Three men sentenced to prison for waste crimes
Oscar Henson | 15 January 2015

Over the last week, three men have been sentenced to prison for separate crimes relating to improper waste management.

Alfred Booy, Alan Teesdale and David Lewis McEwan have each received individual prison sentences following illegal activity at waste sites across the country.

Alfred Booy

Alfred Booy, of Berkley, Gloucestershire was yesterday (14January) sentenced to 18 months in prison at Gloucester Crown Court after pleading guilty to three charges relating to waste crime.

The charges were raised against Booy and his waste management company, A1 Green Recycling Limited, which he operated out of two different sites in Gloucestershire.

The first site, on Bridge Road in Sharpness, Gloucestershire, was acquired by Booy in early 2010. He was granted an environmental permit by the Environment Agency (EA) on 18 November 2010, which authorised him to operate the site as a transfer station for household, commercial and industrial waste.

However, in October 2010, Booy was served with a notice to terminate the rental lease, and was subsequently asked by the owner of the land to clear the site. The owner regained possession of the site in May 2012, however Booy reportedly did nothing to clear the site despite having the necessary access to do so.

Following his eviction, Booy’s environmental permit was revoked, and on two occasions he was served by the EA with an enforcement notice requiring him to clear the site. According to the EA, no action has been taken to date to do so.

In June 2012, EA officers received reports of a second site on Bristol Road in Dursley, Gloucestershire. Upon visiting the location, they observed vehicles delivering waste to the site, which was then being sorted into individual waste streams. They also observed machinery and skips displaying the A1 Green Recycling Limited logo.

Booy denied that the vehicles on site had anything to do with his company, however would not attend an interview to clarify his position.

After monitoring the site on several occasions, EA officers deemed that it was ‘clear that the site was being operated as a waste transfer station’. Throughout the period, the necessary environmental permit was not in force, meaning that the site was operating illegally.

Booy’s sentence

Speaking after the case, an EA officer said: “The defendant was given ample opportunity to clear the site at Sharpness but failed to do so. By leaving the site full of waste there was a potential risk to the environment and it left the landowners with a site that was unusable. Once Mr Booy left the Sharpness site he proceeded to move straight onto a new site which had no environment permit in place.

“By avoiding regulation, Alfred Booy will have saved thousands of pounds. We do not tolerate waste crime and will not hesitate to prosecute in cases such as this.”

Booy claimed that his crimes were committed out of naivety, and that he was ultimately ‘not competent to operate a business’. He claimed that he did not have sufficient funds to clear the site and that he had pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity.

Upon sentencing, His Honour Judge Ambrose told Booy that the severity of his offences could only justify an immediate custodial sentence.

Alan Teesdale

On Friday, 9 January, Alan Teesdale was sentenced to nine months imprisonment suspended for two years following illegal activity at his waste site in Boston, Lincolnshire.

Teesdale had registered three exemptions with the EA to store, clean and treat waste plastics and cardboard on the site.

However, in April 2013 the EA began to receive complaints from nearby residents regarding ‘pungent’ smells coming from the site.

The smell was coming from plastic containers full of water and food remains.

Locals likened the odour to ‘rotting meat’, and some said that they were forced to close their windows and stay indoors as a result. One man claimed that the smell was so bad it caused him to abandon his gardening and vomit.

The EA warned Teesdale that the site did not comply with the exemptions he had registered. However, a month later officers found more waste on site, and observed waste being washed close to a surface water drain in breach of one of the exemptions.

Teesdale was told to stop and to clear waste from around the drain. However, he failed to do so properly, and the nearby drains became contaminated with a ‘milky grey’ liquid.

After Teesdale failed to bring the site into compliance, the EA de-registered the relevant exemptions. He was asked to clear the site by 1 August 2013, however by the 2 August he had failed to do so.

Teesdale’s sentence

Teesdale pleaded guilty to operating a waste operation facility without being authorised by an environmental permit.

Mitigating lawyer Andrew Vout told the court that Teesdale was inexperienced and had ‘got in over his head’ by taking in more waste than he could manage. He also pointed out that Teesdale had since cleared the site.

Judge Stuart Rafferty gave Teesdale credit for clearing the site as well as pleading guilty at an early stage. However, Teesdale was sentenced to nince months imprisonment suspended for two years.

After the hearing Environment Agency officer Emma Ayers said: “Unregulated waste sites can cause harm to the environment and people. Neighbours of this site were subjected to horrible smells for four months and the river was at serious risk of pollution.”

David Lewis McEwan

On Tuesday 13 January, David Lewis McEwan, Director of Larner Timber Recycling was given a six-month prison sentence and ordered to pay £1,800 to the EA after his site in Bevan Close, Northamptonshire was found to be in breach of permit.

The company had been chipping and sorting waste wood on the site since May 2012. However, the EA found that ‘a huge volume of waste wood’ had accumulated and was being stored without any fire breaks.

Furthermore, wood particles from the chipping process were escaping the site and polluting nearby sites. Both of these problems constituted a breach of permit.

Prosecuting, Anne-Lise McDonald told the court that McEwan had been repeatedly asked to provide adequate management and emission plans, but none were received until April 2013.

She told the court that there was a fire on the site in December 2012, which the fire service struggled to put out due to the amount of the wood on site. Furthermore, in May and June 2013 piles of chipped wood were seen smouldering.

Despite these events and regular advice from EA officers, McEwan still failed to create adequate fire breaks.

McEwan’s sentence

After the hearing Environment Agency officer John Jones said: “This prosecution was entirely avoidable had the company complied with our advice. We repeatedly tried to help it comply with its permit but despite many visits and much advice, little was changed.

“Waste sites have a duty to ensure that their operations are managed properly to ensure they do not present a risk to neighbouring companies, nor to the environment. If they refuse to comply, or deliberately ignore advice supplied by site Inspectors, they may be prosecuted and risk going to jail.”

Judge Timothy Smith said McEwan had ‘put his head in the sand’. He added: “There were a number of issues with the site with waste being stored for more than three months, water cannons not used effectively and fire breaks not properly installed. The temperature of the waste was not properly monitored to locate hot spots.”

McEwan pleaded guilty to ‘[failing] to ensure the activities were managed and operated in accordance with a written management system that identified and minimised risks of pollution, including those arising from operations, maintenance, accidents and incidents.’

Find out more about the cost of waste crime.

More articles

resource.co article ai

User Avatar

How will the government and DMOs address the challenges of including glass in DRS while ensuring a level playing field across the UK?

User Avatar

There's no easy solution to include glass in the DRS while maintaining a level playing field. Potential approaches include a phased introduction of glass, potentially with higher deposits to reflect its logistical challenges. The government and DMOs could incentivise innovation in glass packaging design and subsidise dedicated return points for glass-handling. Exemptions for smaller businesses unable to handle glass might also be necessary. Any successful solution will likely blend several approaches. It must address the differing priorities of devolved administrations, balance environmental benefits with logistical and cost implications, and be supported by robust consumer education campaigns emphasizing the importance of glass recycling.