Yorkshire Water fined £1.6 MILLION for Bradford Beck pollution

Handing down the fine, a judge was highly critical of the company, saying it didn’t treat the problem with “the gravity it deserved” and was “reckless” in the fact that it took almost two years to fix a problem with a sewage tank.

He also pointed out the company’s lengthy criminal record for similar incidents.

The company had appeared at Leeds Magistrates Court today to plead guilty to several charges brought by the Environment Agency.

They all related to pollution that seeped into Bradford Beck in 2018.

The Court heard that Yorkshire Water operated a “detention tank” on George Street that is used to store any overflow sewage from the Leeds Road area in case of flooding or heavy rain.

When operating correctly, this tank pumps the waste back into the sewage system once water levels are back to normal.

The company is permitted to allow overflow from this tank, which can hold up to 4,000 cubic metres, into Bradford Beck, but only in certain circumstances.

The court heard that on August 21, 2018 a member of the Friends of Bradford Beck, Rob Helliwell, noticed sewage in East Brook – a city centre section of the beck.

Initially, Yorkshire Water was unsure of where the sewage had come from, but the next day found it was overflow from George Street tank.

A report by Yorkshire Water to the Environment Agency said the overflow was caused by a partial sewer blockage.

It later emerged that the tank was full at the time – despite it being a relatively dry Summer. The Environment Agency later discovered that the tank had in fact been full from January to August 18 – meaning any slight increase in sewage in that period would cause pollution to the beck.

The problem was caused by a number of defects with the tank that meant all three of the pumps involved in its operation were not operating at the time.

One of these pumps had not been operational since August 2017.

The court was told that a condition of the Environmental Permit held by Yorkshire Water for the tank was that two pumps needed to be operational all the time.

Between the pump failing and the end of August 2018, there were 25 “unauthorised spillages” from the tank to the beck – each lasting around 40 minutes.

James Puzey, prosecuting, said the back up pump required to meet the environmental permit was not replaced until June 2019 – 22 months after Yorkshire Water knew it had failed.

He said the incident led to a “very serious escape of pollution.”

One charge related to the pollution to the beck on August 21. A second related to the different spillages during the period the pump was not operational.

The other charges related to the 22-month period the pump was not in operation – when Yorkshire Water was in breach of its Environmental Permit.

Mr Puzey said one aggravating factor was the fact that the company had not contacted the Environment Agency to let them know there was a breach of their permit.

He said: “Yorkshire Water say they didn’t turn a blind eye to the problems, and were actively seeking to remedy them.

“They may not have turned a blind eye, but they were extremely slow in dealing with the issue and they must have known that in these circumstances it was extremely likely that the detention tank would be making unauthorised discharges of sewage into the beck.

“The Environment Agency believes Yorkshire Water took the view that this was low priority and that this work could wait.”

He said the company had failed to explain why the breaches were allowed to continue for such a lengthy period.

He said the company had numerous previous convictions for allowing sewage to pollute waterways.

Mr Puzey said Yorkshire Water was arguing that the beck was open to multiple different sources of pollution in a bid to mitigate their crime. He added: “That suggests this incident doesn’t matter. The reason we have groups like the Friends of Bradford Becks is because people care about the environment wherever it is, not just in areas of natural beauty. This was a watercourse that supported aquatic life.”

Dominic Kaye, defending, pointed out that Nicola Shaw, the new CEO of Yorkshire Water, had attended court along with a number of other high-ranking employees, and this showed how seriously the company took the issue.

He said the company was responsible for an “enormous estate” and added: “It would be very easy to pick on an isolated incident and say that is typical of what is going on in the company. Context is everything.”

He said the company had invested huge amounts of money in improving the water network.

He said: “The idea that the company deliberately broke the law is simply wrong.”

He told the court that the tank was difficult to access, as it was beneath a car park that was not in the ownership of Yorkshire Water. Despite this, he assured the court that the company had been actively dealing with the issue.

He said there was “no evidence to demonstrate” that the spills had caused harm to the beck.

The company had been negligent, but not reckless – he claimed.

Mr Kaye said: “The prosecution pointed out the company has previous convictions. The fact is all water companies have previous convictions. It is impossible to run a water company of this size without occasional breaches. Compared to some companies we have a lot less.”

District Judge Richard Kitson, presiding over the case, said: “Yorkshire Water knew from January 2018 there was a significant problem with the George Street tank, which was 100 per cent full at the time.

“They also knew that with no operational pumps on that tank at the time there was no means of pumping sewage back into the system.”

He suggested some of the sewage could be pumped out of the tank by other means, adding: “While it would cause cost and logistical problems for the company, in my judgement this is the action that should have been taken.

“I find that while the company were taking steps to address the problem, they were extremely slow to implement them, and the timeline shows significant gaps in any action being taken.

“In my judgement no proper explanation has ever been provided by Yorkshire Water to explain these delays.”

He said he was satisfied that the company had acted in a reckless manner in dealing with the situation.

He added: “It took Yorkshire water 22 months from start to finish to remedy the problem Yorkshire Water did not treat these difficulties with the gravity that they deserved.

“They were taking some steps to deal with it, albeit not with sufficient urgency.”

He said Yorkshire Water was a huge organisation, with an annual turnover of £1.1 billion, and any fine should be large enough to send a clear message to shareholders and bosses that policies needed to change.

He fined the company a total of £1.623 million.

After the case a Yorkshire Water spokesperson said: “We take our commitment to the environment seriously and apologise for the issues at Bradford Beck in 2018.

Our pollution performance has significantly improved since 2018, and we’re investing over £790m over the next few years to improve Yorkshire’s watercourses.

“We continue to evolve and strengthen our processes and communication on these matters as a responsible organisation should, and we’ve taken the learning from this incident and embedded this into our processes. This incident should not have occurred, and we’ve thoroughly reviewed it and made changes in how we operate across all our assets to ensure it doesn’t happen again.

“We’re committed to improving the health of Bradford Beck and since this incident we have worked closely with Friends of Bradford Beck to reduce pollution, including sources not related to Yorkshire Water assets, entering the beck via pollution reporting technology. Through this work we have identified several misconnections and action has been taken by those property owners following our investigations to stop pollution entering the watercourse.”

Ben Hocking, Environment Manager for the Environment Agency in Yorkshire, said: “We take our responsibility to protect the environment very seriously. Water companies are aware that their activities have the potential to cause serious environmental impacts and they have a legal duty to avoid pollution. The regulations are clear.

“Yorkshire Water was aware the tank was full and likely to illegally discharge into the beck and failed to take action to prevent it from happening. They undermined the permitting regulations, which are in place to protect the environment.

“Our officers carried out a thorough investigation, with the support of the community, to put the facts before the court as part of our continuing commitment to hold water companies to account.”

Barney Lerner, of Friends of Bradford Beck, said the fine showed how serious an issue pollution of the beck was. He said: “It turns out they had problems in that area for nearly two years.

“It explains why we saw occasional bursts of pollution every now and then.

“What is most concerning is the future. It is clear that Bradford is being served by an inadequately outdated Victorian system. There are 50 sewage overflows in the little bowl of Bradford Beck.”

He suggested that Bradford needed a type of system seen in Sheffield, which is served by an “intercept” sewer system that diverts any sewage overflows away from water courses.

A £3.5m scheme to re-naturalise a stretch of the Beck on Valley Road in Shipley is currently in the planning stages. Mr Lerner said: “What is the point of spending £3.5m on part of the beck if people are still going to run sewage through it? We need a high level initiative to deal with this issue.”