and the London Air Quality Network (LAQN). The following table summarises the average number of days of (a) moderate, (b) high and (c) very high air pollution recorded by all automatic monitoring stations in London in each year since 1997.
The detailed information for each automatic monitoring station is published
on the National Air Quality Information Archive at:
Historic and current data from the AURN and LAQN networks can be found at the following locations:
Sarah Teather: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the concentration was of (a) nitrogen dioxide, (b) sulphur dioxide and (c) benzene in each (i) London borough and (ii) London ward in each of the last five years. [212379]
Alun Michael: There are extensive networks of automatic and non-automatic air monitors in London. Air quality is not measured for these pollutants in each London borough and ward.
Table 1 summarises the minimum (min) and maximum (max) annual mean concentrations of nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide and benzene across London in each of the last five years. The information is collected by Automatic Urban and Rural Network (AURN), the London Air Quality Network (LAQN). Historic and current data from the AURN and LAQN networks can be found at:
AURN: http://www.airquality.co.uk/archive/index.php
LAQN: http://www.londonair.org.uk/london/asp/home.asp
10 Mar 2005 : Column 1915W
Note:
Data for 2004 are provisional. No data are available for benzene for 2002. The number of sites used in the analysis varies each year as networks change. The minimum and maximum annual mean benzene figures presented in the table are the same for 2001, 2003 and 2004 because only a single site was operational for that pollutant in London during those years.
Table 2 summarises nitrogen dioxide concentrations measured by the UK nitrogen dioxide diffusion tube network in London since 1999. Average minimum and average maximum concentrations are presented for all roadside and background locations. A detailed table showing information for the London boroughs in which the diffusion tubes are located is available from the Air Quality Archive at:
http://www.airquality.co.uk/archive/reports/reports.php?report id=309 .
Note:
Data for 2004 are provisional. Data for December 2004 are not yet available.
Animal By-Products Regulation
Mr. Paice: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs for what reasons the processing of slaughter house waste is designated by her Department as a major hazard operation; and whether this designation was required under Animal By-Products Regulation (EC) No. 1774/2002. [220249]
Mr. Bradshaw: The regulation does not define a major hazard operation. However, in order to ensure that the controls are applied evenly across the country, Defra has issued guidance on how we intend to apply the regulation in relation to intermediate plants. The guidance is the result of our interpretation of the legislation and our assessment of the risks to human and animal health associated with handling animal by-products at intermediate plants.
In the guidance we differentiate between loading operations that we regard as a major hazard (e.g. tipping of slaughterhouse waste) and operations that we consider to be a lesser hazard.
10 Mar 2005 : Column 1916W
A major consideration is the physical characteristics of the material to be handled. The handling of slaughterhouse waste (containing viscera, bones, specified risk material etc.) is more likely to result in environmental contamination due to spillage of material or associated fluids than the handling of entire carcases.
Mr. Paice: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs for how long temporary licences will be granted to businesses that need to make changes to their operations to comply with Animal By-Products Regulation (EC) No. 1774/2002; and whether temporary licences to businesses will take into account the time required to obtain planning consent. [220250]
Mr. Bradshaw: The Animal By-Products Regulation has applied in member states since 1 May 2003, and operators have therefore had over 18 months to achieve compliance with its requirements. Continued extension of temporary approvals for non-compliant premises would disadvantage those operators who have invested to meet the required standards, and as a general rule we are not granting such extensions. However, we recognise that in a very small number of cases, short-term approval may be appropriate to allow for specified remedial works to be carried out to an agreed deadline. A temporary approval will only be issued in these circumstances. If the operator cannot provide us with a clear deliverable schedule of works, for example because he has not obtained planning consent, we will not issue a temporary approval.
Mr. Paice: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what the other ways are in which Intermediary Plants can demonstrate compliance with the Animal By-Products Regulation (EC) No. 1774/2002 referred to in the answer to the hon. Member for North Wiltshire of 12 February 2004, Official Report, column 1558W; and how many intermediary plants in England have been licensed which demonstrate compliance with the Animals By-Products Regulation (EC) No. 1774/2002 in other ways. [220264]
Mr. Bradshaw:
The Animal By-Products Regulation (EC) No. 1774/2002 requires Intermediate Plants to have a covered space" to receive animal by-products. It also requires the plant to be constructed in such a way that it is easy to clean and disinfect, and that floors must be laid down in such a way as to facilitate the draining
10 Mar 2005 : Column 1917W
of liquids. The plant must also have appropriate arrangements for protection against pests, such as insects, rodents and birds.
As stated in the answer of 12 February 2004, in our view, the combination of these requirements is such that it would be necessary for the plant to have a roof, walls and a floor before we can approve it. I am not aware of any operator who has been able to demonstrate that their plant complies in another way. However, it is open to them to propose alternative ways of complying with all of the above requirements.
| Next Section | Index | Home Page |