A British court fined Akzo Nobel subsidiary International Paint Ltd. 650,000 pounds (US$805,512) for the discharge of a banned coating that entered a waterway near its Newton Ferrers, UK, paint-testing facility, said the UK’s Environment Agency on Jan 16.
International Paint was found guilty of two charges after a nine-day hearing at Plymouth Crown Court in October. The company, which denied the charges, must also pay court costs of 144,992 pounds (US$179,705).
The Environment Agency launched an investigation after the company tried to sell the property in 2015 and possible pollution had been reported.
International Paint operated a testing facility on the River Yealm at Newton Creek near Newton Ferrers since 1928. The estuary is a Special Area of Conservation due to its rich flora and fauna, according to the Environment Agency.
Since the 1970s, the company used formulations containing tributyltin (TBT) as a coating to prevent the build-up of animals and plants on ships’ hulls. The UK banned TBT from use on small vessels in the late 1980s, and the substance was banned completely worldwide during the 2000s because it was determined to be toxic for the marine environment. One drop of TBT in an Olympic sized swimming pool equals one part per trillion (PPT). The safe level of TBT is 0.2 PPT or a fifth of a drop, according to the Environment Agency.
The agency’s investigation found evidence that the chemical, along with copper, arsenic and mercury, had been present in sediment in a tank at the site and some of the sediment had escaped out into the estuary. A bung on another tank was found to have come out leaving it open to the estuary before it was eventually permanently sealed with concrete.
Nine out of 11 samples of sediment from the tank and the adjacent estuary the safe limit for TBT and that, close to the site, one sample contained 80,000 times the safe level, the agency reported. An expert conducting the testing concluded that the TBT levels in the estuary were sufficient to have the potential for a major toxic effect on marine life.
Following the hearing, agency representative James Wimpress said, “The company not only failed in its duty of care to the environment, but also denied any wrongdoing during the investigation and throughout the trial.”
He added that he hoped the ruling would serve as a warning to other companies that the agency will pursue reckless acts in the future.
