Forum Topic

Mogden Expansion would be environmental disaster for Hounslow & Richmond

The Mogden Residents Action Group (MRAG)  has asked me to post the following on this forum: "Thames Water has applied for planning permission to almost double the capacity of Mogden.  If permission is granted work will begin in winter 2008 and finish in 2012.  We read  with much bemusement this week that Thames Water  state that if massive expansion of Mogden goes ahead there will be no increase in odour. Thames Water has no evidence whatsoever to support its claim. If Thames Water's planning application is permitted it will be a travesty for residents of Richmond and Hounslow boroughs.  Expanding capacity of the site is purely and simply because Thames Water closed down other STW and diverted flow to Mogden and boosted profits at the expense of the local community. In 1999 Thames Water completed major expansion of Mogden to increase capacity from 450 ml/d to 810 ml/d.  This failed because at the end of the project  the Environmental Agency only consented to 690 ml/d being treated. Thames Water is  therefore  seeking planning permission to increase Mogden capacity from 690 megalitres per day to a massive 1074 megalitres per day or face fines / penalties or divert the sewage elsewhere. Following the last project which increased capacity  from 450 to  690 ml/d, odour from Mogden increased so massively  that an Abatement Notice was served on Thames Water. After various appeals a judge ruled  that there existed and continues to exist an odour which amounts in law to a nuisance. The judge agreed 42 months for Thames to stop the odour. The 42 months expires in August 2008. Odour has not reduced significantly. In fact odour complaints for June 2008 far exceed the complaints for June 2007 In May 2004 Thames Water's Managing Director at the time informed MP Vince Cable and Defra Minister Lord Whitty that it would cost £70 to £100 million to stop odour at Mogden.  Ofwat agreed to allow £42million of public money towards the project. Thames Water refused to contribute towards the project and it later admitted to MP Vince Cable  that the current odour improvement programme would only reduce odour by approximately 50% Experts believe that there are in excess of 10,000 dwellings within the effected area that have been effected by odour and / or mosquitoes. Running separately to the statutory nuisance case is a Group Litigation which is a claim against Thames Water by residents of Hounslow and Richmond boroughs in relation to its operation of Mogden STW. The case has been lengthy and complex and the matter is now listed for a 6 week trial to commence on 6th February 2009. As recently as last week on 17 June 2008, odour from Mogden was so severe that Hounslow Environmental Services saw fit to inspect the site during the evening. The Environmental Health Officer found a Primary Settlement Tank which had considerable sludge which had built up on the surface of the effluent at both the west and east ends and was causing odour. It was later identified as a scraper failure which had caused the sludge build up. He also found a Digester which was gassing off actively via the perimeter seal and this was causing a strong localised odour. Thames Water staff responsible for the site were oblivious to the problems! As recently as 31 March  2008 an Environmental Health Officer found open skips  containing  material, including screenings, should have been covered with a tarpaulin. On 10 April he found the same problem and Thames admitted that it had only just  ordered the tarpaulins. And this in 2008 after a district Judge specifically ordered in June 2005 that all plant and odorous materials are kept covered at all times. It was interesting to read this week that Thames  Water  admits that it can't stop Mogden from smelling when the Abatement Notice served in 2001 was upheld and ordered the company to stop the odour. Thames Water have had since 2001 to abate the odour nuisance and to date it has failed. Residents have always maintained that covering only two of eight open storm tanks would not be sufficient. Thames have had five years to cover all storm tanks but the company refused to comply. Increasing capacity of a failing mismanaged site is not the answer. The answer is to put a limit on the flow entering Mogden which is exactly what the Environment Agency has done. The Company cannot even cope with the current consent flow without causing unlawful odour nuisance as determined by Environmental Protect Act 1990.  We believe that as Thames Water has refused to employ latest technology in odour abatement, it is extremely doubtful that site expansion will reduce odour and Thames Water has no evidence to show otherwise.  Based on residents' experiences, following the last expansion, we believe odour would increase significantly if expansion were to go ahead. We believe that until the current odour improvement results have been analysed by an Independent Odour Expert,  it is inappropriate for Thames Water to be considering further expansion of a site which is currently under statutory court order. We believe that it is inappropriate for Thames Water to be considering site expansion of a site when it is due to face charges of negligence in court in February 2009. If expansion is permitted it will be to the detriment of the local communities of Richmond and Hounslow. In the meantime it would be in Thames Water's interest to cover the remaining  six odorous storm tanks, which cause regular odour nuisance to St Margarets, Twickenham and Isleworth, without further unnecessary procrastination.  For further information email  mrag27@aol.com Mogden Residents Action Group (MRAG)  www.mogden.org.uk

Steve Taylor ● 6542d22 Comments

Mogden Residents Action Group has asked me to post this update.Quote"In an incredible display of hostility towards residents of Hounslow, Isleworth, Twickenham, St Margaret's, Whitton and Richmond,  Hounslow Council has given the green light to Investment Bankers, The Macquarie Group, to almost double the treatment capacity of the failed Mogden STW. Despite residents'  repeated requests to defer the planning application for another 7 months until after the High Court of Justice has ruled on a Group Litigation for an injunction against the operators of Mogden, Thames Water,  the Sustainable Development Committee approved the expansion which Hounslow's Chief Pollution Control Officer advised the meeting  would create more odour but 'it would be less odorous'Only ICG Cllr John Hardy voted against the application which was recommended for approval by Labour Cllrs Ruth Cadbury and John Cooper and pushed with ease past a spineless, gormless conservative majority. Spectators were astounded to hear Cllrs Lily Bath and Brad Fisher vote in favour of the expansion which will have a direct effect on their own constituents. Whilst ICG Cllr Paul Fisher had to leave the meeting after having declared an interest by confirming his membership of the MRAG Committee, it was only Cllr Jon Hardy that appeared to have done his homework on the issues at hand and was able to ask intelligent and important questions concerning environmental impact and health issues which clearly had Thames Water and Council Officers stumbling for answers. However the simplistic and amateurish content of the questions raised by some other SDC members demonstrated a total lack of understanding of the issues and Thames Water was able to wipe the floor with ease. Thames Water representatives themselves expressed amazement at the way the fiasco was handled but were clearly delighted at the outcome which will see Ofwat agreement of £ 400 million for the expansion project which is expected to last until 2013.  It is expected that at least one Thames Water Director, who steered this application, will see substantial  productivity bonuses being paid in the coming years.    The meeting hailed by some spectators as a fiasco, a debacle and a shambles was recorded live on webcam and it was clear that some SDC members were out of their depth when Thames Water's External Affairs Director made his slick presentation. One Cllr laughingly admitted she had never even been to Mogden (and why would she, she lives in Chiswick). Whilst Cllrs originally voted 5 to 2 in favour of refusal of the application, the Lead Member for Environment, Cllr Barbara Reid, performed an incredible U-turn by voting in favour of the application after hearing the Borough Legal Assistant advise if Thames went to appeal it may cost Hounslow to defend the appeal .Whilst the legal assistant advised that costs of such appeals shouldn't be of concern to SDC members in the decision making process it, was enough to see the Conservatives quickly changing their minds and supporting the New Labour motion to approve the application. So keen was Cllr Reid to change her vote that she broke protocol by supporting the approval motion before allowing Richmond resident Barry Edwards to speak. Residents of Hounslow Borough were effectively barred from speaking at the meeting as the letter sent to residents inviting participation was already time barred when it was received. An email was sent to Hounslow's Director of  Environment and copied to all SDC Members, advising that any decision to proceed with the meeting and / or any decision to approve the application could be vulnerable to Judicial Review based on failure to ensure appropriate public participation in the decision making process contrary to Article 6 of the Aarhus Convention. The email was acknowledged at the meeting by Cllr Ruth Cadbury and SDC Members were asked for comment. None was forthcoming and the Borough Legal Assistant shrugged off the matter by implying that public participation was not a requirement of Hounslow Council, ignoring the fact that the convention was transposed into UK Law by virtue of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Whilst it is a total disgrace that Hounslow residents were excluded, Richmond residents were represented by Environmental Scientist Barry Edwards who provided expert opinion on current failings at Mogden, reasons why expansion would create additional odour and expert advice of action required to abate the nuisance. It was noted that Storm Tanks which cause odour problems in both Richmond and Hounslow have been filled to capacity during January and February but only two of eight are covered. It was requested that the remaining 6 are covered. Thames Water refused and the Council Environmental Head appeared to have little understanding of the obligations of Utilities companies by informing the committee that Thames Water couldn't cover the storm tanks because Ofwat had not agreed to fund the operation. No Cllr asked the obvious question on why Thames Water couldn't fund it from its own massive profits.  This is a sad day for the communities of Richmond and Hounslow which will see Macquarie Group / Thames Water profits soar whilst property prices tumble as the area becomes a massive cesspool. This Council has had the opportunity to engage with the community but it has turned its back on residents and failed  the communities of Hounslow and Richmond miserably. ICG Cllr Phil Andrews who has been campaigning tirelessly since 1998 to improve the situation at Mogden, with little assistance from Council officers, and open hostility from opposition Cllrs said:  "There is not a word in the English language to describe the way I feel right now. Officers, at best, were remiss in failing to share crucial information with the Committee regarding possible funding options for the covering of the storm tanks, but frankly I don't envisage that any action will be taken nor even any questions asked."I would like to sincerely apologise to my constituents and to ask them to bear with us, for I promise that whatever happens over the coming weeks and months Isleworth residents will not be the sacrifice"                                MRAG's environmental scientist Barry Edwards from St Margaret's, who addressed the SDC had this to say:                  "I have never experienced such a planning evening. We had won, all the points were made and refusal was 5 to 2. Then the Councillors (with the officers help) managed to talk themselves out of it!!"MRAG Co-founder, Hanifa Dobson, who has an in depth knowledge of the Mogden operation and vast experience of dealing with Hounslow's Environment Department and has constantly questioned its capabilities and motives, had predicted that Officers would turn against the community by taking the easy option and reducing their workload simply added:  "It came really as no surprise."                                                                      MRAG's  secretary Steve Taylor said "I was quite astonished. On the one hand Hounslow's Divisional  Head of Regulatory Services,, Cathy Gallagher, told the committee that her department is under-resourced and on the other hand she recommended approval of this application which she has promised the committee will result in additional policing of Mogden by her overworked officers. She has no real understanding of Mogden and I don't think she has ever visited the site. She was clearly out of her depth but the most frightening and inexcusable blunder is that she ignored our request, based on legal  advice, that a decision should only be made after the High Court has considered the matter given that this will involve full disclosure and expert evidence on the problem and the solution from both sides." This is a Technology & Construction Court case which will result in a thorough consideration of the issues by an experienced Judge. The Court’s decision would  undoubtedly have put the committee in a much better position to judge the current application and would have only delayed the application by a few months as the 6 week trial is due to commence in October. Cathy Gallagher's  insistence in recommending this application to an inexperienced committee with the full knowledge that an experienced  High Court Judge would soon be hearing all evidence is irresponsible and indicates total lack of respect or concern for the community she purports to serve. Having said that, all members of the committee, including the chair, were made aware of the current situation and ongoing situation. Their attitude was that if they refused the application Hounslow may lose control of the issue as they risked the Mayor of London calling it in, or possibly a public enquiry which would mean referral to the Secretary of State. They ignored Barry Edwards'  argument that perhaps residents would welcome a public enquiry and senior government intervention.Hounslow Council has had 15 years of control, and it has offered little more than a tick box, reporting regime which effectively advises complainants that the site is operating normally or that the storm tanks are being used.Solicitor Neil Stockdale, of Hugh James Solicitors, who is handling the Group Litigation against Thames Water  added: "I fully expect Thames’ expansion plans to be carefully scrutinised by Mr Justice Ramsey at the trial of the residents’ case in October. Whether this was the right decision remains to be seen " If you have any comments or questions please email MRAG27@aol.com  and please continue to register your complaints through us.Mogden Residents Action Group (MRAG)" Unquote

Steve Taylor ● 6288d

Yes - Mogden has been causing problems since before Christmas. It is unlikely that the odour from Mogden would reach Brentford but a resident from Old Isleworth believes the problems at Mogden may mean Thames Water has been 'dumping in the River Thames'  MRAG has asked both Thames Water and Hounslow Council to advise if this is the case but no replies have been forthcoming. Hereunder latest correspondence with Thames Water's External Affairs Director, Richard Aylard. Again no reply received. -----------------Forwarded Message: Subj: Re: Mogden STW - Sludge spill on Saturday 10 Jan 2008  Date: 15/01/2009 22:30:15 GMT Standard Time From: MRAG27 To: richard.aylard@thameswater.co.uk CC:    RichardThis week MRAG has forwarded to yourself about forty complaints of very severe sewage odour which affected hundreds of residents in both Richmond and Hounslow Boroughs.  You will therefore appreciate that Mr Gingell's continual offers of apology have become quite tedious and flippant. It is obvious from the wording of many of the complaints that the Mogden Works has caused significant odour nuisance since before Christmas and it appears that those responsible for the site last weekend have little understanding of the Defra Code or Thames' OMP and thus Mr Gingell has yet again not followed agreed procedures. For anyone to state that the odours caused by the sludge spillage "appeared to be localized to the sludge handling area" is quite ludicrous and it is obvious from this remark that nobody from Thames attempted to investigate or measure the odour impact off-site and thus failed to report the incident as per procedures to the OHC, Customer Services, LBH or the local community.The sludge spillage was not reported to LBH until well after a complaint was made on Monday and the Communications Advisor has made no attempt to explain what caused the sludge spill, why it happened or what steps have been taken to ensure it doesn't happen again. You will note from Mogden's records that Sludge Spillages have become a regular occurrence so it seems that the Mogden Managers are unable to rectify the problem and the only solution known to them is to react after the event and try to clean up after the event. With only 3 or 4 staff on duty on weekends and after hours this surely cannot be an acceptable solution?Residents are extremely disappointed that Thames Water still has no proactive ambitions and is content to only react when it deems necessary. We look forward to your comments on how you intend to deal with the ongoing "Mogden Problem" and how you intend to communicate more effectively with the communities of Richmond and Hounslow.RegardsMogden Residents Action Group Committee-----------------Forwarded Message: Subj: Re: Mogden STW - Sludge spill on Saturday 10 Jan 2008  Date: 15/01/2009 13:53:51 GMT Standard Time From: Mogden@thameswater.co.uk To: MRAG27@aol.com Sent from the Internet (Details) Dear MRAG,On Saturday 10 January 2008 there was a minor sludge spillage in thepasteurisation area.  At the time, any odours appeared to be localized tothe sludge handling area and a clean-up was quickly carried out.On Monday I received a complaint of odour relating to that Saturday.Following a discussion with the complainant, it was likely that the causeof the odour he experienced may have been the spillage, and I thereforesent out a reactive notification.  LB Hounslow's Environmental HealthOfficer has been fully updated since.Please accept my apologies for any increase in odour that residents haveexperienced.Kind regardsAndy.Andy GingellProject Communications AdvisorThames Water Utilities07747 644522Thames Water Customer Services (24hr/day):  0845 9200 800                                                                                                                                                            MRAG27@aol.com                                                                                                                                                To:      Mogden/Ops/ThamesWater@ThamesWater, Andy Gingell/Ops/ThamesWater@ThamesWater,                       12/01/2009 22:23          Richard Aylard/External Affairs/ThamesWater@ThamesWater, Waste Water Operations                                                        Director/ThamesWater@ThamesWater, Customer                                               Subject:  Mogden STW - Sludge spill on Saturday 10 Jan 2008                                                                                                                                                                  And why weren't residents and LBH Environmental Services informed aboutthis major environmental disaster on Saturday and why wasn't a bulletinposted with your Customer Services Department?Residents are quite astounded and appalled that Thames Water is apologisingfor "any increase in odour that residents may have experienced"  when itwas quite obvious all around the site that the spill had a majorenvironmental impact on both Hounslow & Richmond Boroughs.  Yet moreevidence that Thames Water Mogden staff have no idea of the impact theirnegligence causes to the community.No doubt Thames Water is oblivious to the fact that the odour has continuedinto Monday night and clearly the cleanup of the spill was inadequate.A total disgrace!Mogden Residents Action Group-----------------Forwarded Message:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    Subj:                                                                                  Mogden STW - Sludge spill on Saturday 10 Jan 2008              Date:                                                                                  12/01/2009 14:37:46 GMT Standard Time                          From:                                                                                  Mogden@thameswater.co.uk                                      To:                                                                                    Mogden.notification@Thameswater.CO.UK                                                                                                      Sent from the Internet (Details)                                                                                                                                                                                                  Dear Residents,On Saturday 10 January 2008 we had a minor sludge spill at ourpasteurisation plant (located towards the south west corner of the works).The spill was cleaned up that same day, however we would like to apologisefor any increase in odour that residents may have experienced.Kind regardsAndyAndy GingellProject Communications AdvisorThames Water Utilities07747 644522Thames Water Customer Services (24hr/day):  0845 9200 800

Steve Taylor ● 6337d

MRAG has asked me to post its September update hereunder.Current Situation Following the recent £42 million Odour Improvement Programme completed in August, odour and complaint levels have been so high that residents can subjectively declare the works to be a dismal failure. Ironically too, with severe flaws in general management and housekeeping at Mogden, residents fear that covering parts of the site has created a breeding haven for mosquitoes as residents report increased mosquito activity.  Environmental Scientist and MRAG committee member Barry Edwards of St Margarets commented  "I don't believe that the £42 million was value for money. I have suggested a low tech solution which would cost a fraction of the price and would not cause fan noise. Why is this waste of money being allowed?" MRAG Committe member Marianne Welsh of Whitton said of the mosqtuitoes  " the mosquito activity has been the worst ever seen in the house this week, far worse than any of the previous years.  Nightly, even with a small window slightly open they are coming in and are flying around us (especially around the face), and trying to bite us.  Watching TV we are constantly trying to stop this and to kill them.  My leg bite (a week on), although having gone down is still having to be treated with Aloe Vera daily." MRAG secretary Steve Taylor of Isleworth says"The Mogden Failure comes as little surprise to the MRAG Committee who have always been sceptical of the odour sources tackled as part of the Programme as they were modelled on a similar programme conducted at Crossness STW in Bexley which does not have similar close receptors as does Mogden. Recent communications with Thames Water show that the Company is quite content to base its odour assessment mainly on Hydrogen Sulphide automatic readings. This method of verifying odour is completely unacceptable to residents and Defra. Residents'  independent odour experts made it very clear to the Court in 2004 that measuring odour by means of H2S is not a good indicator of organic odours which are invariably made up of a very complex cocktail of different odorous gases, many of which are only present in very low concentrations. The disadvantage of H2S mapping is that it is of very limited value in predictive work to asses the likely odour impact of improvements or extensions to sewage works. A much more effective method of measuring odour emissions is to use olfactometry and dispersion modelling which involves the collection of odour samples (in bags) which are presented to an odour panel typically made up of  6 people who "sniff" the odour samples to determine the number of dilutions necessary to render the odour detectable by  50%. There are standardised protocols and the methods used to present samples to the panellists are set out in European Standards. The results of odour sampling and emissions measurements can be used to predict off site odour impacts. The emission rate data is used in a computer dispersion model to calculate and map odour concentration/frequency around the works. The results can be used to establish the likelihood of odour complaints at any specific odour receptor site around the works to evaluate the degree of odour abatement or mitigation required to control odour impact. This approach has been widely used successfully for many years by other utilities including Severn Trent Water, Southern Water and Northumberland Water in planning and environmental impact appraisals." In its response to residents' complaints Thames Water refer to H2S levels as hereunder  but we have  repeatedly asked  about other methods of measuring odour to which Thames Water state "At Mogden we have odour monitors that measure the levels of hydrogensulphide produced by the works, alongside routine site inspections.  Wemeasure concentrations of this gas as it provides us with representativedata relating to odour" MRAG Chair Trevor Whittall of St Margarets says that communications with the new regime at Thames Water are at an all time low."Recently most complaints have been of late night or weekend odour so we have repeatedly asked Thames Water how many technicians are employed on site after hours. Thames Water have refused to supply this information although we believe only 2 or 3 staff are employed on site after hours. Thames Water maintain that the site is routinely patrolled at night. We have asked what "routinely" means and if we can sight logs of patrols. The Company has refused to supply this information. With regard to the daily inspections we are aware that the site was previously managed by a professional Chemical Engineer who was always happy to display her vast academic qualifications in her email signature.We have asked Thames Water to advise us what professional qualifications the current site management, responsible for residents well-being, hold."  Thames Water has advised: " We feel that this is an unreasonable request for information and, by law;we are not allowed to disclose such personal information on our employees.We have nothing further to add to this." Steve Taylor says there are serious management, operational and communication problems at Mogden which Thames Water has not addressed. "As recently as 6 September it was discovered that there was  a blocked pump on the East side of the works. Although it took until 12 September for Thames Water to admit to the fault,  it has now been determined that the operator who came across the pump simply turned the pump off. We are quite astounded by this action  as residents'  expert consultants review of the site in August 2007 made it very clear that he found it extremely disappointing that Thames Water had still not established more robust management and maintenance procedures to ensure that there are reliable pump systems available and back-up pumps are readily available to promptly deal with failures if necessary. The survey concluded that better procedures needed to be put in place as a matter of priority! " Action by Hounslow Council The Leader of the Council and the Chief Executive have been fully appraised of the ongoing failings at Mogden and they promised to give the matter top priority so residents find it most disappointing that no senior Council Officer attended the last Residents Liaison meeting on 17 September where it would have been a golden opportunity for the Council to question  Thames Water and hear residents' views and reassure  residents of its interest in improving the local environment by holding Thames accountable. Community Group Leader and Isleworth ward councillor Phil Andrews commented: 'There have been some commitment issues dating back to the last administration which frankly still need to properly addressed.  Councillor Paul Fisher and I are in the process of resolving this at the very highest level for once and for all, and the Leader and Chief Executive are involved with this process.  The residents have been short-changed for far too long and we are determined to deal with this whatever it takes.' Residents therefore  call on this Council to immediately ensure it has procedures in place to investigate and evaluate residents' complaints with a view to serving a further Abatement Notice on Thames Water without further procrastination. The Environmental Services Department is failing this community.  The Future Residents are aware that Thames Water has applied for planning permission to almost double the capacity of Mogden following its closure of other STW's such as Kew. Residents are aware that Thames Water will be fined or face penalties if it cannot improve the water quality by reducing discharges of wastewater to the river. However, after much correspondence with Thames Water MRAG says  "we believe it will be a travesty for this community if expansion goes ahead as it has been established that, besides a reduction in odour from maintenance activities on the existing west side primary settlement tanksand  reduction in the use of storm water tanks, there will be absolutely no direct benefits to local residents if the planning application succeeds.We accept  there may be a few recreational benefits in the long term which are not significant to Mogden's neighbours." Simon Eaton-Walker, MRAG Committee Member from Isleworth says"Thames have long argued that the £42 million spend of ratepayers money, as agreed by Ofwat, was not sufficient to cover all 8 Storm Tanks. MRAG has always maintained that Thames Water has had the perfect opportunity to use shareholder money to complete the job properly instead of covering only 2 Storm Tanks in the past 4 years. The Company refused to allocate any of its profits to do so. Residents argue that it doesn't require permission to expand the site to cover the remaining storm tanks. They simply have to pay for it themselves which is a small price to pay for the environmental pollution the Company has got away with for  decades." Thames also argue that "the west side rectangular tanks fell outside the proposed scope of the odour improvement project, with covering and treating the air from other parts of the site providing a greater benefit.  It was also recognised at the time of the submission of our strategic business plan for the currentregulatory period, that improvements would be required to the effluent treatment stream at Mogden in order to meet the requirements of the Environment Agency regarding water quality in the tidal Thames."  "As the proposals for the effluent improvements at Mogden have developed, it became clear that additional primary treatment capacity would be requiredon the west side works, which would need to be covered if they were not to add to the odour emissions from the site." Says Steve Taylor "In other words the Company was well aware that the  existing west side primary settlement tanks needed to be covered but instead of doing the job as part of the last Improvement Programme, they held back with a view to using this work as a carrot to local residents to support the massive expansion application. The MRAG Committee would not be averse to support any Planning Application to cover only the existing west side primary settlement tanks but expanding a site which a Judge has found guilty of causing unlawful niusance, and continuing to do so,  is not acceptable to this community and is not an option for Thames Water."  Legal Update - Group Litigation Residents involved in the Group Litigation will have been updated by Hugh James Solicitors on the current situation and it would not be appropriate to comment further. Suffice to say that in light of the failure of the Improvement Programme, residents are now considering a further action, in tandem, to seek compensation for the ongoing nuisance. Residents warn that unless Thames MD David Owens gets his house in order he is likely to suffer the same humiliation as former MD John Sexton if a new Group Litigation Order is served. It is understood that John Sexton took early retirement shortly after residents' solicitors served him (in January 2005) with a formal Pre-Action Protocol Letter in relation to claims by residents arising out of foul and noxious odours and nuisance from mosquitoes as a result of the operation of Mogden STW. John Sexton was replaced by RWE Thames director Werner Boettcher who after a short while was succeeded by Jeremy Pelczer who steered the sale of Thames Water to Australian Macquarie Group who brought in David Owens. It has been widely reported that Mr Owens took a massive bonus of £661,000 in July this year. Mogden Residents Action Group Committee (MRAG) email: mrag27@aol.com    

Steve Taylor ● 6437d

MRAG's  July update hereunder:July has proved to be another environmental disaster as far as odour from Mogden is concerned.MRAG have been inundated with complaints of horrific late night odour which has caused much distress to residents trying to enjoy the holiday period or simply wanting to get some sleep with open windows. Complaints have been forwarded to Thames Water and the Council. The matter has now become of such serious concern to the Council that various meetings took place this week between Isleworth Executive Member Councillors Phil Andrews and Paul Fisher together with Council Environmental Services Director Mike Jordan,  Council Chief Executive Mark Gilks,  Pollution Control Officers Suresh Kamath, Gerry McCarthy and Michael Mehta together with the Borough Assistant Solicitor.  The Leader of the Council, Peter Thompson, has been briefed and updated whilst on holiday. The above have requested an emergency meeting with MRAG committee members within the next two weeks. Date to be finalised. Depite the fact that Thames Water alleges to have completed a £42million odour improvement programme the company admits that if expansion is permitted,  odorous maintenance work may have to be undertaken DAILY. So much for employing the latest technology! The best the Company can offer is to notify 'subscribed residents'  of any odorous activities. Unfortunately though, the Mogden staff are unable to identify or predict odorous activities and the website has been out of action for over a month so un-subscribed residents have no way of knowing what is going on. Thames Water claim to have designed an extensive set of odour control measures at Mogden as part of its expansion project.  Why then, weren't these measures put in place with the £42 million we have already awarded over the last 5 years? Thames Water claim  its proposals to almost double Mogden capacity will also show  "local community benefits"  We have repeatedly asked what the benefits will be but the Company seems unable to elaborate. The Company repeatedly advise that  "the new works will not result in any increase of odour at the site"We have repeatedly asked how they know this to be a fact if they don't even know what is currently causing the nightly odour being experienced by residents from Whitton to St Margarets. To make the situation even more laughable the Mogden site staff continually deny that the odour you complain about even exists!!! We believe the expansion of Mogden is designed to increase profits for the shareholders and reduce fines/penalties and whilst we believe odour will increase,  we have repeatedly asked Thames Water how many days are anticipated per annum to use one or more storm tanks containing the raw odorous sewage.Not surprisingly Thames have refused to answer, stating simply  "Although modelling could show storm tank use, we have not carried out this work as part of this project.  We have nothing further to add to thispoint."In an open display of arrogance and in refusing to answer questions as put,  Thames Water states "We have nothing further to add to this point."RegardsMogden Residents Action Group

Steve Taylor ● 6502d

Simon You are quite right. Here's an extract from some of the complaints sent to MRAG which have been passed to Thames Water and the Local Authority. Thames Water have not responded.  The Local Authority has responded hereunder.  Make of it what you will.  Comments appreciated. One resident of Isleworth has requested that Hounslow provide a TXT number so that Environmental Health Officers can be contacted immediately to investigate and verify odour intensity. We have put this request to the Council but they have not responded. My god mogden is really stinking this evening - the worst this year. The windows and doors are closed and yet it is penetrating the house  22.49  hrs  22/7  I suspect you have already been made aware of the overwhelming stench coming from Mogden very late Monday night / Tuesday morning (22nd July). During last week the stink was very bad in this part of Haliburton and on the Cole Park allotments. The stench beacme very noticeable yesterday at  around 2030 hrs - and unfortunately has continued since.  22/7 Varsity Drive  Very bad stench in the wee hours this morning in Haliburton Road, St Margaret's.  22/7 by 10pm the area was positively reeking. My daughter wanted to be sick!  22/7On Tuesday morning my son  was awakened in the early hours to the most terrible smell!  22/7 stench was unbearable last night  - help  - 22/7 The stench has been extreme all day and both my wife and children complained to me about it when I returned home from the office late this evening. 22/7 -Again  on Monday night early Tuesday morning was awken by raw sewage stench and had to close all windows. - Ive a STRONG stench in my flat at the moment its disgusting 22/7  23.20 hours  - I have just spent a horrible night with hardly any sleep. During yesterday evening there was a sickening sewage smell so that I was forced to close my windows and turn off my air-conditioning vent  23/7  Yesterday morning, 23rd July, the air was foul  6:45am the smell around tw7 is cabbages tonight wednesday 23/07/08  sufferred 22/23 July.  A  "breathtaking" experience"Dear MRAGI write to advise that we did visit Mogden on Thursday 24th in response to the high numbers of complaints received.A detailed inspection of the site was undertaken and odour and site logs were checked as were the odour monitor readings and we were unable to identify and operation problem on site which could be attributed to the complaints received. Thames also advised that there were no operational problems on site.Please accept my apologies for not advising you of this earlier.Yours sincerelyHead of Pollution Control"

Steve Taylor ● 6514d

The Mogden Residents Action Group (MRAG)  has asked me to post its June update on this forum:Dear Residents (copied blind to protect email privacy) Bad news:  Although Thames Water assured residents that the first benefits of the odour improvement programme would be seen well before the programme completion, reported odour complaints  for June have reached the highest level for this year and are a massive increase on complaints for June 2007. In most instances Thames Water has been unable to explain the odour or offer any remedial action.  The company still refuses to investigate odour off-site and report accurate findings. The best it can do is report H2S readings from its on-site monitors which are not relevant to the odour you have experienced.Thames Water is fully aware from independent odour experts that whilst H2S may be but one component of the odour cocktail there are many other compounds which cannot be ignored.  There are important limitations to H2S which STW operators are instructed by Defra not to ignore.Mogden Managers seem to be unaware or unconcerned about investigating or abating odour and again the Environmental Health Officer found uncovered skips of waste removed from grit channels awaiting removal from the site. We understand that there were not sufficient tarpaulins on site to cover the skips!  As long as Thames Water cannot manage basic common housekeeping - what hope is there for residents? Despite these basic management flaws the company has stepped up its campaign for support of its controversial plan to almost double site capacity. One resident has described  the plan as Mogden being a growing cancer,  spreading across two boroughs, urgently in need of a dose of chemotherapy. The Company's bid to increase profits at huge environmental cost to the community is beyond  decent human understanding. The planning application is due for comments on the 17th July at the Brentford Free Church on Boston Manor Rd at 7.30pm if residents wish to attend.Good news:V/ub> We are extremely pleased to advise that  MRAG Committee member Cllr Paul Fisher, himself a regular victim of Mogden's mismanagement,  has  taken the responsibility for Mogden from  Cllr Barbara Reid as part of his Executive Portfolio.  As you may know Cllr Fisher works very closely with MRAG  Co-founder Cllr Phil Andrews  and together they will work closely with Hounslow's new  Director of the Environment, Mike Jordan,  and Council Leader Peter Thompson.Many will have noticed the energy with which Paul has already devoted himself to his executive role in the Council and he has promised that the  Mogden issue will be dealt with just as passionately,  and residents will notice a big improvement  in the way Mogden is handled by Council officers.Group Litigation - Legal update:There has been very much happening which for obvious reasons we cannot report at this stage. Suffice to say the trial date is set for a 6 week hearing commencing 6th February 2009.In the meantime please continue to register your complaints via MRAG at mrag27@aol.com RegardsMogden Residents Action Group (MRAG)for information on Mogden Residents Action Group go to OnLine Communities Ltd Website www.mogden.org.uk

Steve Taylor ● 6534d