Councillors demand PCB testing at Ty Llwyd lay‑by after TV expose
Ynysddu councillors urge Caerphilly Council to test a lay‑by near Ty Llwyd quarry after a documentary revealed PCB levels 140 times above background.
Two Ynysddu councillors have written to Caerphilly County Borough Council urging it to carry out soil testing at a lay‑by beside the Ty Llwyd quarry after a BBC documentary highlighted alarmingly high PCB levels nearby.
The programme, screened in August 2026, featured sampling by Dr David Megson, a chemist and environmental forensic specialist commissioned by the Royal Society of Chemistry.
Dr Megson’s analysis of a lay‑by adjacent to the entrance of Pantyffynnon Community Woodland recorded PCB concentrations 140 times the regional background level.
Janine Reed and Jan Jones, the independent councillors featured in the film, said residents are asking a simple question: “Why won’t Caerphilly County Borough Council (CCBC) test the layby at Ty Llwyd?”
They added, “We are not saying a television programme should replace proper council investigation.” Quite the opposite.
If there is nothing to worry about, surely the answer is simple: test the layby.”
CCBC’s official response confirmed that the lay‑by was omitted from its “not contaminated” assessment of the quarry site.
“The woodland and private land where the soil sampling was undertaken is more akin to public open space and grazing land and this is why the risk‑based screening value for PCBs were conservative,” a senior council official wrote.
“The sum PCB results were found to be below the conservative residential land use screening value and therefore were not considered to pose an unacceptable risk to human health.”
The council’s letter also noted that the PCB screening value applied was for residential use, assuming a child’s daily exposure, and that the lay‑by’s public‑open‑space character warranted a different risk assessment.
“We understand your statement that ‘there are no safe levels of PCB contamination’ but in terms of exposure to contaminants, including PCBs, we have to take a risk‑based approach,” the official continued.
He stressed that any further investigation must be “reasonable, evidence‑based, and proportionate” under Part 2A of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.
“Taking into account the sampling undertaken to date, the analytical results obtained, the risk assessments completed and the nature of the layby location, Environmental Health does not consider additional soil sampling within the layby area adjacent to Twyn Gwyn Road to be necessary at this time.”
Reed and Jones argue that the council’s stance overlooks a clear public‑health concern, especially as the lay‑by sits beside a well‑used footpath.
“On Ty Llwyd, one question remains particularly straightforward: if CCBC is confident there is no risk associated with the layby, why not test it?” Test it.
Publish the results. Let the evidence speak for itself — and give residents the reassurance they so badly deserve,” they said.
The councillors also raised broader issues of local democracy, noting a perception among residents of a “difficult or politically hostile relationship” with the council when environmental matters are raised.
They warned that dismissing community‑raised concerns could erode trust, adding that elected representatives must be able to “raise legitimate concerns on behalf of their communities and receive proper, evidence‑based responses.”
While the council maintains that its current risk‑based assessment is sufficient, the documentary’s findings have amplified calls for transparent, site‑specific testing.
Local residents, who regularly walk the footpath linking the quarry to the community woodland, say they need clear answers before feeling safe.
The dispute highlights the tension between scientific sampling presented in a high‑profile documentary and the statutory risk‑assessment framework used by local authorities.
As the debate continues, both sides agree that any decision must be grounded in robust evidence, though they differ on what constitutes adequate evidence.
Further action may hinge on whether the council revises its position in response to sustained community pressure and the documentary’s public exposure.