Complaints About the Council’s Handling of the Rockcliffe Gasification Incinerator Proposal

Complaint	Tier-1 Response	Reply	Tier-2 Response
Environmental Health	Response	Reply with Analysis	None (but see Response to Prejudgment complaint below)
Concerns	Response	Reply with Analysis	None
Countryside Access Team	Response	Reply with Analysis	None
Prejudgement	None		Response. Our Analysis explains why we remain dissatisfied.
Highways	Response	Concerns about maladministration and other correspondence	None

Cumberland Council has not adequately addressed the complaints nor has Cumberland Council provided timely Tier-2 Responses to all complaints in accordance with the Council’s complaints policy.

The Council’s Request for Quotation (RFQ) for a consultant to assist with the assessment used language that prejudged the assessment outcome so compromising the Council’s assessment. This matter was not adequately addressed in the Council’s Tier-2 Response (see linked documents in the table above).

Additional formal complaints have been raised by others. These include:

a complaint about Environmental Health’s consultation comments on noise impacts
a complaint that the Council did not consult the public on its decision to include the Rockcliffe site as a “Broad Area” suitable for waste developments in the Cumbria Minerals and Waste Local Plan and
a complaint that the Request for Quotation for a permitting consultant communicated that the Council expected a permit to be issued and made inadequate provision to address public concerns.