§ Ms RuddockTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has to permit the burning of munitions waste on open ground or a beach in the vicinity of the mid-Essex coast. [33987]
§ Mr. ArbuthnotThis is a matter for the chief executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency. I have therefore asked him to reply.
Letter from John Chisholm to Ms Joan Ruddock, dated 12 July 1995:
1. Your priority written question to the Secretary of State for Defence about plans for burning munitions waste on open ground or beaches in the vicinity of the mid Essex coast, has been passed to me to reply as the Chief Executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA) which, since April, has included the Defence Test and Evaluation Organisation (DTEO) Ranges at Shoeburyness, Essex.
2. Currently conventional munitions are disposed of by a number of means on the Shoeburyness range area in Essex. These munitions are mainly those which have arisen from wartime clearance operations or munitions which are no longer safe for service. No chemical munitions are disposed of at Shoeburyness. Hitherto munitions had been disposed of by deep sea dumping but this was banned in 1993. The method chosen for disposal depends largely on the nature of the munitions, the size of the explosive component and safety of and environmental considerations.
3. One method employed is to burn the munitions in preference to detonating them with allthe noise problems involved. The preferred method of burning is to incinerate the munitions in an explosive waste incinerator, code named "AVOCET", with a complex pollution control system which reduces the pollution emissions to levels below the EC and HMP permitted levels.
4. Some munitions, notably those which are extremely sensitive or with too high an explosive content for Avocet processing, are burned in the open both on the tidal and flats and on the land. The temperatures achieved when these munitions burn are well in excess of 800 degrees centigrade and at these temperatures volatile organic compounds are destroyed. The residues of these burns are immediately removed for disposal by a commercial waste disposal company under the terms of the 1990 Environmental Protection Act.
5. I hope this information is helpful.
§ Ms RuddockTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence on what grounds Shoeburyness was chosen for the siting of the Avocet explosive waste incineration system. [33988]
§ Mr. ArbuthnotThis is a matter for the chief executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency. I have therefore asked him to reply.
Letter from John Chisholm to Ms Joan Ruddock, dated 12 July 1995:
1. Your priority written question to the Secretary of State for Defence asking why Shoeburyness was chosen for the siting of the AVOCET explosive waste incineration system, has been passed to me to reply as the Chief Executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA) which, since April, has included the Defence Test and Evaluation Organisation (DTEO) Ranges at Shoeburyness, Essex.
2. With the end of the Cold War and the resultant stockpiles of surplus or unsafe munitions, combined with the international ban on the deep sea dumping in 1993, large amounts of unserviceable munitions are currently awaiting disposal. There is also a considerable annual requirement to dispose of unexploded wartime munitions found in this country. Shoeburyness was chosen in 1993 as the UK focus for munitions disposal based on a number of factors:
675WIt is a large range area (over 7000 acres plus tidal sands of 35,000 acres) and as such it has the area required for the safe disposal of items with a large explosive content. There is no other site in the UK which can offer similar facilities.
It also has the experienced Army Ammunition Technicians competent to safely and efficiently dispose of such munitions.
It has the storage facilities required for safe and secure holding of munitions whilst awaiting disposal.
It also has the means to receive munitions by sea. In some cases the munitions are not cleared for movement by overland means and the alternative is to land them over the beach from specialist military shipping without a danger to the public.
In essence, Shoeburyness was carefully chosen as the most suitable and safest place to carry out the MOD duty of care to dispose of unwanted or unserviceable munitions without risk to the public.
3. The AVOCET explosive waste incineration system is one of the most advanced methods of munitions disposal systems available in the world today. Its development was a direct response to the need for a more environmentally friendly system of disposing of unwanted ammunition and it is favoured as a method for disposal over burning, burying and detonation of unwanted ammunition each of which have drawbacks.
4. I hope this is helpful
§ Ms RuddockTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence what is the quantity of ammunition to be incinerated in the Avocet explosive waste incineration system at Shoeburyness and over what period. [33989]
§ Mr. ArbuthnotThis is a matter for the chief executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency. I have therefore asked him to reply.
Letter from John Chisholm, to Ms Joan Ruddock, dated 12 July 1995:
1. Your priority written question to the Secretary of State for Defence about the quantity of ammunition to be incinerated in the AVOCET explosive waste incineration system and over what period, has been passed to me to reply as the Chief Executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA) which, since April, has included the Defence Test and Evaluation Organisation (DTEO) Ranges at Shoeburyness, Essex.
2. In the current year the AVOCET facility is programmed to accept 500 tonnes (All Up Weight) of conventional munitions. In subsequent years the system is programmed for 1500–20000 (All UP Weight) per year for up to 10 years (based on current predictions of UK ammunition disposal requirements).
3. The AVOCET facility is licensed by Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Pollution (HMIP). It is not used for the disposal of chemical weapons nor is it used for disposing of anything containing radioactive traces.
4. I hope this information is helpful.
§ Ms RuddockTo ask the Secretary of State for Defence what plans he has to incinerate ammunition imported into Britain at the Avocet explosive waste incineration system in Shoeburyness. [33990]
§ Mr. ArbuthnotThis is a matter for the chief executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency. I have therefore asked him to reply.
Letter from John Chisholm to Ms Joan Ruddock, dated 12 July 1995:
1. Your priority written question to the Secretary of State for Defence about plans to incinerate ammunition imported into Britain at the AVOCET waste incinerator system at Shoeburyness has been passed to me to reply as the Chief Executive of the Defence Evaluation and Research Agency (DERA) which, since April, has included the Defence Test and Evaluation Organisation (DTEO) Ranges at Shoeburyness, Essex.
676W2. The AVOCET explosive waste disposal incinerator is based on United States rotary kiln furnace technology which has been integrated and enhanced with a UK designed and manufactured pollution control system which enables the safest and most environmentally sound means of disposing of conventional ammunition currently available. Emission levels from the incinerator are well below current and projected Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Pollution (HMIP) and European Commission levels making the system a world leader.
3. The primary purpose of the AVOCET Explosive Waste Incinerator is to clispose of the UK arisings of surplus ammunition and ammunition found in Explosive Ordnance Disposal operations. These items are part of the UK duty of care to dispose of our explosive waste.
4. There are currently no plans to import ammunition from other countries as there is only sufficient capacity in AVOCET for the UK requirement. In the future, if sufficient capacity existed in the system, arisings from elsewhere may be considered but only after all the factors had been considered including the nature of the munitions, the country of origin and manufacture, and the safety and environmental implications of both transport an disposal.
5. I hope this information is helpful.