Tenbury Wells based food manufacturer Kerry Ingredients (UK) Limited has been fined £12,000 for making illegal discharges into Severn Trent Water’s sewer network. The company has also been ordered to pay costs of over £30,000.
The case is the latest in a series of prosecutions by the water company - in the last 6 months, Severn Trent has brought successful prosecutions against seven different firms in the Midlands for making illegal discharges into the sewer network.
The case against Kerry Ingredients (UK) Limited was heard on Thursday 30 January at Worcester Magistrates Court, following a prosecution brought by the water company for a breach of the Water Industry Act 1991. It is a criminal offence under section 118 of the Act to discharge trade effluent into a public sewer without consent or other authorisation.
On three occasions between 6 December 2012 and 4 March 2103 Kerry Ingredients (UK) Limited of Clee Hill Road, Tenbury Wells, Worcestershire, breached legal limits regulating the Chemical Oxygen Demand of trade effluent discharged into the public sewer. However, prompt action by Severn Trent operatives at Tenbury Sewage Treatment Works prevented these breaches resulting in a serious pollution of the River Teme. The whole of the River Teme was designated a Site of Special Scientific Interest by English Nature in 1996.
As well as paying the utility’s legal costs, Kerry Ingredients were ordered to pay Severn Trent’s operational costs in responding to the breaches.
Simon Cocks, waste water services director, commented:
“Our customers pay for damage to the sewer network and the treatment works, so it is important that we prosecute offenders in appropriate cases and take action to recover costs where possible."
"The limits we set to regulate trade discharges are calculated to ensure they do not adversely effect the capacity of our sewage works to efficiently treat sewage, so exceeding this consent is not only illegal, it can also damage the sewage treatment process and so risk causing harm to the environment.”
Rather than having to take action in court, we would prefer to work together with businesses to prevent any breaches occurring in the first place.”