Buildings

Planning in Rosscommon - as in many parts of Ireland - has broken down.
FIE has made selective appeals against the decision of the planning authority in the last year to highlight this breakdown. Largely in an area between Boyle and Carrick-on-Shannon, all of them draw on detailed knowledge of the locality supplied by residents who are both appalled and frightened by the wholesale breakdown in planning in County Roscommon. Of particular concern are the areas where soil conditions make effluent disposal methods unworkable, and where the relevant tests, when done, are not done to the standards required. Using detailed inside information, FIE continues to pursue this Authority to highlight the abuses. The extensive effluent section in the Killmacrrill Appeal is particularly interesting, as an expert consultant was called in and covered the failure to meet the test standards by saying they "almost" conformed to the Regulations.



The Townland of Killmacarril
(see also Inspectors Report)

The Townland of Granny

The Townland of Torreymartin
(see also Inspectors Report)

The Townland of Knocknacarrow

The Townland of Aghacarra



PRESS RELEASE 27 DECEMBER, 2000


GRANT FOR CLARE EXPLOSIVE FACTORY

TO BE APPEALED


Friends of the Irish Environment will appeal this decision because it was not made in accordance with the Seveso Directive which forms part of the Clare Development Plan.
Instead, 19th century English legislation has been used which fails to provide adequate consultation or information to the public.


Under the Seveso Directive, the public has the right to know exactly and in simple terms the common names for what is being produced, the principal dangerous characteristics, the storage facilities, the management systems, and the potential effect on the population of a major accident at the factory or in transport.


Article 11 of this Directive requires the production of internal and external "Emergency Plans" with the object of "communicating the necessary information to the public." No such Emergency Plans was required.


Early warning procedures, calls out procedures, coordination of emergency responses - all of this is vital information is required to be provided to the public "without them having to ask".


The Seveso Directive was implemented to ensure consultation with the public; to create a high level of protection in order to prevent major accident hazards; and to limit the consequences of major disasters to man and his environment. None of these are properly implemented by this local authority decision, in spite of correspondence on file which shows clearly the local authority attempted to oblige the developer to comply with this Directive.


Thank you for the copy of the EIS for the above proposal.


We have been requested by local residents to assist in seeking information about this proposal which they have been unable to obtain.


The Secretary,

Clare County Council,

Station Road,

Ennis, Co. Clare

8 December, 2000


Re: EIS for Killadysert Explosive Factory


Dear Sirs;


Thank you for the copy of the EIS for the above proposal.


We have been requested by local residents to assist in seeking information about this proposal which they have been unable to obtain.


In this regard, our examination of the EIS, for which we paid you £30.00, reveals that Appendix 1 is missing from the document.


Appendix 1 relates to the Health and Safety section [see 3.5 Health and Safety], which containing no data refers to 4.2 ["Technical supporting material"] which also contains no data and refers to Appendix 1, which is not included in the copy supplied.


At a number of points during the EIS the authors refer to the confidentiality of their operation, even citing a "need to know" principle.


The requirements for public consultation and the availability of information relating to explosives are clearly laid out in EU Directive 96/082, "The Seveso Directive", which is not referred to by the applicant. The term "need to know" is not used in the Directive.


The following matters, however, are required to be made available to the public and have not yet been provided, unless they are in Appendix 1 which is missing from the copy supplied by your authority.


Article 11 of this Directive requires the production of internal and external "Emergency Plans" with the object of "communicating the necessary information to the public." No such Emergency Plan is included in this EIS.


Article 9 requires that a "Safety Report" be drawn up. No such Safety Report is included in this EIS.


Article 13 (1) "Information of safety measures" requires "Member States shall ensure that information on safety measures and on the requisite behavior in the event of an accident is supplied, without their having to request it, to person liable to be effected by a major accident originating in an establishment covered by Article 9".


Article 13 (4) states that Member States shall ensure that the Safety Report is available to the public.


Annex V details "Items of Information to be Communicated to the Public as provided for in Article 13 (1)". This lists 11 separate items, none of which have been provided within this EIS.


We would be grateful if you supplied Appendix I of the EIS. As an emanation of the State we believe you are required to ensure that the applicant conform to Directive 96/082 by providing for public scrutiny the Emergency Plans and the Safety Report required by this Directive.


Please place this letter on the public planning file and notify us of any requests for further information, etc.

Friends of the Irish Environment


Killadysert Explosive Factory - Our letter in the clare champion




t

The Editor,

The Clare Champion,

11 December, 2000

Killadysert Explosive Factory

Dear Sir;

Your recent report noted that County Councilors were concerned about the lack of information relating to the safety of the proposed explosives factory at Killadysert. In fact, we had been requested by residents to assist them in seeking information about this proposal which they have been unable to obtain.

We purchased the Environmental Impact Statement for £30.00. Unfortunately, Appendix 1 is missing from the document.

Appendix 1 relates to the Health and Safety section [see 3.5 Health and Safety], which containing no data refers to 4.2 ["Technical supporting material"] which also contains no data and refers to Appendix 1, which is not included in the copy supplied.

At a number of points during the EIS the authors refer to the confidentiality of their operation, even citing a "need to know" principle.

The requirements for public consultation and the availability of information relating to explosives are clearly laid out in EU Directive 96/082, "The Seveso Directive", which is not referred to by the applicant in the EIS. The term "need to know" is not used in the Directive.

The following matters, however, are required to be made available to the public and have not yet been provided, unless they are in Appendix 1 which is missing from the copy supplied by your authority.

Article 11 of this Directive requires the production of internal and external "Emergency Plans" with the object of "communicating the necessary information to the public." No such Emergency Plan is included in this EIS.

Article 9 requires that a "Safety Report" be drawn up. No such Safety Report is included in this EIS.

Article 13 (1) "Information of safety measures" requires "Member States shall ensure that information on safety measures and on the requisite behavior in the event of an accident is supplied, without their having to request it, to person liable to be effected by a major accident originating in an establishment covered by Article 9".

Article 13 (4) states that Member States shall ensure that the Safety Report is available to the public.

Annex V details "Items of Information to be Communicated to the Public as provided for in Article 13 (1)". This lists 11 separate items, none of which have been provided within this EIS.

We have written to the local authority asking them to ensure that the developer conforms to Directive 96/082 by providing for public scrutiny the Emergency Plans and the Safety Report required by this Directive.

Further, in the course of our investigations into the proposal, we requested under the Freedom of Information Act full documentation from the Forest Service of the recent felling at the subject site. On the basis of this request, we are writing to the local authority with copies of documents which demonstrate that site development took place at this location without planning permission.

We are requesting that the Council ask the applicant to withdraw the current application and first seek retention for the site development works detailed in the Freedom of Information material supplied by the Forest Service.

Friends of the Irish Environment
PRESS RELEASE FROM COUNCILLOR P. J. KELLY

PRESS RELEASE FROM COUNCILLOR P. J. KELLY


Paddy Wheelan, Managing Director of Wheelan Group (Ennis) Limited who is an employer of approximately 350 employees, many of whom are my neighbours and constituents has been a personal friend of mine for many years.

In recent times the friendship has been the subject of innuendo, intimidation, near blackmail, and a personal vendetta against me by a small minority opposed to the Whelan Group (Ennis) Limited enterprise at Cahercon, Kildysert, Co. Clare.

The ill-informed and ill-advised Press Release and Statement by the Friends of the Irish Environment dated 21 January 2001 contains a blatant untruth and has been referred to my legal advisors for response.

The facts surrounding the case are as follows;

"Prior to his departure abroad in February 2000 I met with Paddy Wheelan to discuss sponsorship of a Community Scheme. As the meeting concluded Paddy Wheelan realised that he forgot to hand in a Tree Felling License Application duly completed to the Garda Station and because of the time factor of his return asked me to do so. I gladly obliged and it appears that my name was entered in the "Lodged by" Column before being signed by a Garda Sergeant. The form did not provide for a signature other than a member of the Gardi. I did not sign the document nor does my signature appear on the documentation, a copy of which was acquired by my solicitor".

I have instructed my Legal Advisor to seek a full retraction and apology for this untruth.

Signed: Padraig O'Ceallagh

23/01/01

See our retraction, apology, and our amendments of our Press Release, and the follow up questions.