IDE Confronts Contaminated Concrete Crisis

• 
• 20th August 2007
• Materials Handling
 

The president of the institute of Demolition Engineers, believes there is a "serious lack of knowledge of the CDM Regulations" at local authority levels and has called upon the Environment Agency to work with the Institute and the National Federation of Demolition Contractors to resolve the issues surrounding the disposal of concrete and hazardous waste.   Speaking at the Institute's Southern regional meeting in London, Turner said that recent de-regulation had done professional demolition companies a disservice.   "Best practice is the removal of contaminants such as asbestos prior to the commencement of demolition work.   This, of course, relies on the employment of professional and competent contractors using trained and preferably licensed staff, he says.   "However, problems immediately arise because clients, aware that Artex and asbestos removal could exceed demolition costs, push for the asbestos to stay or favour the cheapest tender for its removal.  In either of these scenarios the demolition contractor or engineer is at risk of financial loss or prosecution."

Local Authority Shortcomings
Turner also highlighted his concern over interpretation of regulations relating to the disposal of contaminated concrete.   "Concrete is denoted a hazardous waste if it contains a dangerous substance above threshold concentrations but this is open to wide interpretation among officials," he says.   "Some say that if sampling throughout the building shows an asbestos level below the threshold of below.01%, the concrete is contaminated rather than hazardous waste.  But others say that any asbestos level, irrespective of whether the asbestos is white or blue, defines the concrete as ‘hazardous'.  There needs to be clarification from the Environment Agency and the Health and Safety Executive."   In a hard-hitting speech, Turner also pointed a finger at local authorities who, he said, are the clients most likely to require the demolition of contaminated buildings and also the most likely to accept the lowest tender.   "There is a serious lack of knowledge of the CDM regulations at local authority level," Turner argues.

Clarification Required  
Highlighting the difference in attitude between the UK - where legislation is precisely that - and certain European countries where it is seen merely as a form of guidance, Turner also suggested that there seemed to be a move towards sending all concrete to a waste management site with a hazardous waste license.  "We understand the need to prevent contaminants from entering the material cycle but this should not apply to all concrete," he said.   "A large proportion of the concrete handled by our members is well within any contamination guidelines and remains a potentially valuable resource." 

Turner concluded that the IDE and the NFDC would be making formal approaches to the Environment Agency and the Health and Safety Executive but, in the meantime, had a word of warning for his fellow demolition experts.   "Until this situation is clarified, our members will need a shrewd legal eye to oversee any contract," Turner concluded.   "To ensure they are protected, a risk assessment and audit trail if of paramount importance."