00:00Yes, I'm sure, but I'm going to pass swiftly on to David Chadwick, please.
00:03Thank you, Chair. Good morning. Thank you for joining us.
00:06I have a question for Nicola.
00:08The Coal Action Network reported that restoration plans for East Pitt and Margham opencast mines
00:14were put in place for less money than what the operators originally agreed.
00:20I've got the statistics in front of me.
00:22East Pitt was originally to cost £115 million, but only cost £22.4 million.
00:29And Margham was originally supposed to cost £58 million, but only £5.7 million has been spent.
00:37So has this compromised on the safety of those sites?
00:44Thank you for that question.
00:46Those sites were particularly difficult sites for us to manage
00:50because you may be aware that the owners of the site transferred the liability to a company
00:58registered offshore, so it was very difficult for us to enforce the restoration of those sites.
01:05When we managed to secure a dialogue with the owners, it was quite clear and we knew what the value of restoration
01:14in relation to the original restoration schemes was going to cost, exceeded the amount of money that was in the escrow
01:22accounts that were set up to ensure restoration of those sites, and that dates back to privatisation back in the 1990s.
01:30So when British coal was privatised back in the 1990s, provision wasn't made to ensure that those sites were restored
01:39in relation to the works that had been undertaken up to that date.
01:42So the amount of money that was set aside in those accounts would not cover the consequences of mining post-privatisation,
02:02as well as the consequences of mining, which took place prior to privatisation.
02:08There just simply wasn't enough money there.
02:11As an authority in relation to the two sites that you referred to, we were in a position whereby
02:15we had to work with the landowners to try and identify an alternative restoration scheme
02:24because they quite clearly indicated to us they would not undertake the original restoration scheme
02:30because it was unaffordable.
02:32So we had to work with them to identify an alternative restoration scheme,
02:36which ensured that the safety of the communities surrounding those sites was protected.
02:42And that's what we did.
02:44We secured alternative schemes.
02:46It does mean that the void areas remain, albeit much smaller than they were when mining ceased on site.
02:56And it does mean that the overburden and surcharge mounds are still above ground as postments
03:01have been placed back in the void area.
03:04However, the void areas were designed to ensure that the side walls and the high walls were protected
03:12and the overburden mounds were engineered to ensure that they complied with engineering standards
03:18and they didn't pose a safety problem to local communities.
03:24So that was the position that we were in.
03:25So the alternative restoration schemes were different to what was initially envisaged by the communities,
03:32but they were designed to ensure that the safety was paramount for the communities living in those areas.
03:39And what people living there really want to know is whether or not that site is safe.
03:46In your opinion, is the East Pit safe?
03:50My opinion, based on the information that we've got at the moment, there is no evidence to suggest otherwise.
03:58Then, given that it sits on an active geological fault line,
04:02is perched above several villages and has now been filled with possibly millions of tonnes of water,
04:10what safety assessments have been carried out to evaluate the risk of land movement,
04:14the wall failure or flooding,
04:16and what ongoing monitoring is in place to protect nearby communities,
04:21including Kymchindwath, Tyagraif and Wankai Gerwen?
04:25Well, in terms of the original design of the restoration scheme,
04:31buttresses were designed and constructed within the actual void area to ensure that they are met with current engineering standards.
04:40And so the factor of safety was an issue.
04:43And so the design was calculated to ensure it was an appropriate factor of safety in relation to the buttress.
04:50The Cymchindwath fault, which I think you're referring to, lies beyond, lies within the site,
04:57but beyond the void area, and it does not, it's not under the Overburden Mount or the Surcharge Mount,
05:04it's to the west of the void area.
05:08So there is no material perched on the fault line.
05:13Notwithstanding that, we do have inclinometers within that general area,
05:20so that will identify whether there is any movement in that area,
05:24which would, and if there was, then there would be a response to any movement.
05:29But to date, there has been no cause for concern to the residents within that area.
05:36I have one further question on this point as well.
05:39The Welsh Government's 2016 guidance defines restoration as returning land to a natural form,
05:45including the replacement of subsoil and topsoil to support plant growth.
05:50Yet East Pit remains a large water-filled void surrounded by overburden.
05:55So given the Council's position that restoration is complete,
05:59how does the current condition meet that definition?
06:02And has that been verified through any independent assessment?
06:06As I indicated earlier on, the amended restoration scheme was designed to ensure that safety of local communities was maintained and safeguarded.
06:20And we also tried to ensure that the site was as natural looking as possible and had appropriate drainages in place to ensure that the after use of that site was sustainable.
06:35It doesn't comply with that very tight definition, but it reflected the circumstances we were in at that time.
06:44It was a very complicated planning application process that we took the scheme through and we were in consultation with the Welsh Government all the way through it.
06:55And they actually requested the report of the planning officer at that time.
07:03And that was provided to them and enabled them to consider whether they wanted to call the application in for consideration by the Welsh Ministers.
07:12And after due consideration, they confirmed to the local authority that they did not feel it necessary in the national interest to call that planning application in
07:24as they felt that the issues which needed to be considered had been appropriately considered by the local authority.
07:31As part of that process, we engaged with independent experts in terms of geotechnical experts, hydrological experts, and we were also liaising with the coal authority and with NRW all the way through the process.
07:48The scheme did not cause a problem in terms of the material which remained above ground and also to ensure that we had mitigation measures in place to allow the natural flow of water from the void area into nearby water courses.
08:07So there are channels built in to ensure that the water from the water courses safely and that was undertaken in consultation with the appropriate statutory consultees at the time.
08:23Thank you very much. Very comprehensive answer again.
