Decision details

3.1 The Council entered into an agreement with JMC (Engineering) UK Ltd in 2015. If it continues with this arrangement, it will ensure the continuity of site security, coupled with the extensive site-specific knowledge of the existing contractor. This will ensure that there is no period where the site is insecure. As a result, the health and safety risk will be mitigated as far as reasonably possible.
3.2 The buildings and headstocks pose an immediate health and safety risk; they are dilapidated and are attractive to trespassers who have been known to climb similar headstocks, therefore creating a significant health and safety risk.
3.2 As of 2 November 2018, the site report reflected that theft/intruder activity has been increasing over this month. Security personnel are still escorting thieves off site. Quads and motocross bikes are running both around site and on the tips. As reported, the main concern is surrounding incidents associated with human factors - accidental or deliberate interventions by trespassers, opportunist thieves, adrenaline junkies or closure tourists.
3.3 The risk to human health will increase should any barriers or security removed. As the likelihood of an incident will increase. From a public health perspective, the site should be made as safe as possible before the barriers or security is removed to protect human health.
3.4 It should be noted that the site itself poses a number of major risk (in accordance with those associated with large mining sites). This includes issues such as lagoons, spoil tips and associated subsidence.
3.5 There is no allocated budget for Hatfield Colliery so in order for the work to be undertaken funding will need to be secured from the Councils 2018/19 Contingency.

To continue to contract with JMC Engineering to provide site security at Hatfield Colliery site for 2019/20. The associated costs of this on-going security to be met from 2018/19 Contingency.

Option 1 - Do Nothing – if the Council does nothing the site will be left without sufficient measures in place to prevent unauthorised access to the remaining buildings and Headstocks, representing a risk to health and safety. Given that the Council has provided security on the site, it must be in position to show that it has done all that is reasonable to prevent accidents on the site before removing security.
Option 2 - Continue with current arrangements – this will involve an ongoing commitment of approx. £150,000 per annum for site security and site inspection and will not address the deterioration of the headstocks and the buildings. (This has been covered by a previous ODR ref RE17 0169).
Recommend option - to carry on with the current arrangement for site security.