AT THE HEART OF THE ROAD TRANSPORT INDUSTRY.

Call our Sales Team on 0208 912 2120

GV9s Purle's pollution problem

21th July 1972, Page 20
21th July 1972
Page 20
Page 20, 21th July 1972 — GV9s Purle's pollution problem
Close
Noticed an error?
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.

Which of the following most accurately describes the problem?

• When Purle Bros (Holdings) Ltd appeared before Mr H. E. Robson, Eastern LA, last week in Cambridge, Mr Patrick Ground, counsel for Purle, emphasized the national importance of the toxic waste disposal activities of the company.

Accepting this Mr Robson later commented that in cutting out one aspect of pollution it would be a pity if another problem were introduced — that of an increased risk of road accidents owing to improperly maintained vehicles.

Purle Bros were called under Section 69 following an admitted substantial increase in GV9s attracted by vehicles operating out of their Attleborough (Norfolk) depot. The court was told that Purle operated 25 depots in England of which four were in the Eastern traffic area. Each depot was under the control of a manager and groups of depots came under the control of a regional managing director.

Giving evidence of improvements planned for all four East Anglian depots, Mr Peter Newman, general services director, agreed that there had been difficulties at Attle borough. In April following a vehicle examiner's visit the depot manager had called in the Purle vehicle examiner and this had resulted in staff changes being introduced at the depot. Since then there had been only one GV9 issued. Planning permission had been obtained and work costing £18,000 was to be carried out to further improve the depot facilities.

Mr Newman also outlined the use for 10 extra vehicles for which he was applying. These, he said, were to be 5000gal tankers designed to be fed by smaller tankers collecting waste from source.

Mr Robson, summing up, said it was clear that there had been a major breakdown in inspection and maintenance at Attleborough earlier this year which, he accepted, had probably been put right now. He hoped the company would be mindful of the warning issued that day that if proper standards were not maintained then the licence would be in jeopardy. Mr Robson reserved judgment and said he would give a written judgment in due course.

Tags

Organisations: US Federal Reserve
Locations: Cambridge

comments powered by Disqus