A HAMPSHIRE scrap metal firm has been fined £25,000 for putting groundwater at risk of pollution.

Magistrates imposed the fine on Dase Engineering Ltd after residents raised concerns about the contamination risk at the firm’s site in Bishop’s Waltham.

Business bosses pleaded guilty to two waste offences and were fined £10,000 for each offence.

The court heard that concerns were first raised by the Environment Agency (EA) about the site in Garfield Road five years ago.

Over the course of the past five years the organisation carried out several inspections of the site, while several complaints were made by residents living near to the site.

After a thorough inspection of the site in September 2011, the EA served company bosses with an enforcement notice which required them to improve their on-site operations.

Investigators highlighted a number of issues with waste storage at the site and raised particular concerns with waste oil and fluids which had the potential to contaminate local groundwater.

Other issues including the incorrect storage of hazardous wastes including car batteries, and a lack of facilities to deal with explosive components such as car air bags.

The notice also demanded that Dase Engineering update the site’s working plan, which details what activities are carried out on-site, how they can be carried out to avoid pollution and lists emergency procedures for dealing with situations such as fires or spills.

A further site visit on December 5, 2011 indicated that although some improvements had been made, the site still fell below acceptable standards.

The EA’s Dawn Theaker said: “Despite numerous warnings and attempts to advise the company to clean up its act, it was disappointing that very little action took place to remedy the various serious issues at the site.

“It was very concerning that operations at the site were run in a way that did not protect the environment. I hope this prosecution sends out a clear message to other waste operators that we will not hesitate to prosecute them if they fail to comply with their permit and put the environment at risk.”

At the court hearing at Fareham Magistrates’ Court, the firm was ordered to pay costs of £5,782 and a £15 victim surcharge on top of the two £10,000 penalties.

Company bosses apologised and said in mitigation that the offences were not deliberate but were due to negligence.

They added that £15,000 had been spent to update the firm’s working plan.