HC Deb 22 April 1993 vol 223 cc162-4W
Mr. Roger Evans

To ask the Secretary of State for Wales when he will publish the report by the University of East Anglia on contamination by polychlorinated biphenyls in the Panteg area.

Mr. David Hunt

I have today published the report into PCB contamination in the Panteg area which I commissioned from the environmental risk assessment unit of the university of East Anglia. I have arranged for a copy of the report to be placed in the Library of the House.

I commissioned the study in January 1991 at a contracted cost of £432,000 and, in the two years during which it has been in progess, three interim reports have been produced and published.

The main conclusion of the study is that with the exception of a localised area close to the eastern boundary of the ReChem site, the measured concentrations of PCBs and dioxins in the Panteg area are not unusual or significantly different from those encountered in similar areas elsewhere in the United Kingdom. According to currently accepted criteria and guidance on health effects for these compounds, such levels should not generally give rise to concern.

The report also concludes that the distribution and gradation or PCBs and dioxins in the Panteg area suggests a common localised source or sources, possibly at or close to ground level within the ReChem plant. However, the report has not identified any specific source within the plant.

The study has found no evidence of significantly elevated levels of PCBs and dioxins in foodstuffs, including locally produced milk, in the Panteg area. The only exception is in relation to duck eggs at Pontyfelin House, which is immediately adjacent to the ReChem plant, where guidelines limits for human intake of dioxins could be exceeded if the eggs were consumed. The Government advised the occupants of this property in 1989 that their duck eggs should not be consumed and this advice still stands.

The report has been considered by the Government's expert advisers and I have also consulted the regulators of the plant—the Health and Safety Executive and Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution. I have received an assessment of the report from my independent adviser, Professor Lewis Roberts, which I have also published today.

In the light of the advice I have received, I am satisfied that the report is comprehensive and thorough and shows no evidence of widespread contamination by PCBs and dioxins in the area. Although elevated concentrations were found close to the ReChem plant, with the exception of the duck eggs I have already referred to, these are not considered to pose any significant risk to public health or the food chain.

The report makes a number of recommendations for further work to clarify some remaining uncertaintes in relation to the small area of el0evated PCB/dioxin concentrations near the ReChem plant, and to provide public reassurance. These recommendations have been endorsed by Professor Roberts and I accept them.

Work on four of the recommendations, for further testing of soil and air samples in the vicinity of the ReChem plant and more testing of grass and local egg samples, is already under way. Work is also in progress on the fifth recommendation for analysis of vegetables and meat from fowl in the small area of higher contamination.

All this supplementary work will be undertaken by the university of East Anglia and I will publish its results when they are available.

The report also recommends that there should be further investigation of the ReChem site to identify and quantify all current sources of emissions which may be contributing to off-site contamination. Her Majesty's inspectorate of pollution and the Health and Safety Executive will be pursuing this matter with ReChem International Ltd. as quickly as possible. Their inquiries will also include the extent to which the PCB/dioxin levels found are due to past rather than current operational factors on the ReChem site.

The final recommendation is that there should be continued monitoring of the environment in the vicinity of the site and that this might usefully be developed from the joint survey carried out at present by Torfaen borough council and ReChem International Ltd. This is primarily a matter for Torfaen district council as the local environmental health authority. I commend the recommendation to it.

The work of the study has been overseen by a technical steering group on which Torfaen borough council, ReChem Ltd. and the European Commission have been represented. I have asked the group to study the final report and my statement in more detail and, once the results of the supplementary work are available, to give me their further views.

I hope that the publication of this report will help to relieve public anxiety and uncertainty about PCB and dioxin contamination in the Panteg area of Pontypool. It provides an opportunity for a fresh start in the relationships between the local authority, the local community and the company; one I hope that all will be willing to take. I am aware that past proposals for the establishment of a liaison committee have not progressed. I hope that the community and the company will give renewed thought to this as a forum for local debate and consultation.

Finally, I should like to express my thanks to the university of East Anglia for the meticulous and exhaustive manner in which it has undertaken this formidable and complex task; to Professor Lewis Roberts for the help and guidance he has given to my Department and the university team during the conduct of the study; and to the technical steering group which has overseen this work.