Wethersfield Airfield is a 322 hectare site in the middle of remote north Essex countryside. It is ‘Open Mosaic Habitat’ and includes mixed habitats, from ancient woodland to Jubilee woodland, to grassland and scrub.  The airfield is rich in rare species of grasses, invertebrates and birds. 50 hectares of the site are built on already. 

This airfield is the focus of rather a lot of unwanted attention.   

So, who is interested in it?  

·       Ministry of Defence (owner of the land, needs to dispose of it). 

·       Ministry of Justice (wants to build two mega prisons to house 3,400 inmates). 

·       Home Office (wants to build an asylum centre for 1700 refugees).   

·       Braintree District Council (put the site forward for prisons in 2016 and will determine any planning application)

·       Local residents (who want to see the site preserved for nature, community uses and renewable energy)

Dumping ground

It seems that this green and wildlife rich part of Essex is viewed as a dumping ground for the Government’s tricky problems.  However, the airfield has been already been used as a dumping ground - for everything from nuclear waste to fuel, asbestos, munitions and possibly chemical weapons. 

The image below shows some of the contaminating activity that has taken place on the airfield. There is a lot to take in…

Despite that well-known history, there is astonishing and frankly shocking lack of regard for the contamination risks associated with the airfield shown by any of the authorities involved.  Risks extend to workers currently preparing the asylum centre, to refugees housed there in the future, to prison construction workers and even the prisoners.

Possible radioactive materials

Here’s what Homes England, who contemplated building a ‘garden village’ on the site, said, “The Wethersfield site will undoubtedly contain residual contamination in various areas of the site as there are no signs of any significant demolition and remediation having been carried out.”  Homes England went on to list a myriad of possible contaminants, as follows:

·       Bulk fuel installations and former petrol filling station (all now disused)

·       Active domestic fuel oil storage associated with the technical area and Married quarters area

·       Previous areas of waste disposal and burning (not defined)

·       Possible radioactive and asbestos containing materials

·       Munitions

·       Reported aircraft crash site in Park woods to the north of the runway

·       Fire and Rescue training ground

·       De-icing

·       Disposal of runway sweepings

·       Possible disposal of aircraft and parts

·       Nuclear weapon storage

What do the protagonists say about contamination?

There’s clearly a cover-up going on.

The Ministry of Defence says, “If the MOD were to confirm the location of the munitions store at Wethersfield this would provide public confirmation of the buildings’ usage. Providing such confirmation would give anyone with malicious intent the location of military weapons which would potentially place service personnel, and the public, at risk of harm.”  That’s nonsense, as contamination could cover the entire site.

The Ministry of Justice says, “This information is commercially sensitive, and release would prejudice the Authority’s negotiating position on the project. Release would also prejudice the Authority’s negotiating position and ability to achieve value for money in future prison builds.

Release could also prejudice the MoD’s ability to achieve value for money should they choose to sell the land to another party.

Disclosure of the requested information into the public domain would harm the confidential nature of the information and would also harm the legitimate economic interests.”

This secrecy begs the question: what are they hiding, and why is the Ministry of Defence prioritising money and economic interests over the safety of people and the environment?

Surely other government bodies care?

No…

The local authority, Braintree District Council, is no help, saying, “Local Authorities do have a legal responsibility to act on contaminated land however Ministry of Defence land is deemed to be a “Special Site” and as such would fall under the Environment Agency’s jurisdiction as specified in the Environmental Protection Act 1990 Part 2A”.

The EA passed the buck back to the local authority faster than a hot potato, “The Local Authority is the lead regulator for Land Contamination, implemented through the planning regime described above or through Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.  Part 2A provides a means of dealing with unacceptable risks posed by land contamination to human health and the environment and enforcing authorities should seek to find and deal with such land.”

Meanwhile, the Home Office, via a Treasury Solicitor, produced a wishy-washy report with relation to the proposed asylum centre, which swept aside any concerns about potential contamination on the site. Not only is it downplaying concerns, it is withholding a report by Aecom which may shed further light on the assessment of conditions at the airfield.

So, in summary, we know from Homes England, and from a historical assessment of the airfield’s uses, that contamination is a very real problem.  But we also know that contamination data is being withheld by the Ministries of Defence and Justice, and that the Home Office is trying to pretend contamination is not a problem. The Environment Agency pointed to the local planning authority, which in turn pointed back at the Ministry of Defence. Summary: Full circle and no-one is taking responsibility.

Testing, testing, testing!

With that, local residents decided to take action. 

Concerned that the government is putting its own commercial interest over public health, residents arranged to carry out their own testing, via an accredited laboratory in Germany.

In one of their water samples tested, levels of toxic forever chemicals (PFAS) were found to be an extraordinary four times over the UK advisory limit for drinking water (less than 100ng/l): 454ng/l.  

(By way of comparison, it is worth noting that at Duxford Airfield where similar contamination was discovered, action was taken when the levels in the underlying aquifer were found to be almost 400 ng/l.) 

Residents also appointed expert consultancy Buro Happold to carry out a review of contamination risks associated with the airfield. Look what it concluded:

You’d think that such an established, well-recognised consultancy would be listened to?

No.  Buro Happold made all of the following recommendations, but its report is being dismissed by the Home Office, which continues to prepare the site for the asyslum centre:

That risk might be to site visitors, it might be to those placed there as asylum seekers or prisoners, to construction workers and to local surface waters.   Government's various departments are playing a very dangerous game with this potentially extremely contaminated site, and putting human lives at risk. Most shocking of all is the case of the Ministry of Justice, which is more interested in commercial risk than human lives.  

Why are the precautions set out in the Buro Happold report not being taken? What will it take for all of these public bodies to realise that Wethersfield Airfield poses a very serious risk?  

To follow the activities of the residents’ group, click here

For information about the history & heritage of the site, click here.