ENZO HOME  -  HOME

STEPHEN KARL HUNT & DAI RICHARDS

CONVERSATION VIA FACEBOOK MESSENGER & EMAIL

2 March 2021 - to 1 March 2022

 

98.jpg (343298 bytes) 97.jpg (538400 bytes) 96.jpg (630526 bytes) 95.jpg (548258 bytes) 94.jpg (572326 bytes)

 

Dai Richards to Steve Hunt - 2 Mar 2021, 08.16

Hi Steve - I've chatted to a mutual acquaintance about the problem with the contamination in Glynneath and planning problems with the Heol y Glyn site and also your involvement with the FB Group Glynneath News and Views. The acquaintance says you are a good bloke and you wouldn't hide like Simon Knoyle if I asked you a direct question. What I would like to suggest to you is that because we have a personal FB friendship we can have an off the record conversation on FB messenger where we can exchange information and opinions none of which are personal, derogatory or accusational towards each other but are factual and relevant to the conversation. On the other hand if you wanted to talk openly in your role as a councillor or have any other suggestions I am happy to consider these. A conversation between us I believe will be of mutual benefit. Myself, the protection of my family from God knows what has been dumped at the site and you in the saving/and /or furtherance of your political aspirations. I have started uploading videos to youtube on the subject, you may have seen some of them, the first two identify you as part of the corruption coalition related to the planning application. 

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLgZICAvXkAMuWdc-mlXvAE3gWErDt88ZH.

As previously stated my main objective is the protection of my family, my granddaughter was born with a mutation consistent with contamination and so the probability that it has affected other residents and may affect my family in the future remains high. 
You can read more about me here. www.dai-richards.wales  - regards - Dai

14.jpg (479578 bytes)

Steve Hunt to Dai Richards - 2 Mar 2021, 09:59

Stephen Karl Hunt
Thanks for getting in touch and information Dai, I always appreciate openness and happy to ask any difficult questions, Iím honest , straight and open in my opinion of course, I may lack the knowledge of environmental issues as contaminated land and itís affect on people and would rely on those experts in this field, yes I have seen your videoís and I donít believe you have done any justice to your concerns or arguments if Iím honest, to constantly attack and belittle people isnít very clever at all, some of the original comments laid at myself wasnít warranted also, in my opinion of course, I fully understand your frustration and anger but there are better ways of dealing with it in my opinion.
I would fully support any action you need to take to get the answers to contamination on the site in question thatís for sure as I wouldnít want you or anyone else living there to be put at any health risk and if that would be the case then it certainly needs dealing with as a matter of urgency.
Instead of me asking you lots of questions, I will take a look at the links you have shared with me here and get back to you as you suggest to possibly have a chat in person as teams , zoom or in a safe outdoor environment.
Some of the points you originally made were fair, as planning committee members myself included havenít the correct training to understand the whole complexity of planning law, policy especially when it comes to the environment, I continue to ask for further training for members of the planning committee , and actually spoke to the head of legal services about this only last week.
But Iím sure irrespective of your views, evidence we as planning committee members do rely heavily of planning officers and other experts they bring to committee as to provide the evidence needed as for supporting any application and we wouldnít have any reason to doubt their evidence, however we are able to challenge and ask questions as you did in the original planning committee.
I am in the middle of the budget setting currently so can you leave this with me for now, and Iíll get back to you to sort out something as soon as possible because if you have any justification to be concerned then Iím happy to help.

13.jpg (577949 bytes)

Dai Richards to Steve Hunt - 2 Mar 2021, 11:57

Hi Stephen, thanks for taking the time to reply, if you felt that I belittled you personally, I can't remember doing so but I do apologise nevertheless if you felt I did. Maybe we could have a fresh start., once your current commitments are finalised. You may also want to check out the following page on our website which deals with the question you asked the planning department and appeared in the amendments sheet for the meeting in question. I'd be interested to learn what the actual question or questions were so that I can place the answers in true context. I'll wait to hear back from you. - Dai


http://www.walk-around-wales.com/county/npt/glynneath/enzo-development/CCC/rab-deception.htm

11.jpg (196443 bytes) 12.jpg (321253 bytes)

 

Steve Hunt to Dai Richards - 2 Mar 2021, 12:14 - LIKE

 

Dai Richards to Steve Hunt - 21 Jun 2021, 10:31

GLYNNEATH CONTAMINATION MURDERS - I offered you an opportunity to do the right thing but you haven't. The fact that you haven't provided me with the actual question you asked tells me that as with the rest of your council you are corrupt. You'll find yourself on this page in the public domain listed as a corrupt council official. 

http://www.walk-around-wales.com/county/npt/glynneath/enzo-development/my-corrupt-council/corruption/coalition/20210320S-WB-EPA-breach-coalition.htm

10.jpg (501217 bytes)

 

Steve Hunt to Dai Richards - 21 Jun 2021, 11:27

Thanks for this Dai, I can assure you Iím not a corrupt councillor, when we are told not to communicate with you by our head of legal services then thatís something we have to take on board.

However Iím happy to answer any questions as to what I asked at the said meeting and the answers that were received at the time, Iím sure you would know these also as you was in attendance at that meeting.

So Iím not sure what your criticism of me is to be honest, but your entitled to your view and opinion I guess, thanks Steve.

 

 

Dai Richards to Steve Hunt - 21 Jun 2021, 12:36

Your head of legal services is working together with your head of planning to cover up corruption and you have been provided evidence of planning department corruption. You can play dumb if you want but its your job as an elected official to regulate the staff of NPTC. You can turn a blind eye to the social murder of Glynneath residents but it will all come out eventually because while you weren't looking your planning department has rubber stamped the tipping of 21,000 cubic metres of contaminated waste in Powys. after your committee said they would test the land thoroughly. You don't need to answer any questions because I already have the answers. The main one in your case is that you have covered up council malpractice that has caused the deaths of Glynneath residents. 
http://www.walk-around-wales.com/county/npt/glynneath/enzo-development/my-corrupt-council/corruption/coalition/20210320S-WB-EPA-breach-coalition.htm

 

Steve Hunt to Dai Richards - 21 Jun 2021, 13:09

I would never cover up malpractice Dai I can assure you, why havenít you taken your evidence through the proper channels then as Iím sure you can get this council prosecuted if they have done things as you suggested.
I challenge NPTCBC in the best possible way and I might not have your knowledge on specific information, events or historical situations, but I would never allow any community to be put at risk with any health issues I can assure you.
You should be able to take the authority to a judicial review and present all your evidence for a judge to determine what is or isnít on this site once and for all Iím sure.

 

Dai Richards to Steve Hunt - 21 Jun 2021, 13:52

The proper channels I see are Glynneath Town Council and Natural Resources Wales and elected NPTC councillors such as yourself. You are on the planning committee and you have information that the planning department are killing people in Glynneath therefore you are one of the proper channels. Both the Glynneath Town Council and NRW refuse to investigate and their response is to refer us back to NPTC and I have been blocked by the whole of NPTC because of the planning department 
because I've already pointed the finger at them. They've already refused to investigate their own corruption obviously so its councillors like yourself who are elected to regulate them and refuse to investigate planning department corruption that are accountable and I'm drawing the line there. You are part of a corruption coalition whether you like it or not and its up to you to blow the whistle on those initially responsible not me because if you don't the accountability for contamination deaths falls on you. You should take time out to watch this video to see how Steve Ball manipulates you into believing the site is clean.
https://youtu.be/IXqYRlqN2iA

08.jpg (510427 bytes)

Dai Richards to Steve Hunt - 21 Jun 2021, 14:48

You are aware of this act of course which I will refer to again and again.

The Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 (as amended 2013)

The Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 (PIDA) offers protection to workers from any
detriment from their employer that arises from the worker making a Ďprotected disclosureí.
    
To qualify as a Ďprotected disclosureí the disclosure must satisfy a number of requirements under PIDA:

1. The worker must have made a Ďqualifying disclosureí. This is a disclosure of information which, in the reasonable belief of the worker, tends to show one or more of the following:

(a) That a criminal offence has been committed, is being committed, or is likely to be committed
  
(b) That a person has failed, is failing, or is likely to fail to comply with any legal obligation to which he is subject.

(c) That a miscarriage of justice has occurred, is occurring, or is likely to occur
 
(d) That the health and safety of any individual has been, is being, or is likely to be endangered
  
(e) That the environment has been, is being, or is likely to be damaged

(f) That information tending to show any matter falling within any of the preceding paragraphs has been, or is likely to be deliberately
concealed. A disclosure of information is not a qualifying disclosure if the person making it commits a criminal offence in doing so. 

.............that's from the NPTC whistleblowing policy

07.jpg (444426 bytes)

Steve Hunt to Dai Richards 21 Jun 2021, 14.52

Thanks for information Dai, but I still refute your claims that I'm corrupt because I for some reason do not do your bidding, as I said, you as a citizen living in as you say an area of deep concern to your health as because NPTCBC have allowed contaminated waste to be deposited there, you have many other avenues to explore if you feel everyone is corrupt, planners, councillors, NPTCBC as a whole ,NRW , then go directly to Welsh Government or ask for a judicial review as to historical waste dumping on this site, prove your case as I'm sure you would think you will with all the evidence you have, I don't think your contempt you have for us allis the right way to go but that's only my opinion of course, I feel your frustration if you think everyone is blocking you and telling lies etc, but as I said before your an intelligent man, use the system to help you prove your case.

06.jpg (500868 bytes)

  

Dai Richards to Steve Hunt - 21 Jun 2021, 15:23

Nice attempt at avoiding accountability but you are aware of corruption within the planning department and so you have a duty to report this. This legal officer is working with the planning dept and so your duty is to report this to your fellow councillors other than the planning committee. I'll prefer to just let the public know who is corrupt meanwhile you should keep your fingers crossed that Ruth Medic who lives next to the site and Max Boyce don't get ill from contamination related illnesses because that will make you and the rest of your coalition public enemy No 1.

 

Steve Hunt to Dai Richards - 21 Jun 2021, 15:27

Not attempting to do anything just giving you good advice ,raise your concerns above the level of corruption as you see it, remember everyone has a view and right to heard , as do you of course, so if you feel your getting nowhere with this avenue then take it to the higher level, I'm sure you can get to the bottom of any wrong doings that way but I will continue to refute your call as to suggest I am corrupt because I know I'm certainly not.

 

Dai Richards to Steve Hunt - 21 Jun 2021, 16:42

Moral Corruption = Where an official deliberately fails to follow a government's moral values, usually defined by an organisation as 'purpose' and 'values' and a staff 'code of conduct'.

 

RESUME CONVERSATION

Dai Richards to Steve Hunt - 13 Oct 2021, 09.00

Hi again - if you read through this conversation you will note that I've approached you and attempted to negotiate a comprise between our group and the NPTC. I've identified planning department deception for you and you've admitted that you are being pupated by the civil servants at NPTC when your role is to regulate these corrupt officials who are almost certainly causing the death of the people in our street. I've pointed you in the direction of the public disclosure act and I also note that you are chair of the relevant scrutiny committee. To make matters even worse for a future video that is directed towards your actions you refuse to let me join a group that is misrepresented by its title that includes the words 'everyone' Here are the links to 2 videos, one says who I am, the other identifies planning committee malpractice of which of course you are a member. It is not your job to point me to a higher level of a system that is corrupt. It is your job to represent the people. 

https://youtu.be/tvHPn9flfto

https://youtu.be/ViBkhfYK5bU

excuse the typos, I can spell

05.jpg (444533 bytes)

Steve Hunt to Dai Richards - 13 Oct 2021, 12.50

Thanks for information Dai, duly noted , Steve

 

Steve Hunt to Dai Richards - 13 Oct 2021, 14.42

Dear Mr Richards
I thank you for your message and whilst I acknowledging your concerns, I would suggest on this occasion that these are matters which need to be directed to Council officers in general for them to respond to. As a member of the Planning Committee, my role (along with the other elected members) is to determine and consider planning and development applications in Neath Port Talbot. The issues that you raise here are of course significant and I would encourage you to raise these with officers within the Planning Section or more senior officers such as the Director of Environment and Regeneration and the Chief Executive, whose details are available on the Council website but I can gladly provide if that would assist. Alternatively you may wish to refer the matter to the Public Service Ombudsman for Wales (www.ombudsman.wales) or perhaps even South Wales Police given the nature of your concerns. I understand these options have been provided to date. As Chair of the Regeneration and Sustainable Development Scrutiny Committee I can of course make representations to officers and I will ask them to consider the same, and for them to provide you with a response if appropriate, but ultimately given your issue relates to staffing matters the matter does need to be raised with officers of the Council directly. I trust that this will be of assistance in moving forward.
Yours sincerely
Cllr Steve Hunt

04.jpg (516896 bytes)

 

Dai Richards to Steve Hunt - 13 Oct 2021 - 20.57 

Dear Councillor Hunt, if you refer to our corruption coalition page on our website, you will note that officers of the council to which are directing me have committed corrupt actions in relation to the planning process and also the complaints process. I have been blocked from asking further question by council officials who are paid to answer them. Your job as an elected councillor I would assume is to regulate these officials and bring them to account if they fail to do their job. Your refusal to investigate my concerns or at least to undertake due diligence in relation to the information I am providing you is clear evidence that your "I want to help everyone" front is a facade. This video about Ceri Morris, the head of planning and public protection to whom you are pointing me shows a deliberate misrepresentation of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. 
https://youtu.be/ZNR32GjgBqM
It is your job as the chairman of scrutiny committee to investigate such corruption that has almost certainly caused the corporate manslaughter of Glynneath residents. Passing the buck to the ombudsman and the planning department will not bring back these lives and the lives of those who will die because your planning committee have allowed the planning department to bypass the remediation process again on land that has been tested as contaminated. - regards - Dai Richards

03.jpg (537800 bytes)

 

Steve Hunt to Dai Richards - 14 Oct 2021 - 09.00

For your information, I have sent this short email to both the Director of the Environment Nicola Pearce and Head of Planning Ceri Morris and Iím waiting for a response , thanks Steve.

Dear Both
I am of course aware on the longstanding matters concerning Mr Richards and the Heol Y Glyn development at Glynneath. In recent days I have been contacted by Mr Richards requesting my assistance in helping to consider matters, specifically focussing on my remit as the Chair of the Regeneration and Sustainable Development Scrutiny Committee. I am of course aware that planning applications do not fall within this area but aspects of contaminated land I understand do. I wonder therefore whether I could meet with you both to have an understanding of the issues that have developed here. It is concerning of course that Mr Richards is making strong allegations of corruption and inappropriate actions and I wish to understand the basis behind this and what as an authority we are considering. I can then perhaps determine whether there is anything specific that needs to be considered from the scrutiny perspective. I would be grateful to meet with you at your earliest convenienceĒ.
Many thanks Steve.

 

Dai Richards to Steve Hunt - 14 Oct 2021 - 19.17

Thank you, I appreciate you taking the time to do this.

 

Steve Hunt to Dai Richards - 14 Oct 2021 - 21.27

No problem and I will after the responses take it to my scrutiny committee if necessary depending on what they come back with, I have told all officers to invite NRW and Land Contamination experts to the said meeting, I will keep you informed as t9 any progress as I know Nicola Pearce and Planning officers are very busy with backlog of work.

81.jpg (208895 bytes)

 

02.jpg (435642 bytes)

 

Dai Richards to Steve Hunt - 14 Oct 2021 - 21.35

OK thanks again.

 

Dai Richards to Steve Hunt - 28 Oct 2021 - 16.53

Dear Councillor Hunt, I was wondering if there was an update on this, I realise that you have identified that Nicola Pearce and planning officers are busy with a backlog of work, however the contamination exposed by Enzo Homes last October is still potentially affecting the health of Glynneath residents. I refer to the roles of Nicola Pearce and the planning officers Steve Ball and Ceri Morris in the early cover-up of the 2008 identified contamination at the development and would suggest that they will use any excuse possible to prevent being questioned on this subject and so I would suggest to you that you either demand that they meet with you at a specific time and date or engage in correspondence in relation the subject. I'm not sure if you viewed our Planning Committee corruption video which identifies that NPTC have committed Corporate Manslaughter by enabling both the Cuddy Group and Enzo Homes to breach the 1990 Environmental Protection Act. It should be noted that Enzo's actions are potentially causing current Corporate Manslaughter enabled by the planning department, and the recent planning department approval of the movement of 21,000 cubic feet of an area where toxic waste has been reported as dumped will cause more deaths in the future. Here is the link again, just in case you didn't get a chance to view it. 

https://youtu.be/tvHPn9flfto

On a different note, but on the same subject, were you aware that Enzo Homes approached a land owner in Seven Sisters to dump untreated waste there? 

regards - Dai Richards

80.jpg (506412 bytes) 79.jpg (225630 bytes)

  

Steve Hunt to Dai Richards - 28 Oct 2021, 19.24

Hi Dai, I have a meeting with Head of Planning and Director of the Environment and others next Tuesday afternoon and I will be in a position then to update you with further information, if you want to forward me a number of direct questions once more before next Tuesday for answers then forward them to me ok.

01.jpg (517296 bytes)

Dai Richards to Steve Hunt - 28 Oct 2021, 19:50

brilliant - thanks - will the others include NRW?

  

Steve Hunt to Dai Richards - 29 Oct 2021, 00:37

I asked for NRW representative to be at meeting, but I donít see them as listed for the teams meeting, I have sent email to Ceri Morris asking for someone from NRW to be there, by unfortunately Iím not in a position to demand this, hopefully they will agree to my request, as I said, get me some important questions that I can try and get answers for over to me before that meeting if you can, cheers Steve.

 

Dai Richards to Steve Hunt - 29 Oct 2021, 07.08

Thanks Steve - one final question, hopefully. What is the purpose of the meeting, is it one specifically convened to discuss our problem, is it normal council business or other. - Dai

 

Steve Hunt to Dai Richards - 29 Oct 2021, 

The purpose of the meeting is to specifically discuss your issues as you brought them to me in my role as Chairman of Regeneration and Sustainable Development Scrutiny Committee , land contamination falls under my portfolio so my obliged if asked by any member of the public to try and find answers to their questions , even if they as in your case to date are not the answers they are looking for I guess.

So if you bullet point once more some questions as specifically to the land contamination, I will endeavour to get you answers, I suspect they will say or explain they have given you answers previously but Iím prepared to give them a proper grilling on your behalf, I hope that explains the purpose of the meeting, as I do take my job and position very seriously indeed and if Iím able to help residents wherever they live across NPTCBC I will, thanks once more Steve.

 

Dai Richards to Steve Hunt - 29 Oct 2021, 15.04

Thanks again - much appreciated.

  

Steve Hunt to Dai Richards - 29 Oct 2021, 17.39

LIKE 

00z.jpg (287698 bytes)

Dai Richards to Steve Hunt - 31 Oct 2021, 17.02 

Hi Steve - I've attached a .pdf file of the questions + additional info. The pdf basically is a print of a web page I've built to organise the information relating to the questions. This is the link to the page. If you are unsure about anything or if any of the links fail, please contact me. Can you please acknowledge receipt. Thanks again. - Dai


http://www.walk-around-wales.com/county/npt/glynneath/enzo-development/archive/2021/10-2021/20211031S-WB-cllr-hunt-questions5.htm

 

Steve Hunt to Dai Richards - 31 Oct 2021, 23.44 & 23.46

LIKE

Yes thanks for this information and Ceri Morris has acknowledged my email asking for NRW representation to be at meeting, he said he would do his best as he was off and only back in work on Monday.

 

Dai Richards to Steve Hunt - 1 Nov 2021, 08.10

LIKE

 

CONVERSATION BETWEEN STEVE HUNT & DAI RICHARDS ENDS 

At this point, the Glynneath Town Councillor, Jennifer Herbert is copied into the conversation for observation purposes.

 

STEVE HUNT, JENNIFER HERBERT, DAI RICHARDS

Heol y Glyn Development conversation on Facebook Messenger

 

Dai Richards - 1 Nov 2021, 08.07

Hi Steve - that's great thanks, I've added Jennifer Herbert the Glynneath Town Councillor to this message, She's interested to hear the answers. - Dai

Jennifer Herbert - 1 Nov 2021, 08.34

Good morning Dai and Steve, Iíve taken an interest in this Item Steve, because quite frankly nobody else has.

What saddens me the most is, I was talking to a elderly ladyí Iola at Brynhyfryd Ď a couple of months ago, and she told me of the lorries that were dumping at this site (Cudieís) a while back, when they had the contract to dump whatever they were dumping there? 
And for the whole of that summer could not access her garden for the foul smell each time she opened her back door? 
So spent the whole summer! With her elderly husband ( deceased) indoors! and nobody namely Del at the time, looked into this for her? 

Itís alarming to think that this wasnít taken seriously at the time?
Dai Has spent a number of years on this, and Iíve no reason to doubt a lot of went on there because before I became a councillor for GTC, I had heard a few horror stories of Ď The cuddie Group myselfí in other areas of South Wales.

What concerns me, is the ridicule Dai has been subjected to,by members of GTC, Dai has ( rightly so) stood by his convictions, disregarding the hate campaign that was clearly set up against him in GTC.

The least I can do, is try to understand the colossal work he has undergone and unearthed, and support him whichever way I can?
From the mountains of work that Dai has collected on this matter over the years, and the intensity of time committed to this item, itís a travesty to think he isnít being taken seriously?

Is it to outrageous to think that this crime hasnít been committed? I would be blind not to investigate the seriousness of this matter, for all the residents living at that site and beyond.

Dai Richards - 1 Nov 2021, 08.40

Thanks Jennifer, I might add that Iola lives between the PSP victims.

Jennifer Herbert - 1 Nov 2021, 08.45

Thatís correct Dai, what a beautiful person she is, and had nowhere to turn, before you listened to her and others at this site, the least this council can do now, is get ALL the facts in order, and insist that The Borough take it seriously.

Jennifer Herbert - 1 Nov 2021, 09.11

If ĎThe Boroughí are saying that they ď couldnít intervene in the process, because the Planning was underwayĒ? That raises very serious concerns for me?

 

Steve Hunt

I havenít time unfortunately to discuss on here Dai , I have very early this morning sent your web link and all your questions in advance of my personal meeting with Ceri Griffiths , Nicola Pearce and Steve Ball and hopefully a NRW representative, I have meetings all day today with a seven sisters community council meeting tonight so I wonít be active in this chat ok.

Jennifer Herbert

Letís hope they at least hear him out Steve, and do the right thing at least, and give this whole scenario the air time it deserves.

 

Steve Hunt

LIKE

Jennifer Herbert

Letís hope they at least hear him out Steve, and do the right thing at lÖ

 

Steve Hunt - 1 Nov 2021

We will see what they say tomorrow, but this is my meeting as Chairman of Regeration and Sustainable Development Scrutiny Committee Jen as Land Contamination falls under my remit.

Jennifer Herbert

Then I know Dai is in good hands Steve. This is an awful situation for you Steve, but we have to look at the bigger picture, and this whole thing needs scrutiny.

 

 

 

THE MEETING WAS HELD ON 

2nd NOVEMBER 2021

 

 

 

COUNCILLOR STEPHEN K HUNT COMMUNICATION

Questions for the Planning Department at NPTC

All questions are directed to the Head of Planning and Public Protection, Ceri Morris

 

The questions only can be found in this table. Information and illustrations relating to the questions can be found by scrolling down or CLICKING HERE 

Question 1 to Ceri Morris: In an email dated 4/5 2020 you stated that:

"Turning specifically to the issue of land contamination at the site and whether the Council has historically contravened the Environmental Protection Act 1990, I would advise that this legislation no longer applies when a site is going through the planning process; by definition therefore the Council has not at any point contravened its duties under this legislation, as it is not relevant once the planning process has commenced."

Please can you supply evidence that the council followed the Contaminated Land Strategy process in relation to the contamination identified in the 2008 chemical testing and human health risk assessment at the Heol y Glyn landfill. The UK law the Environmental Protection Act required either testing the site further to establish whether or not the site was a special site or remediation of the land as suggested in the human health risk assessment and the council Contaminated Land Strategy?

Question 2 to Ceri Morris: Why was the information relating to the chemical testing of the site withheld from the planning application P2020/0863?

Question 3 to Ceri Morris: Why were the WAC (Waste Acceptance Criteria) Tests on the removed spoil heap not included as part of the application P2020/0863? 

Question 4 to Ceri Morris : The chemical testing submitted for P2021/0546 suggests a form of remediation is necessary for this area of the development and 6 out of the 7 trial pits have been found to contain at least 1 contaminant. If remediation is necessary and the results of the testing show some of the carcinogens and mutagens to be nearly 9 times above the safety guidelines. Why is the human health risk assessment missing from this document? 

Question 5 to Ceri Morris: The TP1-6 shallow sample result is missing on the test results submitted for P2021/0546, Why?

 

QUESTION 1 - RELATING TO THE HISTORICAL BREACH OF THE 1990 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT 

Overview and background information relating to the question: The planning department are attempting to cover up historical malpractice where they colluded with the Cuddy Group to hide contamination and a human health risk assessment in a series of planning applications between the period 2008 and 2010. This malpractice breached the 1990 Environmental Protection Act and the planning department are trying to hide this. Evidence was submitted to the Neath-Port Talbot Council Planning Committee and the Glynneath County Councillors Del Morgan and Simon Knoyle on 7/9/2020 in the below document and to date no counter evidence has been provided by the council to refute the allegation that the council colluded with the Cuddy Group Ltd to hide contamination at the Heol y Glyn development.

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE EGRAC 1990 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION ACT BREACH REPORT

CLICK HERE TO SEE THIS DOCUMENT AS A YOUTUBE VIDEO

Subsequent to this document being submitted to the NPT Council planning committee a second member of our residents group died from an extremely rare neurodegenerative disorder PSP that has been linked to Arsenic. The residents lived 5 doors apart and at the closest proximity to the site. Our 1990 EPA breach document provides evidence that an above safe level of the contaminant Arsenic was found at the site and left un-remediated against the advice of the human health risk assessment submitted to NPTC. A second document was created on 1 May 2021 and submitted to Natural Resources Wales, Glynneath Town Council and Neath-Port Talbot Council that contained this information and reached the following conclusion:

ďResidents of Brynhyfryd are dying from the rare neurological disorder Progressive Supranuclear Palsy. These deaths are almost certainly due to specified and other probable unspecified contamination tipped at the Heol y Glyn landfill site. Public officers who have covered up this contamination are potentially responsible for the unlawful killing of these residents.Ē

Document 1 provides the cause and Document 2 shows the effect. 

To date no counter evidence has been provided by the council in relation to either document to refute the allegation that public officers at Neath-Port Talbot Council are responsible for the deaths of Brynhyfryd residents. 

CLICK HERE TO VIEW THE EGRAC PSP REPORT

CLICK TO SEE THIS DOCUMENT AS A YOUTUBE VIDEO 

00v.jpg (332749 bytes) 96-human-health-7-1-risk-as.gif (510303 bytes) 84.jpg (431147 bytes) 39-UKLEA-contam-montage-mar.jpg (295836 bytes) 96.jpg (137746 bytes)

Question to Ceri Morris: In an email dated 4/5 2020 you stated that:

"Turning specifically to the issue of land contamination at the site and whether the Council has historically contravened the Environmental Protection Act 1990, I would advise that this legislation no longer applies when a site is going through the planning process; by definition therefore the Council has not at any point contravened its duties under this legislation, as it is not relevant once the planning process has commenced."

Please can you supply evidence that the council followed the Contaminated Land Strategy process in relation to the contamination identified in the 2008 chemical testing and human health risk assessment at the Heol y Glyn landfill. The UK law the Environmental Protection Act required either testing the site further to establish whether or not the site was a special site or remediation of the land as suggested in the human health risk assessment and the council Contaminated Land Strategy? (End of question) 

The reason we ask this question is because: This statement by Ceri Morris is a deliberate misrepresentation of a UK Government law, his responsibilities include upholding this law within the county borough of Neath-Port Talbot. 

CLICK HERE FOR THE ORIGINAL DOCUMENT WRITTEN BY CERI MORRIS

CLICK HERE FOR A YOUTUBE VIDEO THAT EXPLAINS THIS INCIDENT IN GREATER DETAIL

Additional Notes 1: The Contaminated Land Officer identified that the testing in 2008 was inadequate during the planning committee meeting of 8/9/2020. 

Additional Notes 2: Failure to provide evidence of correct contaminated land protocol by the developer Cuddy Group Ltd. means that the council planning department worked together with the Cuddy Group Ltd to avoid the correct contaminated land protocol as required UK Government law, the 1990 Environmental Protection Act.

 

 

QUESTION RELATING TO THE PLANNING APPROVAL P2020/0863

http://appsportal.npt.gov.uk/ords/idocs12/f?p=Planning:2:0::NO::P2_REFERENCE:P2020/0863

CHEMICAL TESTING

Overview and background information relating to the question: To avoid accountability for potentially causing the death of Glynneath residents, the planning department are enabling developers to remove the toxic waste tipped at the site which will enable them to then test the natural ground and find the ground to be suitably uncontaminated as one would expect with natural ground.

The following document relates to the testing of the contamination at the Heol y Glyn landfill site and has been submitted to NPTC as part of the application for P2021/0546 (Heol y Glyn Development) by Enzo Homes. 

http://www.walk-around-wales.com/county/npt/glynneath/enzo-development/2021-06-plans/p2021-0546-01-chemical-testing.pdf

The document shows chemical testing that took place on 13 October 2020 and the Geotechnical advisor to Enzo Homes, Terra Firma (Wales) Ltd have dated their transfer of this information to their contact at Enzo Homes, Mr Enzo Sauro, 3 November 2020.

If we refer to planning application P2020/0863 registered on 12 October 2020 and submitted on the day before the chemical testing, we will see that it was passed by the planning department on the 16 March 2021. This information was therefore available to consider as part of this application which was passed by the planning department on 16 March 2021 without having gone through the planning committee. If we look at the area of testing within the site you will note from our estimation of the area tested that the majority of the tested area contains soil from the spoil heap. Of the 7 trial pits in the published test results 6 of the pits were found to be contaminated.

17-chem-testing.jpg (999687 bytes) 69.jpg (412139 bytes)

Area 1: in red is an area of spoil heap within the testing area.

Area 2: in blue is soil removed from the spoil heap and spread over the ground to achieve an even gradient.

Area 3: in maroon is the area of spoil heap that was required to be tested prior to the approval of P2020/0863 but is now free to be removed from the site and also moved towards the boundaries of the residents of Brynhyfryd to fill in the stream and create an even gradient.

Question to Ceri Morris: Why was the information relating to the chemical testing of the site withheld from the planning application P2020/0863? (End of question) 

The reason we ask this question is because: This information is crucial to the planning application because it identifies that the spoil heap is contaminated with 6 out 7 trial pits testing as contaminated.

Additional Notes: Linked to the next question.

 

QUESTION RELATING TO THE PLANNING APPROVAL P2020/0863

http://appsportal.npt.gov.uk/ords/idocs12/f?p=Planning:2:0::NO::P2_REFERENCE:P2020/0863

WASTE ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA INFORMATION 

Overview and background information relating to the question: Councillor Simon Knoyle has posted the following information on his Councillor Facebook page which he uses to make NPTC and Glynneath Town Council announcements. 

"I was provided with a copy of the WAC (Waste Acceptance Criteria) Tests which were carried out on 7th October 2020" 

16-document.jpg (286980 bytes)

(image above, the results of the test have been redacted by Councillor Knoyle to avoid public scrutiny)

Question to Ceri Morris: Why were the WAC (Waste Acceptance Criteria) Tests on the removed spoil heap not included as part of the application P2020/0863? (End of question) 

The reason we ask this question is because: These results are more than relevant to the application, they are of paramount importance and if Simon Knoyle, the Neath-Port Talbot Council Glynneath Councillor was in possession of this information then it was clearly available to the Neath-Port Talbot Council Planning Department.

Additional Notes: Councillor Simon Knoyle has refused to communicate with our group since April 2020. Councillor Knoyle runs a construction industry consultancy, SAK Consulting and has been seen on the site working with Enzo Sauro on more than one occasion and is recorded as supporting this application to remove the spoil heap without testing.

 

HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT

QUESTION RELATING TO THE PLANNING APPLICATION P2021/0546

https://planningonline.npt.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?keyVal=QTB8NLKZMQP00&activeTab=summary

HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT

Overview and background information relating to the question: There are several corruption indicators identified that suggest the chemical testing results supplied for P2021/0546 have been tampered with and are not a fair representation of the level of contamination found at the site. 

Question to Ceri Morris : The chemical testing submitted for P2021/0546 suggests a form of remediation is necessary for this area of the development and 6 out of the 7 trial pits have been found to contain at least 1 contaminant. If remediation is necessary and the results of the testing show some of the carcinogens and mutagens to be nearly 9 times above the safety guidelines. Why is the human health risk assessment missing from this document? (End of question) 

The reason we ask this question is because: 20% of properties with long term occupancy that border the site have had a death from a neurodegenerative disorder in the last 5 years. Our figures show that this is 112 times above the national average. 

Additional Notes: Linked to next question.

 

QUESTION RELATING TO THE PLANNING APPLICATION P2021/0546

https://planningonline.npt.gov.uk/online-applications/applicationDetails.do?keyVal=QTB8NLKZMQP00&activeTab=summary

INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THE CHEMICAL TESTING DOCUMENT

Overview and background information relating to the question: If we refer to the text in the chemical testing report dated 3 November 2020 we will see that: 

'Shallow soil samples were taken from the top 600mm and in addition, deeper samples were collected to ascertain the nature of the deeper soils.' 

73-chem2.jpg (316978 bytes)

Then if we refer to the testing samples we will see that TP1-6 shallow sample is missing. If the deeper sample is contained on the spreadsheet then the shallow sample must have been submitted to the testing agent because it is inconceivable that they would start a trial pit and abandon the top layer as unsuitable once the pit is completed. If the top layer was unsuitable for testing, the trial pit would not have been started or it would have been abandoned as unsuitable at an early stage. 

Our interpretation of the text in the document is that 14 samples were submitted, however only 11 samples have been recorded on the document which was compiled by Terra Firma (Wales) Ltd on 3 November 2020. 

71.jpg (214232 bytes)

If we refer to the results of the test on the lower level we will see that the greatest concentration of contamination can be found in this trial pit. If we then refer to the sequencing of the other tests we will see that in the majority, the contamination is in the top layer of the soil. It is therefore probable that the contamination in the top layer of TP1-6 was of a greater concentration than the lower level test. If we refer to the spreadsheet in the document we will see green triangles on some squares. 

72-chem.jpg (288493 bytes)

This indicates that the test results have potentially been tampered with.

Question to Ceri Morris: The TP1-6 shallow sample result is missing on the test results submitted for P2021/0546, Why? (End of question) 

The reason we ask this question is because: This is only one incidence of a 'corruption indicator' that we have found in these results. 

 

COUNCILLOR HUNT RESPONSE POST MEETING

   

Hi Dai, sorry I have not got back to you after the meeting as I am waiting for further information from officers at that meeting I asked for and to answer the questions I gave them from you and some of my own.
I havenít to date received any further correspondence or information yet, but Iím not going to lie to you on how the meeting went as it was highly charged , Nicola Pearce Director of the Environment joined the meeting late , at the meeting was Calvin Davies Environmental Health Team Leader, Ceri Morris Head Of Planning & Public Protection and Steve Ball Development Manager - Planning, there was no representative from NRW but apologies were given as I asked for these representatives late apparently.

They listened to everything I had to say in my capacity as chair of regeneration and Sustainable Development Scrutiny Committee where contaminated land falls under.

They as in different speakers during the meeting were singing from the same hymn sheet as they say, explaining to me that all the questions I have given them on Tuesday and your Web Link questions have already been answered to yourself in full.

They gave me assurances that no work will start on the site until the new owners satisfy planning that the necessary work and information would need to be given and that is including land contamination survey , they did state that and this came from Calvin and Steve Ball that , I think they presumed that you or others would want the whole site excavated to determine the land contamination that is on the said site, this isnít achievable but they would follow the legal practices to make sure the site is safe with various bore holes if needed, they also went onto say that not all contamination is a health risk or harmful to the environment or people and in certain circumstances these contaminates can stay on site and be treated appropriately within health and safety guidelines set out by NRW and Welsh Government.

They said that they certainly would not put peopleís health at risk if giving any permission to build on this site, Mr Ball said an awful lot more as did Nicola, Calvin , Ceri but continued to say that they would not give me answers to all your questions as they have done this before, so I asked for a copy of the answers or responses to you on these questions , but Iím not sure if they going to get these to me anytime soon.

They also felt that you havenít listened to their responses and if you was still not happy then you should gather all your evidence and give it to the Public Ombudsman for further consideration.

We went around in circles after that, as I maintained I needed answers to your questions and they saying they answered them but your coming back with more, and some threats I believe was mentioned also from you to officers?

As I said Dai, Iím waiting for full response from them currently and will give you a copy, what I have written here is my take on how the meeting went with honesty , they might even dispute my findings but I like you would not want anyoneís health to be put at risk with any contamination that is a health hazard on that site.

Iím also aware and mentioned Cuddy and his way of working during the site in question but I havenít any proof of that of course, I also for your information that they are well aware of and that was Howard Rees and contamination of the land by him in Rheola , they all went quiet then, but stated they are aware of that situation and speaking to the possible developer at that site to deal with contamination there also, but again stating that it doesnít always be needed to be removed.

Iím sorry this isnít more positive information, but I will continue in my capacity to make sure the site in question does not cause any health problems for you or the residents living close to the site, I am a one man band however and not sure how much influence I have on this local authority Iím sorry to say.

I know I got around the roundabout in answering you, but itís only what I took from the meeting but I might have missed something sorry, as soon as I get an official response from officers I will send it to you ok.

 

STEVE HUNT & DAI RICHARDS CONVERSATION 

(with JENNIFER HERBERT observing)

POST SCRUTINY CHAIR MEETING

(Regeneration and Sustainable Development Scrutiny Committee)

PRECEDING CONVERSATION  -  END OF CONVERSATION / THIS PAGE

Following on from questions presented to the a group of NPTC staff including Steve Ball, Ceri Morris and Nicola Pearce. - CLICK HERE Councillor's Hunt & Herbert picked up on our FB messenger conversation. 

 

Dai Richards - 5 Nov 2021, 12.02

Hi Steve, would it be possible to have an update following Tuesday's meeting please? - Dai

Steve Hunt - 5 Nov 2021, 13.29  (20211105A-PM-SKHU - ANALYSIS - CLICK HERE)

Hi Dai, sorry I have not got back to you after the meeting as I am waiting for further information from officers at that meeting I asked for and to answer the questions I gave them from you and some of my own.
I havenít to date received any further correspondence or information yet, but Iím not going to lie to you on how the meeting went as it was highly charged , Nicola Pearce Director of the Environment joined the meeting late , at the meeting was Calvin Davies Environmental Health Team Leader, Ceri Morris 
Head Of Planning & Public Protection and Steve Ball 
Development Manager - Planning, there was no representative from NRW but apologies were given as I asked for these representatives late apparently.

They listened to everything I had to say in my capacity as chair of regeneration and Sustainable Development Scrutiny Committee where contaminated land falls under.

They as in different speakers during the meeting were singing from the same hymn sheet as they say, explaining to me that all the questions I have given them on Tuesday and your Web Link questions have already been answered to yourself in full.

They gave me assurances that no work will start on the site until the new owners satisfy planning that the necessary work and information would need to be given and that is including land contamination survey , they did state that and this came from Calvin and Steve Ball that , I think they presumed that you or others would want the whole site excavated to determine the land contamination that is on the said site, this isnít achievable but they would follow the legal practices to make sure the site is safe with various bore holes if needed, they also went onto say that not all contamination is a health risk or harmful to the environment or people and in certain circumstances these contaminates can stay on site and be treated appropriately within health and safety guidelines set out by NRW and Welsh Government.

They said that they certainly would not put peopleís health at risk if giving any permission to build on this site, Mr Ball said an awful lot more as did Nicola, Calvin , Ceri but continued to say that they would not give me answers to all your questions as they have done this before, so I asked for a copy of the answers or responses to you on these questions , but Iím not sure if they going to get these to me anytime soon.

They also felt that you havenít listened to their responses and if you was still not happy then you should gather all your evidence and give it to the Public Ombudsman for further consideration.

We went around in circles after that, as I maintained I needed answers to your questions and they saying they answered them but your coming back with more, and some threats I believe was mentioned also from you to officers?

As I said Dai, Iím waiting for full response from them currently and will give you a copy, what I have written here is my take on how the meeting went with honesty , they might even dispute my findings but I like you would not want anyoneís health to be put at risk with any contamination that is a health hazard on that site.

Iím also aware and mentioned Cuddy and his way of working during the site in question but I havenít any proof of that of course, I also for your information that they are well aware of and that was Howard Rees and contamination of the land by him in Rheola , they all went quiet then, but stated they are aware of that situation and speaking to the possible developer at that site to deal with contamination there also, but again stating that it doesnít always be needed to be removed.

Iím sorry this isnít more positive information, but I will continue in my capacity to make sure the site in question does not cause any health problems for you or the residents living close to the site, I am a one man band however and not sure how much influence I have on this local authority Iím sorry to say.

I know I got around the roundabout in answering you, but itís only what I took from the meeting but I might have missed something sorry, as soon as I get an official response from officers I will send it to you ok.

65.jpg (897466 bytes)

 

 

Dai Richards - 5 Nov 2021, 14.01

Steve - thanks for the reply and info, if you could press for the official response please that would be great. Thanks again. - Dai

Steve Hunt - 5 Nov 2021, 14.29

LIKE

Dai Richards - 24 Nov 2021, 09.13

Hi Steve - can we move forward on this now please, the PD are not going to answer the questions because they are covering up the historical Corporate Manslaughter of people in my street with the intention to continue this practice and place the residents in further danger to cover their tracks. The answers to our questions will provide you with evidence of this and so they have attempted to discredit me verbally but when it comes to committing information that can be recorded on file they will not oblige. It is not my intention and never has been to target you, all I ask is that you and your fellow councillors do the jobs they are elected to do, that is to regulate and scrutinise the actions of the civil servants employed by the authority. The main cause of this problem is Steve Ball, everyone else is supporting his deception and refusal to follow protocol. It was of interest to us that the Contaminated Land Officer was not present at the meeting you had and considering the meeting was about contamination that to me seems strange. We need to move forward now at my end because there is toxic waste on the surface at the site that is potentially affecting people and plans have already been passed to move toxic waste closer to our houses. I'm sure that following the meeting you've had time to think about the actions of the group you met with and are concerned about their motives in refusing to answer simple relevant questions. I'll be happy to support you and any other councilllors with information and/or analysis of the actions of the PD should you require it. - Dai

Jennifer Herbert - 24 Nov 2021, 10.24

Morning Steve,
I would also like to add to Mr Richards concerns, that I have repeatedly tried to support him in council, and the barrage of abuse against his character, he claims here, is very real.
This isnít just 1 person wanting answers, there are countless residents in support of Mr Richards, wanting to get to the bottom of why Cuddy was even allowed to dump waste there in the first place? And Iím one of them.
And I have to be honest with you Steve, the more Iím hearing about the lack of interest shown by GTC and also Steve ball, to why they wonít do the Ď Proper investigationí or if they have? Show the true results?
The more people will keep asking.

I will support Mr Richards in any which way I can, because that is what I was elected to do, and if for any reason I find any information hidden from this investigation, or even think that There are more questions to be asked, I will more than happy oblige.
There are bigger risks at stake here,than us failing to get involved, from what Iíve read/heard, Glynneath residents will be paying a very high price, if we donít do everything we can right now, to uncover anything that is deemed toxic at Heol Y Glyn.

I myself have been ridiculed by certain councillors for even acknowledging Mr Richardís, but I know Iím made of stronger thread than most of them, so their actions will not deter me from asking awkward questions which they are trying their hardest to deflect from.

If, everything possible has been done to uncover any contamination at this site, then why canít we see the information? Itís a simple ask really, and surely itís better to produce that, than continue with the pressure of constant questions.

 

Steve Hunt

Hi Both, 
Sorry for delay in getting back to you with any response and information, but Iím relying on the heads of services to provide me with the information I gave them if Iím honest.

I will chase this up again today, but Iím not sure as you eluded to previously Dai if they going to respond in full to yours and my questions, as I previously mentioned that at the meeting they stated they had responded to you on the points you raised previously , I will as I said chase this up again today also to see what else can be achieved at this time.
They did tell me to tell you to take all your concerns to the Public Ombudsman also, of which I think you should of course, and point out the lack of response from NPTCBC in answering your specific questions with the ombudsman also.

You can also request a FOI from the Council for unanswered questions also, again if Iím hitting a brick �� wall then that should also be done in my opinion.

I will send your comments to them again today or tomorrow when I have time to see what they respond with, I agree that they promised to get back to me sooner than this previously so Iím not sure where they are with this, possibly still finding out any further information, sorry about the delay , as I said i will chase this up as a matter of urgency.

For your information though and please do not share as of yet, but Steve Ball is leaving the council middle of December to take up a new job back where he came from is my understanding, cheers Steve.

 

Dai Richards to Steve Hunt & Jennifer Herbert - 21 Dec 2021 - 10.10 ( 20211221A-PM-RICD-to-SKHU-meeting)

Hi Steve and Jennifer - I hope you are both well and looking forward to the Christmas break.

I still haven't heard back from you Steve about the questions you asked the Head of Planning so I will be starting to take action in relation to the information already received from you as regards the meeting sooner, rather than later. Some of the relevant points from our previous conversations are as follows:

On the 24 November you mentioned that I should put in a FOI to the council. You will remember of course that I provided you with an FOI on the 25 October 2020 which you passed on to the Head of Planning Ceri Morris to action. The links for these communications can be found below. 

http://www.walk-around-wales.com/county/npt/glynneath/enzo-development/archive/2021/06-2021/20210607R-EM-20201025A-EM-PCOM-foi.pdf

http://www.walk-around-wales.com/county/npt/glynneath/enzo-development/archive/2021/06-2021/20210607R-20201102A-LE-NPTC-PCOM-response.pdf

The result of this FOI / Council purpose communication was that I was identified as a vexatious complainant and blocked from asking further questions of the council. this is still the case. The fact that I was ushered into the complaints process while requesting information, before I even complained, and since have only complained once, and this complaint was ignored, is of course of no relevance to the Planning Department. They have blocked me in the knowledge that the Ombudsman complaints service will look at service issues and not the finer detail of the subject matter. The Ombudsman is not a democratically elected service and I do not pay my council tax to him. My actions for the foreseeable future will remain directed towards staff within the council and those elected to regulate their actions (NPTCBC Councillors). 

If we refer to the 5 questions you asked at the 2 November meeting on our behalf. The correct answers to the questions will of course have provided you with evidence of gross misconduct by the Head of Planning and Public Protection and also the potential current and future Corporate Manslaughter of Glynneath residents by the actions of the Planning Department who are using developers to cover up their past malpractice. As the Chair of the relevant Scrutiny Committee, I believe this is what you should be concerning yourself with now. In particular you should pay special attention to the last 4 questions I asked and the reasons why I asked them which are detailed on the page which I have previously sent a link to.

http://www.walk-around-wales.com/county/npt/glynneath/enzo-development/archive/2021/10-2021/20211031S-WB-cllr-hunt-questions5.htm

On the 5 November 2021 you said about the meeting (on 2 November) that.......... "Mr Ball said an awful lot more as did Nicola, Calvin , Ceri but continued to say that they would not give me answers to all your questions as they have done this before, so I asked for a copy of the answers or responses to you on these questions."

I take this to mean that you wanted the Planning Department to provide you with proof that you they had already answered my  questions. This is of course impossible because 2 of the questions relate to a planning application approved in March 2021 and the other 2 questions, to a pending planning application. This being the case I would expect you to scrutinize the relevant information or lack of it within these applications because it relates to contamination and the laws that govern contaminated land. If you fail to get this information from the planning department then I would expect you to scrutinize this in a meeting that is available for viewing by the public.   

I have a new number for you:

 125,000,000 : 1 (One hundred and twenty five million to one)

Those are the odds for two people in a random group of 20 people dying in a period of two years from the rare neurodegenerative disorder Progressive Supranuclear Palsy.

This has happened in our group since we first made representations to the NPTCBC in 2016. Two of our group have died from this rare neurodegenerative disorder in the period November 2018 to December 2020. Progressive Supranuclear Palsy has been linked to the contaminant Arsenic which was found to exceed recognised safety guidelines in 2008. The chances of this happening are 1 in 125,000,000.

On the 14 October 2021 you said - "No problem and I will after the responses take it to my scrutiny committee if necessary depending on what they come back with, I have told all officers to invite NRW and Land Contamination experts to the said meeting". 

I have already noted that there were no Land Contamination experts at the meeting which was unusual considering the meeting was about land contamination. 

On the 29 October 2021 you said - "The purpose of the meeting (2 November 2021) is to specifically discuss your issues as you brought them to me in my role as Chairman of Regeneration and Sustainable Development Scrutiny Committee , land contamination falls under my portfolio so my obliged if asked by any member of the public to try and find answers to their questions.................. I hope that explains the purpose of the meeting, as I do take my job and position very seriously indeed and if Iím able to help residents wherever they live across NPTCBC I will."

On the 1 November 2021 - you said to Jennifer: - "We will see what they say tomorrow, but this is my meeting as Chairman of Regeneration and Sustainable Development Scrutiny Committee Jen as Land Contamination falls under my remit."

and Jennifer replied to you saying  "Then I know Dai is in good hands Steve. This is an awful situation for you Steve, but we have to look at the bigger picture, and this whole thing needs scrutiny."

If we refer back to 2 March 2021, you said "I would fully support any action you need to take to get the answers to contamination on the site in question thatís for sure as I wouldnít want you or anyone else living there to be put at any health risk and if that would be the case then it certainly needs dealing with as a matter of urgency."

Steve - if I refer you to that last word 'urgency' and the date 2nd March I think we would both agree that in the last 9 months I have placed enough information into the public domain that identifies corruption within the NPTCBC Planning and Public Protection Department in particular their actions relating to Contaminated Land at the Heol y Glyn Development. I believe that you as Chairman of Regeneration and Sustainable Development Scrutiny Committee should be seriously concerned about this especially as you have been implicated in your role as a member of the Planning Committee. 

It should be noted that I have offered NPTCBC the opportunity to challenge my analysis and the only response I have had is to be lied to, blocked and identified as vexatious. I may have made you aware previously of my support team of three PhD academics currently working in the chemical and health and safety industries, I am not a one man band. I have these academics as support when required and the backing of the residents in my group who are still dying at an alarming rate.

I realise that what I am asking you to do is a difficult and unpleasant task, we noted the difference in your level of confidence before and after the meeting with the 'cover up coalition', you sounded as though you had taken a beating. However, you did the right thing in questioning them and you must continue to do the right thing because the residents of this area are depending on your honesty and integrity to potentially save their lives. Jennifer is confident, as am I that you will do the right thing for the people of this area. Again, I offer you my support in helping you achieve this. This communication is not intended to attack you, but to support you in your role as a NPTCBC Scrutiny Chair supporting a community under attack by unscrupulous developers and a coalition of corrupt public officials.

Please note that there is toxic waste on the surface at the site that is potentially affecting people and plans have already been passed to move toxic waste closer to our houses, The council are also without a published human health risk assessment as required by the Contaminated Land Strategy.    

If we refer again back to 2 March 2021, you said .......... "I wouldnít want you or anyone else living there to be put at any health risk and if that would be the case then it certainly needs dealing with as a matter of urgency."

It is 7 weeks today since the meeting. Can I now ask of you now to  "deal with this as a matter of urgency" PLEASE - Dai

 

92.jpg (686041 bytes)

Steve Hunt - 21 Dec 2021 - 13.48 (20211221A-PM-SKHU)

Sorry Dai i havnt got back to you with answers to your questions but this is completely the officers fault and the Director of the Environment Nicola Pearce ,I'm sure your aware that Steve Ball the planning development officer has left the authority last Friday, I have for your information in an online meeting in front of all officers and chief executive criticised the time we are all waiting for responses and asking should we councillors use the FOI system to get answers and I used that opportunity to say I have been waiting for months for a reply to my questions as on your behalf, Nicola was quick to send me an email to ask what I was referring to so I told her and she said she will rattle a few cages to get me the response to the questions I seeked, I am still waiting of course and as officers are dropping like flies I doubt if I'll have anything before Christmas now, I would put a FOI into the council yourself if I was you , or you can still leave me to try and get some answers, your call ok.
Sorry about this but I'm in same place as you waiting for them I guess , have a good Christmas though , catch up soon Steve

 

Dai Richards - 21 Dec 2021 - 14.41

Steve - thanks for the reply, - can you identify for me what meeting that was please, I'm not doubting that you asked this, I would like to have the information for my records and your identification will save me a ton of time looking for it. Thanks again for your help in this matter. Have a great Xmas and new year - Dai

Steve Hunt - 21 Dec 2021 - 15.33

The meeting wasnít a scrutiny meeting but one I called for with officers to deal with your questions as was previously put to NPTCBC also.
In attendance was Steve Ball Development and Control Officer, Head of Planning Ceri Morris , Environmental officers Calvin Davies and Nicola Pearce Director of the environment but she joined the meeting late.
I will need to go back if itís still in the system Dai to give you the date Iím afraid , but I will see for you ok, it was a meeting I asked for with officers in my role as Chairman of Regeneration and Sustainable Development Scrutiny Committee of which land contamination falls under, and as you asked me to get answers to your questions thatís what I attempted to achieve , without success it would seem.
But as I mentioned I did recently embarrass the Director with FOI for councillors to as create an email and response to me which was in reference to your questions , have a good Christmas �� yourself with friends and family ok.

Dai Richards - 21 Dec 2021

Hi Steve, further to today's conversation, I'm happy to wait for you to chase up the answers to those questions. The meeting I wanted a date for was the one you mention here 

"But as I mentioned I did recently embarrass the Director with FOI for councillors to as create an email and response to me which was in reference to your questions"

You mentioned this was an on-line one and as such I have assumed it is a public one that is available to view on the council's YouTube channel. - Dai

Steve Hunt

Ah got you now, it was a seminar and wasnít recorded for public viewing sorry, only recorded for members who could not make the meeting to view , so no itís not on YouTube Iím afraid.

Dai Richards

Steve - great, just to confirm that I'm happy to wait for you to chase up the answers to those questions. - Dai

91.jpg (433383 bytes)

Steve Hunt

Hi Both, Iím terribly sorry this has taken so long, but it wasnít a lack of trying on my part I can assure you, you are aware that Steve Ball has left the authority now as well, and he was one of the main planning officers as in Development and Control officer.

I have been contacting Head of planning and director of the environment for answers that you previously asked me @Dai Richards and others I posed as well, Iím not sure if we are going to get the substantive response you require , but see below Nicolaís response to my recent email.

Dear Cllr Hunt,

My apologies that you havenít had a substantive response on this yet. You will appreciate that work pressures are more acute than normal for us within the Directorate, with staff shortages and multiple emergencies to handle in addition to the normal business as normal workloads.

As stated in the email below I wasnít in the majority of the meeting you held with Ceri as I was double booked in my diary. Ceri has confirmed that it was agreed that officers would provide an overall update regarding this site, as opposed to answering all of Mr Richardsí concerns given that we have been in detailed written communications with him for some time now and we are effectively repeating ourselves.

Ceri has confirmed that this overall update will be finalised this week and forwarded to you as soon as possible thereafter. I hope that this is acceptable and apologise that it is taking so long, but as I said earlier, it is exceptionally busy at the moment.

Kind regards

Nicola

44.jpg (472955 bytes)

Jennifer Herbert

Thanks for your work on this Stephen. And a happy new year to you.

Since I last spoke with you, the Heol Y Glyn site , has attracted a great deal of attention from residents in Glynneath, it is gaining momentum ( as in questions being asked) and the borough should be made aware of this, People are scared Stephen, and need certainty of the levels of contamination there.
I have pledged my alliance to this group, as it was clear to me, there has been NO thorough investigation into the contamination there. ( none that confirms for sure itís levels of contamination).

The 20 tonnes of top soil taken away from this site ( before being tested) adds further question marks.
I am hoping the borough wonít fail us with their findings, as this matter needs urgent attention.

Thanks Jenni.

Dai Richards

Hi Steve - the reply from Nicola Pearce is unacceptable as far as I'm concerned, I don't need an update on the site, I can see it from my house and nothing is happening there. I would like answers to relevant questions that have been asked of public officers who are paid to answer them. Rather than bleating about overwork Nicola Pearce should prioritise important relevant questions that could save lives. Steve Ball and Ceri Morris have done nothing but fabricate information and use methods of deception to avoid providing truthful answers in relation to the contamination and the site in general since I first started dealing with them in March 2020, even then they refused to answer further questions and blocked me completely in October 2020. What she is proposing will produce exactly the same results. The 5 questions I have asked are relevant to the planning process and 4 of them relate to planning applications approved or submitted since I was blocked in October 2020. Nicola Pearce was guilty of covering up Steve Ball's corrupt activities early on in the planning process, she is not to be trusted.

The chemical testing document for the current contamination on the site stinks of being tampered with and I have evidence of the planning department tampering with similar documents submitted by specialists that do not suit their objective. There should be a human health risk assessment submitted with the chemical testing, there is not. Where is the human health risk assessment? People are dying living next to the site and nobody gives a shit about them. There needs to be a human health risk assessment and it needs to be submitted. This is a priority and the Contaminated Land Strategy says there should be one.  Please stick to your guns Steve, and please keep asking  the questions, they are relevant to the planning process and they need to be answered by the planning department. Please insist that they answer them or provide evidence that they have answered them previously. - Dai
  
Steve one last note, when Nicola Pearce says "as opposed to answering all of Mr Richardsí concerns given that we have been in detailed written communications with him for some time now and we are effectively repeating ourselves." she's lying to you. I would suggest that you push her for proof of this.

Steve Hunt

Thanks for this information and I will certainly relate back to her once more as to what information she or her colleagues have already given you as Iím pretty much in the dark with all of this correspondence, if you have any from Steve Ball , Ceri Morris or Nicola Pearce can you send it to me please.
I will be watching the site carefully in my own right , I understand your children are in the field of chemists or something like that? 
Is that true, are you able to use them to get a report if there is air pollution on the site, as the strongest evidence is hard copies , written proof , your an intelligent man, so you know not all contaminates are dangerous of course , but I like you would not want to risk anyones health living in close proximity of the site in question thatís for sure, as I said happy to keep asking the questions for you and others of course.
Maybe if you send me just two questions at a time we can get somewhere , just a thought , send me a couple of questions after I get you the response that Nicola mentioned end of week , and Iíll bounce them back , if they answer them, I can then ask a couple more, �� a different way of skinning a cat ��‍⬛ as they say, but you might not like their responses though.
Have you contacted public health wales at all? anyway bed for me now , Nos Da ok.

 

Dai Richards  to Steve Hunt - 25 January 2022

Hi Steve - this is what you stated on the 29 October 2021

"The purpose of the meeting is to specifically discuss your issues as you brought them to me in my role as Chairman of Regeneration and Sustainable Development Scrutiny Committee , land contamination falls under my portfolio so my obliged if asked by any member of the public to try and find answers to their questions , even if they as in your case to date are not the answers they are looking for I guess.

So if you bullet point once more some questions as specifically to the land contamination, I will endeavour to get you answers, I suspect they will say or explain they have given you answers previously but Iím prepared to give them a proper grilling on your behalf, I hope that explains the purpose of the meeting, as I do take my job and position very seriously indeed and if Iím able to help residents wherever they live across NPTCBC I will, thanks once more Steve."

I did what you asked and I provided you with 5 questions to ask the Head of Planning & Public Protection Ceri Morris, this is what I said last night 24 January 2022.

"The chemical testing document for the current contamination on the site stinks of being tampered with and I have evidence of the planning department tampering with similar documents submitted by specialists that do not suit their objective. There should be a human health risk assessment submitted with the chemical testing, there is not. Where is the human health risk assessment? People are dying living next to the site and nobody gives a shit about them. There needs to be a human health risk assessment and it needs to be submitted. This is a priority and the Contaminated Land Strategy says there should be one.  Please stick to your guns Steve, and please keep asking  the questions, they are relevant to the planning process and they need to be answered by the planning department. Please insist that they answer them or provide evidence that they have answered them previously. - Dai"

I followed that by providing you with the following information:

Steve one last note, when Nicola Pearce says "as opposed to answering all of Mr Richardsí concerns given that we have been in detailed written communications with him for some time now and we are effectively repeating ourselves." she's lying to you. I would suggest that you push her for proof of this.

If we refer also to what I said on the 28 October 2020.

" I refer to the roles of Nicola Pearce and the planning officers Steve Ball and Ceri Morris in the early cover-up of the 2008 identified contamination at the development and would suggest that they will use any excuse possible to prevent being questioned on this subject"

Steve, the big picture at the moment is this: 

You are the Chairman of Regeneration and Sustainable Development Scrutiny Committee and land contamination falls under your portfolio. You have asked 5 questions of the civil servants whom you are paid as a councillor to scrutinise. These civil servants are refusing to answer those questions and are lying to you in an attempt to avoid accountability for corrupt actions that has placed the lives of my family and other families in this area in danger. If you take your job seriously as you say, you will keep scrutinising them and keep asking them the same questions until they answer them. The questions are relevant to contamination and so you have every right to keep asking them. Rather than trying to make me jump through hoops to accommodate them and letting them off the hook as your last message suggests you should be putting more pressure on these heads of department to answer the questions or you should be taking this case to your scrutiny committee or you should whistle blow on them as previously suggested. Whichever way you decide, I'm not jumping through hoops and neither are my support team. We've done what you asked, over to you. - Dai

36.jpg (487976 bytes)

Thanks for your response @Dai Richards I will do my job as you suggest and continue to ask all questions for answers , what I was trying to say as I donít actually like typing if honest was that according to the officers they have answered your questions previously with regular correspondence with you.

Can you do me a favour again then please.

Email me the five questions again as outlines like:

Question 1. Blah Blah

Question 2. Etc etc 

Question 3.

and so on, but specific questions without lots of details for answering and I will relate they again to officers that are currently working for the authority , if they choose not to answer them then, as an excuse that they have already done do, I will ask them to reference their previous replays to you , to me once more.

As you say if they are not directly answering the questions , please take it further with public ombudsman and FOI requests , I will always attempt to do my job as Chairman of Regeneration and Sustainable Development Scrutiny Committee I promise you, however if officers decide to not answer or give responses like they are doing then Iím not sure what I can do, as I donít know enough about the site in question as to any serious life threatening pollution or contamination there, if there is as you say then I would stand alongside you for sure as nobodyís life should be put at risk with contamination or poor air quality, but I would say we really need evidence and poof of such things I believe.

Thanks again for your response and I will continue to ask questions I promise you, no matter what obstacles are put in front of me, Steve.
Write to Stephen Karl Hunt and Jennifer Herbert

Dai Richards

Hi Steve - I'll get back to you tomorrow with a response to this message, meanwhile here is some reading matter for you in relation to the site. It shows that if you live next to the Heol-y-Glyn development you are far more likely to die from a neurodegenerative disorder. Also attached are 2 images of contaminants found at the site together with a list of what effects they have on human beings, and in those human beings I include my granddaughter who was born with a mutation (her parents lived with us in the period living up to her conception). Perhaps you can check the list of contaminants and let me know which ones are not harmful to humans?- As previously stated, I will respond to your message tomorrow, meanwhile, happy reading and have a nice day. - Dai

Attached - PSP report - images of 2008, 2020 contamination & list of contaminants

Jennifer Herbert

Given the extent of Mr Richard findings Steve, there are NO reports made by NPTCBC, that can prove that these findings are not accurate, and neither, it seems, do the borough want to prove him wrong? Only to ridicule all the evidence, and try and close this down as Pure Fabrication. 
If I were living near/around this site, I would at least expect a thorough investigation to be done and prove him wrong? 
There are many unanswered questions surrounding this site, when it was used as a ĎDumping groundí by Cuddies, and the people who live near there, are demanding that the Answers are now put on the table.

We can ALL walk away from this, and hope that MR Richards has got this completely wrong, and pray that his reports are nothing more than delusional, but for me personally, something is niggling, that things donít seem quite right, and the more unanswered questions, the more momentum this will gather.

37.jpg (696031 bytes)

Jennifer Herbert

Mr Richards sent a FOI request into GTC, which was received by our then Clerk JVT. 
The request was for answers to a previous report Mr Richards had submitted to council members on the 3rd May, 2021.
JVT confirmed the FOI had been dealt with under the Freedom of information act 2005, and replied with - 
ď The current physical location of Mr Richards report sent to councillors on the 3rd May 2021, is unknown as both councillors had disposed of them?
JVT also went on to say Ď She had NOT received the reportí?

I can categorically say, that this Item (The suspected contamination of Heol Y Glyn,) has never come up for discussion ( not in my presence anyway) or I would have been aware of it ( in my 4 yrs).
This sent alarm bells ringing, as we had seen video footage of Mr Richards delivering these reports.

Itís as plain as day, that GTC refuse to engage in any correspondence with Mr Richards, and would sooner brush him aside with bullying tactics, ( which I have seen first hand), rather than do the RIGHT thing and bloody investigate the site.
This isnít fair Stephen, and say what you like, it takes two to tango! As far as Iím concerned, and many more here in Glynneath are not going to stop asking these questions until the correct answers are given and itís put to bed, and people can safely raise their families in this area, knowing the investigation has been done.

I have NO gain here Stephen, backing this Item, has lost me some friends here in Glynneath, but they are friends I can do without, if this is for the greater good. I have NO political agenda, other than to help, where NO help is being given.

A PROW was recently reopened here in Glynneath, and I backed it ( as a resident who had lived in the area for 50yrs) and witnessed the lies and lengths people will go to, to have kept that PROW shut.

I am being Intimidated/bullied, by a select few councillors, because I dared to back this PROW.
And although ĎThe Welsh officeí concluded the investigation into the PROW, and seen fit to Install it back to its original state, and donít forget EVERYONE had the opportunity to object it at the time, but no one did? I have been targeted ( while other councillors inc borough councillors look on and say NOTHING) yet, they know, the enquiry that the ĎWelsh officeí undertook was all above board and thorough, but they allow ď The bullyingĒ to continue? 
Good job Iím me, and see through the games they play, hey Stephen.

Dai Richards

Steve - I must say, I am more than disappointed by your response. I would suggest that you re-consider your position based upon the following information

On 13 October 2021 I said: "It is your job as the chairman of scrutiny committee to investigate such corruption that has almost certainly caused the corporate manslaughter of Glynneath residents. Passing the buck to the ombudsman and the planning department will not bring back these lives and the lives of those who will die because your planning committee have allowed the planning department to bypass the remediation process again on land that has been tested as contaminated." 

(you should pay particular attention to the word 'again' here because it refers to the planning approval in March 2021, P2020/0863)

On 14 October 2021 you replied with: - No problem and I will after the responses take it to my scrutiny committee if necessary depending on what they come back with

On 29 October 2021 you arranged a meeting in relation to my 13 October comment and said: The purpose of the meeting is to specifically discuss your issues as you brought them to me in my role as Chairman of Regeneration and Sustainable Development Scrutiny Committee , land contamination falls under my portfolio so my obliged if asked by any member of the public to try and find answers to their questions.................. So if you bullet point once more some questions as specifically to the land contamination

On 31 October 2021 I sent you a .pdf file of the questions + additional info. The pdf basically was a print of a web page I'd built to organise the information relating to the questions. The page is live in the public domain at the address below. I sent you a link to the page with questions on and you acknowledged receipt and also stated that you had sent the link to the others at the meeting.


http://www.walk-around-wales.com/county/npt/glynneath/enzo-development/archive/2021/10-2021/20211031S-WB-cllr-hunt-questions5.htm

The information above is a timeline line leading up to the meeting where you presented the questions to those attending. 

Where we are today is that I've informed you through the provision of relevant information that the council you work for has supported unscrupulous developers to avoid the remediation process. This happened in 2008-10, and has happened again in 2021 with the planning approval P2020/0863. The 2008-10 avoidance of the process has almost certainly caused the death of Glynneath residents and by your refusal to investigate the 2021 planning approval further, it will allow another developer to spread a contaminated spoil heap around the site releasing neurotoxins, carcinogens and mutagens into the air affecting residents around the site. 

I have provided evidence of the 2008-10 avoidance to you previously in a document received by you on 7/9/2020 and I also provided you with a question which when answered truthfully will implicate your Head of Planning in a cover up of the process that has potentially led to the death of residents in Brynhyfryd. I provided you with a document relating to the Progressive Supranuclear Palsy deaths in Brynhyfryd which are almost certainly related to the chemical contamination at the site.

I have provided you with questions relating to the planning process P2020/0863 which was approved in March 2021. Along with those questions I provided you with evidence that the land had been tested as contaminated and information was available for this planning application and that your planning department by-passed the committee process and approved the removal of 22,000 tons of contaminated spoil heap from Heol-y-Glyn marking it as inert and not contaminated as the testing had already proved. This contaminated soil will also be cut and filled and placed next to peoples houses as indicated by County Councillor Knoyle in the planning committee meeting of 8/10/2020.

I have provided you with evidence that the chemical testing relating to the current planning application P2021/0153 has been tampered with and is also missing the associated 'human health risk assessment' that should accompany the contamination report. This would indicate that the 'health of the humans' bordering the site is of secondary concern and not relevant to the development. I have provided you with questions relating to this current application and the chemical testing.

It would seem from the last two messages received from you, that you are attempting to manipulate the information I have provided you with, it would seem with the sole purpose of supporting corrupt public officials at NPTCBC. I would like to remind you that you role as a councillor is to support the people of the county borough and the purpose of the council in general is:

to serve and represent the interests of its citizens and communities. We strive to improve the economic, social, environmental and cultural well-being of all of our people."

and one of the values of NPTCBC is

We will conduct the work of the Council in an open and accessible way, ensuring we are properly accountable for the decisions we make.

The above value you will see does not include the Ombudsman as an investigating authority, it says 'we', and I would take 'we' to mean public officials at NPTCBC and no-one else. If we return to our recent correspondence, I would suggest that the previous two messages show that you are no longer impartial and have sided with 'evil' rather than 'good', this would suggest that you are happy that people may die because of the decisions you have made previously as a member of the planning committee and now as the Chair of the relevant scrutiny committee. I would also suggest that this is an error of judgement on your part that can be easily rectified by following the process we discussed and agreed upon early on in our communication exchange. That is, if the public officials you have met with refuse to answer the questions I provided, you take those questions to the scrutiny panel/committee and ask them there. There is also the option of PIDA 1998 which I have previously mentioned. 

My position now is that I have placed you back on my confirmed 'corrupt public official' target list until you make at least one positive action on in relation to the safety of my family and the other families which I am supporting that surround the Heol-y-Glyn site. 

My intended timeframe for the release of the above information and our complete communication chain into the public domain is as follows:

14 days - publish Walk Around Wales website & Facebook Glynneath Residents Against Contamination page

28 days - YouTube video released on Walk Around Wales channel & the following Facebook pages, Corruption at NPT Council, Rugby Relics, Walk Around Wales, Glynneath Residents Against Contamination.

May 2022 Stand for election as a NPTCBC councillor on the basis that I am fighting corruption within NPTCBC and name the corrupt public officials that I will be fighting against individually in my election leaflets which as you well know is a legal document on which the truth must be told. 

If we reach this stage I would suggest that one of us will be going to prison, and I would suggest that the 'one of us' won't be me. 

regards - Dai Richards (Rugby Relics Ltd) on behalf of East Glynneath Residents Against Contamination.



The Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 (as amended 2013)

The Public Interest Disclosure Act 1998 (PIDA) offers protection to workers from any
detriment from their employer that arises from the worker making a Ďprotected disclosureí.
    
To qualify as a Ďprotected disclosureí the disclosure must satisfy a number of requirements under PIDA:

1. The worker must have made a Ďqualifying disclosureí. This is a disclosure of information which, in the reasonable belief of the worker, tends to show one or more of the following:

(a) That a criminal offence has been committed, is being committed, or is likely to be committed
  
(b) That a person has failed, is failing, or is likely to fail to comply with any legal obligation to which he is subject.

(c) That a miscarriage of justice has occurred, is occurring, or is likely to occur
 
(d) That the health and safety of any individual has been, is being, or is likely to be endangered
  
(e) That the environment has been, is being, or is likely to be damaged

(f) That information tending to show any matter falling within any of the preceding paragraphs has been, or is likely to be deliberately
concealed. A disclosure of information is not a qualifying disclosure if the person making it commits a criminal offence in doing so. 

.............from the NPTC whistleblowing policy

also sent as an email with .pdf attachment of original questions file

38.jpg (571527 bytes)

Steve Hunt

Thank you for this information once more, Iím really sorry you feel that way as my only intention is to get your questions answered , I have in my capacity as chair of the regeneration and sustainable development scrutiny committee taken you questions to relevant officers at NPTCBC , I have also chased up further for a response of which they said they would respond end of the week.
I can assure you that I would not personally put anyones lives at risk and Iím certainly not corrupt as you suggest, Iím really disappointed myself with this thread of information if Iím honest, also surprised as your obviously an intelligent man, if someone has died as you suggest then I expect you to take this evidence to the police and those responsible as you also suggest would be dealt with in an appropriate manner.
I can also assure you I havenít concealed anything , whatever NPTCBC officers , directors , head of legal services answer me with, I will pass onto you.
I will continue to try and get answers for you , irrespective how you feel I am managing the situation , but as I said I can only get the answers that those at NPTCBC give me, Iím sure there are plenty of other avenues for you to pursue to get answers to your questions also , if what I am trying to help you with is unsatisfactory then I suggest you do look to get your answers else where , I honestly can tell you that if wrongdoing or contamination on this site has harmed or killed anyone now or going forward I will stand with you and others to hold those responsible to account I promise you.
I will still send you the response I receive from officers as they promised end of week.

 

Dai Richards

Hi Stephen - this is confirmation I have received this message. - Dai

39.jpg (608066 bytes)

Steve Hunt on 31/1/22

Hi both, 
Sorry @Jennifer Herbert I sent this information to only @Dai Richards as an email as error , but posting here for you to see response I have received from NPTCBC to the questions I and Dai raised , probably not as expected , but this is what they have sent back to myself for your information, thanks Steve.

Dear Mr Richards

Further to your recent correspondence of the 28th January 2022, I would confirm I have raised your queries to officers of the Councilís Environment Directorate and met with them to discuss the points raised.

I have now had a response from the Councilís Head of Planning and Public Protection providing me with some further clarity, and I set out below their response to me:

As advised when we met, we are firmly of the belief that we have adequately responded to the issues raised by Mr Richards and advised him on the process which will be followed to address any issues Ė i.e. through the planning process. Mr Richards has also been advised where he can make a formal complaint so that these matters can be fairly and properly investigated by an independent external source should he wish. 

We do of course take our responsibilities with regards to ground contamination with the utmost seriousness. The very serious allegations made by Mr Richards, both in the past and currently, are clearly based on a fundamental misunderstanding of the role of the planning process on remediating contaminated land. Mr Richards has been advised that the obligations under the Environmental Protection Act 1990 no longer apply when a site is going through the planning process. Accordingly, the Council has not, at any point, contravened its duties under this legislation as it is not relevant once the planning process has commenced. Notwithstanding this point, the Council is required to address land contamination, in line with guidance, to ensure sites are safe and suitable for use after development has been completed.

In respect of the current planning status of the Heol Y Glyn site, you will of course be aware that planning permission was granted on 14th September 2020 (ref. P2020/0195) and subsequently varied under application ref. P2020/0863 (granted 16th March 2021). Officers are continuing to engage with agents on behalf of the developer to ensure that all conditions on the consent, notably including those relating to land contamination (i.e. Condition 36 Ė Desk Top Assessment and Condition 37 Ė Remediation Assessment), are approved to our satisfaction. In this regard, I would note that to this point, our land contamination specialists have advised that the details on the current application (Ref. P2021/0546) do not provide us with sufficient level of information to approve such details.

Specifically, the following has been reiterated and emphasised to the agent/developer:

An updated Preliminary Risk Assessment (also known as a ĎDesk Studyí) is required for the whole of the site Ė this is a minimum requirement to help design future site investigation work and to ensure everything has been done to try and identify whether there are any contamination issues that need to be addressed. As a comprehensive desk study has not been carried out to date, the site investigation work done so far is not considered to be reliable to address any potential contamination issues.
∑ Additional Site Investigation works need to be completed and should be designed using a revised Conceptual Site Model (CSM) based off the updated Desk Study Ė the works will need to be broad enough to characterise the whole site and after the Site Investigation is completed the CSM should be refined using the new site data.
∑ The final Risk Assessment should be detailed enough that our land contamination specialists have enough confidence to know the depth and constituents of the made ground to address any public concerns about the site. Only then can a remediation strategy be designed and implemented.

Throughout we have been consistent with the agent/developer as to the requirements needed to discharge the above referenced conditions. Officers have provided detailed comments and a comprehensive list of additional information that they would need to be satisfied before the details of the conditions could be agreed. Furthermore, ownership of the site has recently changed hands Ė again, it has been emphasised to the new owners that it is in their best interests to seek to prioritise and progress matters in relation to the contaminated land conditions, bringing it to an acceptable conclusion so that the public can have a degree of confidence that development will progress and any identified contamination fully remediated.

As you will see therefore, at this stage perhaps officers have provided the assurance to me that they are looking into these issues and addressing. I understand though that you might feel this is does not satisfactorily answer your concerns but you will appreciate that at this time I have been provided with all the information I am able to obtain. The specific queries you raised with me I understand have been answered in the past by officers direct to you. If you feel though that is not the case then this could be referred back to them.

I will assure you though that I will continue to monitor the position and to ensure that officers are addressing the same, both in my capacity as a Planning Committee member and as Chair of the Regeneration and Sustainable Development Scrutiny Committee.

I know from previous correspondence that you have received that suggestions has been made to referral to independent bodies who have oversight of the work of the local authority and I would strongly encourage you to make a referral to the Public Service Ombudsman in this regard regarding your concerns. They are independent from the Council and might assist in providing you with any assurance you require that the Authority has acted appropriately.

Yours sincerely
Councillor Steve Hunt.

 

Jennifer Herbert

Can I meet with them Steve, itís a serious question.

Steve Hunt - 11:13 (31/1/22) - Stephen replied to Jennifer

Speak to Dai first Jen, and I might be able to get you a meeting with the Director of the Environment if thatís what you want , but she might not agree of course, or would outline or ask you , why you want to meet with her in advance.

Jennifer Herbert

Sorry Stephen, it shouldnít be ME really that needs this question answered, You should be banging heads together down there, to get these residents that report, so they can sleep safe knowing their not in danger of bringing up their small families in that area.
Of course she wouldnít agree to meet me , if she cannot find Ď The Human Health Risk Assessment Ďon that Investigation they say theyíve done at the site.
Thatís one way of making this all go away, provide the proof.

40.jpg (279254 bytes)

Steve Hunt

I will ask for the report of the Human Health Risk Assesment then, letís see what they come back with ok.

Jennifer Herbert

Thank you very much Stephen, much appreciated.

Steve Hunt

Like

Dai Richards (also sent via email - 20220301A-EM-RREL-SKHU-questions)

Dear Councillor Hunt

Thank you for your report received in your role as Chair of the Regeneration and Sustainable Development Scrutiny Committee and for submitting our questions to the Head of Planning and Public Protection in this role.

It is disappointing that Mr Morris has refused to answer all the relevant questions relating to the current planning application and the recent associated planning approval and to provide evidence of the correct procedures followed for land contamination in relation to the historical contamination tests. 

This is concerning to us as residents surrounding the site. I would suggest that the actions of the NPTC planning department including Mr Morris in relation to the planning approval P2020/0863 show a complete disregard for human health. 

There is no valid reason why the chemical testing of land that has previously been tested and found to be contaminated should be removed from the conditions. It must be accepted therefore that the only reason that the P2020/0863 planning application existed was to support the developer Enzo in the breaking of conditions to cover up the historical malpractice of the planning department. This historical malpractice allowed the Cuddy Group to tip toxic waste next to our homes for a number of years. As can be seen in the documentation previously submitted to you, this has almost certainly resulted in the deaths of the residents living closest to the site.

The result of the P2020/0863 approval means that the current application for the Heol y Glyn site will allow toxic waste to be deposited next to our homes. If you search the re-distribution of soil levels in application P2021/0546 you will see that in some areas of the site, this will mean the raising of the current levels of the ground with toxic waste by over 5 metres.   

We are deeply concerned that the contamination testing submitted with application P2021/0546 lacks the supporting Human Health Risk Assessment as required by the Council Contamination Land Strategy and the results of the testing can also be seen to have been potentially tampered with to suit planning department malpractice as was identified in our unanswered questions. 

I would urge you please to request the HUMAN HEALTH RISK ASSESSMENT from the planning department. This is key safety information. I would also urge you to personally investigate the chemical testing information submitted to NPTC for the current application P2021/0546.

We appreciate the option you have given for you to ask further questions of the Planning Department on our behalf and we would like to keep this avenue of information gathering open please. 

regards David Richards - Rugby Relics Ltd, on behalf of East Glynneath Residents Against Contamination