CIWM: UK signs international secondary resources trade deal: announces that the UK has signed the  North Sea Resources Roundabout (NSRR), an international voluntary agreement between France, Flanders, the UK and the Netherlands. The NSRR is intended to stimulate international trading of secondary resources left over after waste incineration, such as incinerator bottom ash. The agreement seeks to harmonise quality protocols and waste definitions and classifications across the four countries. (8 March 2016)

R (Surringer) v Vale of Glamorgan Council [2016] EWHC 494 (Admin) (Admin Ct): S applied to quash the Council's decision to grant planning permission for the construction of a facility for the recycling of incinerator bottom ash (IBSA). The recycling process would produce IBA aggregates for use in road construction. A detailed "dust assessment" provided that the impact of dust arising from the stored IBA would be negligible. The planning officer's report stated that the proposal complied with the general principles of waste strategy set out in the national documents by recycling 100% of the IBA produced by the local incinerator, which was classified as a non-hazardous waste material that would otherwise be sent to landfill, to produce a usable secondary aggregate product that could reduce the need for quarried stock material for aggregate and cement production. S contended that the statement in the officer's report that IBA was classified as non-hazardous was misleading and amounted to a fatal flaw in the decision-making process; also, the Council had also failed to take into account risks to human health even where IBA was classified as non-hazardous, and the officer's report had not dealt with health questions. S also argued that there was also inadequate, and therefore unlawful, consultation.

The court held, refusing the application, that the statement in the officer's report was not materially misleading. The planning application, the supporting documentation, the consultation, the permit, and the officer's report were all plainly based on the fundamental premise that the IBA brought to the site would be non-hazardous. The risks (including any risks to health) posed by dust spreading from this site were fully consulted on and considered by both the officer's report and the planning committee, and there was no arguable deficiency in the decision-making process. Nor was the consultation process flawed. (17 March 2016)