Now, as building work on the school proceeds, campaign groups are seeking clarity over who will be responsible for monitoring the health of those who attend the school, what records will be maintained, and how these records will be used.

This file also includes an image of the leaflet put out by the PTFA/PFTA to counter the GAG leaflet.

Alternative document formats:
PDF

HTML

This Circular applies only to England. Responsibility for implementing Part 2A in Wales rests with the National Assembly for Wales.

Some sections have similar text to that within the Brown Fields Appraisal document (see above).

In its conclusions, this report states "... the findings of the risk assessment indicate from the data reviewed and collected by URS that there is no reason on human health grounds why the site cannot be redeveloped for the stated purpose once suitable remedial works have been undertaken."

This seems to be saying 'go ahead and build this landfill school' but, importantly, then goes on to say:
"However, in order to make the above conclusion for the site as a whole it is important to ensure we have a high degree of confidence in the data that describes the chemical condition of the landfill ... further data collection is required ..."

It is at this point that we are told that the sampling exercises undertaken to date were insufficient to characterise the site as a whole.  The upshot being that this report was incapable of giving Newport Council the necessary assurances about the suitability of this site for development.

Indeed, the report final paragraph is saying 'the results of further investigations could invalidate our whole report'.  Which is precisely what happened as a result of subsequent and more effective site investigation methods.

Once again, issues concerning public health appear to be subservient to perceived financial imperatives. 

Nevertheless, the findings are very serious and cast doubt on the continued use of the Glebelands in its present condition for recreational purposes.

The findings of this report about the north Glebelands provides the best indication yet of the substances that probably also exist in the fill material in the south Glebelands area. Also provides an indication of the range of pollutants that continue to leach into the River Usk SSSI.

Completion of the questionnaire by parents was no doubt based on the biased and misleading information provided on the form itself and within the text of the accompanying newsletter. Of course, Newport Council got the result that they had engineered so carefully.  Newport Council later used the results of this dubious survey of parents to imply that the survey results reflected local views in general.

Includes Pages 1 and 22-29.

Later updated in 2002.

This 're-issued' Notice of Decision was, allegedly, issued unlawfully in 2002.

Councillor Townsend said: "We have always been given assurances that this site will be safe and more than suitable for a school and homes. The update we have heard reinforces that. We were able to challenge the contractors and they have satisfied us that the work is meeting the safety standards set out for the project."

However, it is not clear which members of Newport Council cabinet, if any, have the qualifications necessary to undertake an effective and detailed challenge of their contractors in key technical areas relating to environmental protection and public health. It is not clear that those residents who had raised concerns were present when the contractors were 'challenged' during the meeting.

Does anyone know:
- what was removed from site;
- how much was removed; and,
- what still remains in the ground below the school?

Click here for a full colour version of the newsletter.

Includes comments about access.

"What is worse is the news that Monsanto illegally dumped toxic waste from Newport in a site at Brofiscin quarry, at Groesfaen near Cardiff. Dangerous chemicals are leaking from the site. It could cost 100 million to clean up the chemicals that include the derivative for Agent Orange. PCBs were manufactured up to 1977 in Newport - six years after a ban in the USA.

"The first report of the danger tip was made in 1972 when nine cows died on a local farm. Since then it has been a sad story of delay, cover-up and incompetence."

Some background . . . .

There are several toxic waste dumps in south Wales, some of which have attracted a lot of media attention. Brofiscin Quarry is one such site that, like the Glebelands, has been used to dump PCBs manufactured by Monsanto (now Solutia). Some articles in both the media and professional journals have criticised the work of the Environment Agency and its staff.

The criticism often implies a failure on the part of the Environment Agency to prosecute those responsible for the illegal transfer and dumping of industrial waste.

In the murky world of toxic waste, it appears that you can't always rely on the statutory agencies to protect our environment and public health.

Below are some relevant media articles concerning Brofiscin Quarry, concluding with a link to a response from the Environment Agency.

A clear example of the folly of relying on local authorities to protect the environment and public health.

Norwest Holst s Bristol Office has been awarded a 14.9 million contract to design and construct the school and the Building & Facilities Division of Crispin & Borst has been awarded an 8.1 million contract to fit-out and provide support services at the school for a period of 25 years.

The motion was defeated by 27 votes 'against' to 23 'for' the motion, with a full record of the voting shown on Page 114.
John Griffiths, Jane Davidson, Mike German, Sue Essex, Jane Hutt, and others voted against the motion.  David Davies, Jocelyn Davies, William Graham, and others voted for the motion.

Mentions the proposed Glebelands landfill school, and advises the local authority not to proceed, concluding "It is therefore my view that these schemes should not proceed in their present form, and that the Local Authorities in question pursue other means to achieve their admirable desire to improve the educational environment of the children in their area."

The Annex to this paper includes the text of the original October 2001 report by Peter Clarke, Children s Commissioner for Wales entitled 'Building Schools on Former Landfill Sites'.

In relation to the requirement to line Lotery's Reen, and actions required if development plans changed, you may wish view Section 7.2 only.

To view the available appendices to this report, click on the links below:
Figures
Plates [File size: 46 MB]
Stockpiled Material: Plates 37, 38, 39 & 40
Appendix A - Report Conditions
Appendix B - Phasing of Works Correspondence
Appendix C - Summary of Previous Site Investigations
Appendix D - WYG Performance Criteria
Appendix E - WYG Site Visit Reports [File size: 3 MB]
Appendix F - Contractor Method Statements
Appendix G - NHSED Plates, Borehole and Excavation Logs
Appendix H - Soil Validation Samples Audit and Prefix Identification
Appendix I - Soil Validation Analysis Results [File size: 11 MB]
Appendix J - Water Analysis Results [File size: 14 MB]
Appendix K - Suspected Leachate Breakout Correspondence
Appendix L - Waste Transfer Notes and Destruction Certificates [File size: 26 MB]
Appendix M - Land Gas Monitoring Results
Appendix N - Asbestos Boundary Air Monitoring Method Statements and Results [File size: 5 MB]
Appendix O - Geophysical Survey Results
Appendix P - Regulator Correspondence
Appendix Q - VINCI Drawings [File size: 6 MB]
Appendix R - Prestige Air-Technology Ltd Completion Certificate