Contact: Paul Archer, ext 7022

1. Summary

1.1 The following decisions are sought:

That delegated authority be given to the Director of Environment to:

(i) work with commercial partners to encourage the further development/exploitation of incinerator bottom ash as a construction material in Hampshire;

(ii) enter into a confidentiality agreement with commercial partners to develop the use of unbound incinerator bottom ash as a construction material, subject to the provisos set in paragraph 10 of the report, which will:

(a) set out outcomes and timescales

(b) ensure the Council has full rights to the end specification

(c) avoid anything which would prevent the Council from using unbound incinerator bottom ash as a construction material;

and, subject to confirmation that unbound incinerator bottom ash can be used safely, lawfully and cost effectively as a construction material, approval be given to:

(iii) negotiate for use of the material under the current Term Maintenance Contract and specify use of the material in future procurement exercises.

2. Reason

2.1 To engage with industry to develop construction materials which could potentially avoid sending any incinerator bottom ash to landfill.

3. Other Options Considered and Rejected

3.1 Do nothing - which would have meant incinerator bottom ash having to be landfilled.

4. Conflicts of Interest Declared by the Decision Maker or a Member or Officer consulted - None.

5. Dispensation granted by the Standards Committee - Not applicable.

6. Reason(s) for the Matter being dealt with if Urgent - Not applicable.

Approved by: Date:

Councillor K B Estlin

7. Background

7.1 Under current arrangements, from the year 2005, up to 100,000 tonnes of incinerator bottom ash (IBA) will be consigned to landfill every year unless some more constructive alternative use can be found. It has already been established that IBA has significant potential as a secondary aggregate for construction but this potential has not been fully exploited to date. It will be in the best interests of the community of Hampshire, and indeed the South of England as a whole, for the County Council to encourage more positive and extensive exploitation of IBA.

7.2 Under Project Integra, incineration (with energy recovery) is to be pursued as a pre-treatment strategy, which will reduce the waste produced in Hampshire to about a third of its volume. Under the long- term waste disposal contract, three new household waste incinerators are to be constructed. The first, at Chineham near Basingstoke, is currently being commissioned (to be fully operational later in 2003) and by 2004/05, when the final plant is due to be commissioned, the three incinerators together will be producing in excess of 100,000 tonnes of bottom ash each year.

7.3 Central Government Minerals Planning Guidance advocates preserving primary mineral resources through the increased use of secondary aggregates and it is now generally accepted (study by the Environment Agency) that IBA has great potential as a secondary aggregate for use in construction activities. IBA has the structural performance to be used as a secondary aggregate in unbound granular form but unfortunately, in the wake of adverse publicity regarding the Byker and Edmonton incinerators, current guidance from Central Government classifies unbound IBA as waste.

7.4 This classification means that a waste management licence (or an exemption) is required for every site on which the material is to be used in unbound form. Although the licensing process has been streamlined, the very need to apply discourages potential users and effectively limits the number of sites on which bottom ash is likely to be used for construction.

7.5 Unless the legislation can be changed, or the increased use of IBA promoted in some other way, the Council taxpayers of Hampshire will need to fund the considerable cost of transport and disposal of significant tonnages at an appropriate waste facility, probably out of county. To compound the issue, taxation (the Landfill Tax) is set to increase over time.

7.6 In order to avoid this increasing financial burden, and also more importantly to promote the Corporate Strategy for Sustainability (viz the Hampshire Natural Resources Initiative), the County Council has an obligation to work with stakeholders in the waste and construction industries to facilitate the most advantageous use of this potentially valuable resource.

8. Current and Potential Use of IBA

8.1 The traditional conservatism amongst engineers (and indeed competition from other sources of primary and secondary aggregate) has meant that, until now, UK research into the use of IBA has concentrated on incorporating relatively small percentages of segregated aggregate into conventional construction materials. Progressing along these lines will make little impact on the total waste stream. To encourage a significant step change in the potential use of IBA, the County Council needs to be more radical in its outlook.

8.2 Following the lead of construction practices on mainland Continental Europe, the potential exists to develop alternative methods of constructing roads and other paved areas, using comparatively thicker layers of weaker materials, comprising relatively high percentages of secondary aggregates, in this case IBA. Such a step change in construction technique could open up a market which could absorb a significant proportion, if not all, of the IBA generated in Hampshire and, at the same time, significantly reduce the demand on virgin aggregates locally.

9. Options for Progressing Research

9.1 One possible way forward would be to commission a research project through an institution, such as the Transport Research Laboratory (TRL). However, any such project is likely to be lengthy, expensive and there would potentially be a significant delay in rolling out the outcomes into the industry. This is not viewed as an efficient use of resources.

9.2 Preliminary discussions with existing commercial partners in the waste and construction arena have established a willingness, in principle, to work with the Environment Department to explore possibilities for exploiting IBA in highway construction/maintenance from inception right through to developing a realistic strategy for service delivery. This approach has the potential to fast track the introduction of any materials developed and would, as a bonus, involve negligible financial commitment from the County Council with input limited to contributions in kind, ie officer time.

10. The Need for Confidentiality

10.1 As is the case with many `waste' issues, developing new materials and particularly developing the infrastructure to put such materials into production is likely to require commercial partners to make a significant financial investment, and to subject this investment to a degree of financial risk.

10.2 Understandably therefore potential commercial partners in this venture have sought to protect their initial investment by entering into a confidentiality agreement to protect their ownership of any detailed material formulations which are developed through the work.

10.3 This is not necessarily viewed as a problem since, as part of any project, the County Council would make it a prerequisite in any agreement that approval for the use of any materials in Hampshire would be dependent not only on establishing the satisfactory performance of any particular material but also the development of:

(i) a robust end product performance specification which would be independent of any proprietary mix design and could be used by the Council in future procurement processes; and

(ii) an assessment protocol against which the performance of any alternative (competitor) material may be measured transparently.

10.4 There will also need to be an understanding that the County Council would not be able to specify a particular product or supplier (EC procurement legislation) but would only be able to call up materials to a generic end performance specification. It is not however thought to contravene the EC legislation if an Authority points potential customers to a known source of any such material as long as it does not preclude supplies from other sources. The only real advantage given to commercial partners involved in development would be time, ie their products would be pre-approved whereas products from potential competitors would need to be assessed in advance using the agreed protocol before approval could be granted.

8004/PA