Liam Rosenior: “By far. By far. That as unacceptable in every aspect of the game. Unacceptable in attitude. I keep coming out and defending the players, that was indefensible, that performance tonight. The manner of the goals we conceded, the duels that we lost. Something has to change drastically right here, right now.”

ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — Florida’s attorney general on Tuesday opened a rare criminal investigation into OpenAI’s ChatGPT over whether the artificial intelligence app offered advice to a gunman who killed two people and wounded six others last year at Florida State University.

Attorney General James Uthmeier said that prosecutors had done an initial review of chat logs between ChatGPT and the gunman, Phoenix Ikner, to determine if the AI app aided, abetted or advised the commission of a crime.

Prosecutors believe the chatbot advised Ikner on what type of gun and ammunition to use, whether a gun would be useful at short range, and what time of day and at which location would allow for the most potential victims, Uthmeier said.

“My prosecutors have looked at this, and they’ve told me if it was a person at the other end of that screen, we would be charging them with murder,” Uthmeier said at a news conference in Tampa. “Now, of course, ChatGPT is not a person, but that does not absolve our office and my prosecution team from our duty to investigate whether there is criminal culpability here.”

Florida’s Office of Statewide Prosecution has subpoenaed OpenAI for records of its policies and training materials regarding threats to harm others, and for its policies on reporting “possible past, present, or future crime,” according to the attorney general’s office.

OpenAI spokeswoman Kate Waters called the FSU shooting a tragedy but said the company had no responsibility. The company proactively shared information with law enforcement and continues to cooperate with investigators, she said Tuesday.

“In this case, ChatGPT provided factual responses to questions with information that could be found broadly across public sources on the internet, and it did not encourage or promote illegal or harmful activity,” Waters said in an email.

Uthmeier conceded that his office was venturing into “uncharted territory” by launching a criminal probe into whether a chatbot contributed to the commission of a crime. His office also has initiated a civil probe, he said.

Several civil lawsuits have sought damages from AI and tech companies over the influence of chatbots and social media on loved ones’ mental health. Last month, a jury in Los Angeles found both Meta and YouTube liable for harms to children using their services. In New Mexico, a jury determined that Meta knowingly harmed children’s mental health and concealed what it knew about child sexual exploitation on its platforms.

Also last month, a man sued Google for the wrongful death by suicide of his son and product liability claims, the latest in a growing number of legal challenges against AI developers that have drawn attention to the mental health dangers of chatbot companionship.

Ikner is the stepson of a local sheriff’s deputy, and investigators say he used his stepmother’s former service weapon to carry out the shooting. Prosecutors in the case intend to seek the death penalty.

Uthmeier, a Republican, was named to the position by Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, after the GOP governor appointed then-Attorney General Ashley Moody to the U.S. Senate seat vacated by Marco Rubio when he became the secretary of state in President Donald Trump’s second administration.

Uthmeier is running in November to be elected to the position on his own.

DeSantis has called a special session for the end of the month to consider an “Artificial Intelligence Bill of Rights,” as well as redraw congressional districts.

___

Charles Sheehan in New York contributed to this report.

___

Follow Mike Schneider on the social platform Bluesky: @mikeysid.bsky.social.

It was one of those games where you’d love to focus on Brighton’s performance but, at the end of yet another chastening evening it was hard to take the eyes off the Chelsea captain. There was Enzo Fernandez, standing there mostly motionless in front of the away crowd, other than shrugging his shoulders. That he was wearing the armband only two weeks after being dropped from the first team added to the sense of farce, of a club shredded by so many bad decisions.

What was Fernandez actually doing here? What was he thinking? Maybe it was an apt image in its own bizarre way, because you can say this of the entire club right now. “A sad night for the club”, as one Chelsea insider said. Most visibly, there’s just the way they’re playing. What is Liam Rosenior trying to do?

Well, whatever it is, the players aren’t responding. This dismal run has now added up to the club’s worst run since 1912.

As cameras constantly cut to Behdad Eghbali and the rest of the Chelsea leadership, it was impossible not to wonder whether they were deciding on Rosenior’s future there and then. No one would be surprised if a club statement was imminent.

His defeated post-match Sky interview even felt like one of those exit speeches. Rosenior he spoke about how Chelsea’s performance was “unacceptable” and “indefensible”. He said he was “hurting” and that their display did not “represent this great football club”.

More words, even if these were conspicuously directed towards the players.

But, by the end, they were also amounting to some form of self-flagellation. Rosenior couldn’t even look up.

Really, though, the focus should stay on that hierarchy. They are responsible for this. They are responsible for turning a social institution into some kind of financial experiment.

They’ve made the common mistake of thinking they are smarter than the norms of a 166-year-old sport and have been shown reality. Maybe it’s a rare football morality play for private equity trying to exploit the sport.

The Rosenior appointment was really only a logical – or perhaps illogical – conclusion of all this, especially amid the widespread suspicion that he was largely appointed on the basis of being someone the hierarchy could control.

That might be a little harsh on a forthright young coach, but he’s now in the sorry situation where there’s sympathy for him. It’s got that bad, as was seen with the facial expression after that third Brighton goal. Almost the saddest part is that this has become one of those appointments that has the possibility of destroying a career.

For all the jokes about Rosenior and fair criticism, he did previously enjoy a respect as a promising young coach. Even leading Premier League clubs felt he was very adept at all the pure tactical elements of coaching.

The fundamental issue, however, is that you do need all the other elements of management to actually maximise such qualities. Rosenior has been found wanting there, as there have been constant insider questions about his authority over the squad.

Players have even felt he has “changed” in his short time in charge.

Again, that shouldn’t be a surprise.

A young coach has been prematurely promoted to what was already one of the most pressured jobs in the game, made more complicated because of the “unique” approach of the ownership.

How can a team culture even be built if there’s constant transfer turnover of young players? Little wonder those like Marc Cucurella and Cole Palmer might be considering their futures.

And despite all of that, Rosenior couldn’t really say no to such a job.

He was already working in the ownership group so would have known the chance probably wouldn’t have come again.

So here they are, at the end result of multiple bad decisions. Not just a 3-0 at Brighton, but a tailspin.

And worse may be to come. Can anyone see them beating Leeds United in the FA Cup semi-final on Sunday?

What would the ownership do? The word from inside is that they don’t have any prospective replacement lined up. Do they have any ideas?

And there’s a key final point. The opposition also represented a fitting image of something that works well, all the more so because this ownership’s one idea was to copy Brighton.

Typically, though, they got that wrong too.

There’s no point in trying to bring over everything from Brighton if you can’t also bring over their analytics.

That’s what really makes it work, and fortifies the culture.

You could ask how the Chelsea ownership missed all of this but that itself would be to miss the point.

This outcome – a comprehensive 3-0 for a club in the Championship when Chelsea were last English champions – was entirely predictable. It is the result of multiple bad decisions.

As a subscriber, you are shown 80% less display advertising when reading our
articles.

Those ads you do see are predominantly from local businesses promoting local
services.

These adverts enable local businesses to get in front of their target audience – the local
community.

It is important that we continue to promote these adverts as our local businesses need
as much support as possible during these challenging times.

President Donald Trump on Tuesday said the U.S. would extend its ceasefire with Iran that was due to expire tomorrow, at the request of Pakistani authorities, despite having threatened hours earlier that, ‘I expect to bombing’ when asked if he’d agree to such an extension.

Writing on Truth Social, Trump said Pakistani Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif and Field Marshal Asim Munir had asked him to put a hold on his bombing plans while further attributing the decision to “the fact that the Government of Iran is seriously fractured.”

“We have been asked to hold our Attack on the Country of Iran until such time as their leaders and representatives can come up with a unified proposal,” Trump said.

He added that the American naval blockade on Iran’s ports would remain in place while the ceasefire continues “until such time as their proposal is submitted, and discussions are concluded, one way or the other.”

The president’s latest walk-back of his threats to resume the U.S. air campaign against Tehran comes hours after he told CNBC he was not inclined to agree to any extension of the ceasefire.

After he was asked by anchor Joe Kernen if he’d consider an extension during a telephone interview on the cable news program Squawk Box, Trump replied: “I don’t want to do that. We don’t have that much time.”

“I expect to be bombing because I think that’s a better attitude to go in with. But we’re ready to go. I mean, the military is raring to go,” he said.

Trump had also told Bloomberg News it was “highly unlikely” that he’d agree to extend the ceasefire after its Wednesday expiration without a full agreement to end the nearly two-month-old war he started on February 28.

Although negotiations between the parties had been set to commence in Islamabad, Pakistan’s capital, the U.S. team that was slated to be led by Vice President JD Vance never left the U.S., and Vance remained at the White House all day on Tuesday in what officials described as a series of policy meetings.

For their part, Tehran’s negotiators had refused to participate in the sessions unless Trump had lifted the blockade of Iran’s ports.

In a post on X, Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi called the blockade an “act of war” and therefore a violation of the ceasefire.

“Iran knows how to ‌neutralize restrictions, ‌how to defend its ⁠interests, and how to resist bullying,” he said.

Tuesday’s announcement is just the most recent in a series of reversals, which critics have come to give the derisive acronym TACO (”Trump Always Chickens Out”) that have characterized Trump’s second bite at the apple of presidential power.

The pattern was established last April after his shambolic “liberation day” tariff rollout — he makes an outrageous threat on trade or another policy matter that is likely to cause the market to tumble before he inevitably walks back on that policy, leading to a market rebound.

For example, his so-called “Liberation Day” tariffs caused the markets to hit historic lows before he ordered a 90-day pause one week later, leading to record highs.

Traders even started using the TACO acronym to describe the rapid policy shifts, borrowing the term first coined by Financial Times columnist Robert Armstrong last year.

The ceasefire extension echoes his decision to announce the ceasefire agreement on April 7, hours ahead of a self-imposed deadline before he ordered U.S. forces to bomb Iranian civilian infrastructure.

Days earlier, he’d declared the day “Power Plant Day” and “Bridge Day” for U.S. armed forces unless Iran would “Open the F***in’ Strait, you crazy b*****ds,” lest they be “living in Hell.”

He later threatened that Iran’s “entire civilization” would “die tonight, never to be brought back again,” implying that the U.S. would commit genocide against the Iranian people unless their government capitulated to his terms.

The first heat of the new series saw six amateur cooks battle it out for a coveted MasterChef apron

Advertisement

MasterChef has returned to the BBC with a brand new presenting partnership.

The 22nd series welcomes renowned chef Anna Haugh and restaurant critic Grace Dent as they take over from Gregg Wallace and John Torode in the judging roles. The duo will put 48 of Britain’s finest amateur cooks through their paces with a series of demanding challenges.

Tuesday’s opening heat (21 April) saw six skilled home cooks from diverse backgrounds enter the kitchen to compete for a prized MasterChef apron.

The contestants featured digital portfolio manager Rosdip, 33, construction project company director Brendan, 57, tech programme manager Jhané, 29, environmental consultant Sabina, 49, accounts assistant Samantha, 39, and IT manager Matt, 41.

Within minutes of the programme starting, audiences found themselves split over Anna and Grace’s first appearance together. Several viewers were frustrated with the judges’ facial expressions, with one person posting on X (formerly Twitter): “I’m assuming it must be in the contract that judges/presenters on MasterChef must express shocked/surprised faces at every opportunity possible! Gregg and John did it for years and it looks like it’s continuing!” reports the Mirror.

Advertisement

Another commented: “Someone tell Anna that she doesn’t have to replicate Gregg’s surprised face every time a contestant tells her what they are going to be cooking,” while a third remarked: “I can’t watch #MasterChef any longer. [Anna] and her daft facial expressions.”

A fourth viewer echoed the sentiment: “Why do those two presenters keep making such stupid faces?”

Meanwhile, many other viewers were thrilled with Anna and Grace’s first appearance, with one person writing: “Loving the two ladies, Grace and Anna running the MasterChef kitchen.”

Another remarked: “Love Anna and Grace in this series,” while a third commented: “Absolutely love Anna.” A fourth fan added: “Loving Grace and Anna on #MasterChef.”

Throughout the episode, Anna and Grace put their trust in the amateurs’ palates as they introduced the Signature Dish round, which challenged contestants to prepare their most-loved dish from home.

The cooks who made the best two dishes, Rosdip and Jhané, were immediately rewarded with a MasterChef apron, while the other four fought it out for the last two aprons in the Classic Recipe Test.

Each of the amateur cooks were handed the same recipe for one of Anna’s cherished brunch dishes, designed to put fundamental cooking skills under the spotlight. Those who succeeded in securing their aprons still faced one final obstacle before clinching their quarter-final spot.

Anna and Grace called upon last year’s final three — champion Harry Maguire and finalists Claire Syrenne and Sophie Sugrue — to cast judgement on the dishes on offer. They sampled two courses from each contestant, before Anna and Grace announced the three cooks who would be progressing to the quarter-finals.

MasterChef season 22 is available to stream on BBC iPlayer

Writing in post on his Truth Social platform, Mr Trump said: “Based on the fact that the Government of Iran is seriously fractured, not unexpectedly so and, upon the request of Field Marshal Asim Munir, and Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, of Pakistan, we have been asked to hold our Attack on the Country of Iran until such time as their leaders and representatives can come up with a unified proposal.

The Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle, signed a multi-year with Netflix in 2020, which was once valued at up to $100million (£74m), and led to the release of several projects

Meghan Markle’s latest ploy to woo Netflix bosses has been described as “annoying” by a royal insider.

The Duchess of Sussex’s partnership with the streaming giant has become turbulent recently after projects, such as With Love, Meghan underperformed and faced criticism. The Netflix deal, once valued at up to $100million (£74m), came to an end earlier this year which reportedly left Meghan and Prince Harry exploring new avenues.

But Meghan was last week spotted cosying up to the boss of Netflix and his wife at a party in California. It is now reported the Duchess has been regularly reaching out to CEO Ted Sarandos and his spouse Nicole Avant with personal gifts ranging from handwritten letters to flowers, and even jars of her As Ever jam. One insider said the tactic isn’t working and, in fact, the ploy has “become annoying”.

READ MORE: Meghan Markle mocked after her three-word plea during Australia tourREAD MORE: Prince Harry and Meghan Markle ‘enormously upset Queen’ over ‘wasted opportunity’

The source said: “To some, it comes off as too much — and honestly, it’s not working. If anything, it’s becoming annoying. But Meghan believes it’s necessary. In her mind, this is how you repair — and secure — a relationship.”

They were speaking to royal journalist Rob Shuter, whose Substack page explores Meghan’s apparent determination to win over the Netflix team again. Another insider told the reporter: “It’s constant — cards, gifts, deeply personal messages. She’s making sure they feel valued, remembered, and appreciated.”

Mother-of-two Meghan was snapped with the company’s CEO at a party in Montecito. The pictures appear to show the Duchess’s friendship with the Netflix boss is continuing, even though the streamer is no longer involved in the As Ever lifestyle brand, and with the CEO no longer following Meghan or As Ever on Instagram.

In an official statement, Netflix said, “Meghan’s passion for elevating everyday moments in beautiful yet simple ways inspired the creation of the As Ever brand, and we are glad to have played a role in bringing that vision to life. As it was always intended, Meghan will continue growing the brand and take it into its next chapter independently.”

The brand, which is well known for its jams, was launched by the Duchess just last year, and was financially supported by Netflix, in a separate deal to that of her TV content.

It was reported last month Meghan may returning to acting, having been on the screen since she was 20. Meghan is best known for her role in Suits, a legal drama series, in which the star played Rachel Zane for seven seasons. The actress left in 2018, the year in which she married Prince Harry and officially became part of the British royal family.

In his first public hearing, Donald Trump’s nominee for Federal Reserve chair Kevin Warsh faced several rounds of questions about his loyalty to the president as Trump looks to reshape a powerful global economic institution.

Trump has pushed for criminal investigations into current chair Jerome Powell over renovations at the central bank’s home in Washington, D.C., while the president continues to demand lower interest rates even as fuel prices surge with the U.S. war with Iran that has upended global markets. Warsh has denied that his nomination hinged on the president’s demands, but he repeatedly dodged questions from the Senate Banking Committee about Trump’s politicized overhaul of the Fed.

Follow for the latest from the Trump administration

3:45 p.m. — Kennedy grilled by Republican and Democratic senators over women’s health

Trump’s Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. came under fire from Democratic lawmakers last week over disparities in Black maternal health that he appeared to dismiss. Today, he’s hearing from Republican and Democratic women over threats to reproductive healthcare and how the administration’s gutting of federal funding has threatened women’s health.

“The administration’s emphasis on canceling diversity-related grants has resulted in less research aimed at women’s health,” Republican Sen. Susan Collins said during a Senate Appropriations subcommittee hearing. “It is well established that disparities in women’s health exist.”

“You’re right,” Kennedy said. “We have the worst maternal health outcomes of any of the Western countries and Black women are 2.6 times more likely. A college-educated Black woman is two and a half times more likely to die from maternal health mortality than a college-educated white woman.”

Democratic Sen. Tammy Baldwin pressed Kennedy on the administration’s threats to birth control and widely used anti-abortion drugs that are also used to treat miscarriages.

Asked if he has talked with officials about screening for mifepristone in wastewater, Kennedy said he wants the government to look for “pharmaceutical drug artifacts” in water.

He said he has “no plans to do that at the moment” when it comes to screening wastewater to track the use of abortion drugs.

2 p.m. — RFK defends Trump response to measles outbreaks

Kennedy wrapped up the first of two congressional hearings on Tuesday as the nation’s top health official justifies his budget to lawmakers and defends his chaotic year in office.

In front of a House Energy and Commerce subcommittee Tuesday morning, the vaccine skeptic defended the administration’s response to a surge in measles outbreaks within the last year, saying that low vaccination rates predated his time in office. There have been more than 1,700 measles cases in the U.S. so far this year.

Next, Kennedy will appear before a Senate appropriations subcommittee to review his agency’s budget request, which would slash the agency by 12 percent as lawmakers wrestle with changes to vaccine policy, rising healthcare costs and the loss of thousands of public health employees.

12:35 p.m. — Warsh dodges questions on Trump trying to fire Lisa Cook and Powell

The president’s attempt to fire Fed governor Lisa Cook “would weaken, if not shatter, the independence of the Federal Reserve,” according to Trump-appointed Supreme Court Justice Brett Kavanaugh.

Warsh said it wouldn’t be “appropriate” to weigh in when asked by Sen. Angela Alsobrooks whether he would defend his potential future colleague.

“If I stand for anything it’s that the Fed should stay in its lane,” he told the Senate Banking Committee.

A legal challenge over Trump’s attempt to remove Cook from the board is pending before the Supreme Court. Warsh said “it’s not appropriate for me to weigh in on that” as he “could be a party to that matter.”

Warsh also avoided answering whether he agrees that the laws requires Powell to remain as chair until his replacement is confirmed.

Powell’s term as chair ends May 15, and his term as a board member ends January 31, 2028..

12:08 p.m. — Warsh denies Trump ever asked him to lower interest rates

While Trump repeatedly demands the Federal Reserve lower interest rates, Warsh denied throughout his sworn testimony that the president ever personally instructed him to do so.

“The president never asked me to commit to interest rate cuts,” Warsh said under questioning from Democratic Sen. Ruben Gallego. “He didn’t ask for it, he didn’t demand it, he didn’t require it, and nor would I have done so.”

Warsh, a former Morgan Stanley banker who served as a Fed governor during the 2008 financial crisis, would likely be the wealthiest Fed chair if confirmed. According to financial disclosures, his fortune tops more than $100 million, including assets in AI and cryptocurrency.

Warsh told the committee that the Fed’s independence in setting interest rates is “essential” — but before the hearing, Trump told CNBC that he would be disappointed if Warsh doesn’t immediately cut rates.

Trump to read Bible passage one week after posting AI image of himself as Jesus

The president will virtually participate in the “America Reads the Bible” event Tuesday evening and read a passage from the Old Testament roughly one week after he drew bipartisan ire for posting an AI-generated image of himself as a Jesus Christ-like figure.

Read more:

11:40 a.m. — Warren’s questions into Warsh’s alleged Epstein ties follow DOJ files release

Senator Elizabeth Warren’s questions about Warsh’s alleged ties to dead sex offender Jeffrey Epstein were previewed in her letter to Trump’s Federal Reserve chair nominee last month, when she asked for details about the extent of his connections to the wealthy and well-connected abuser.

Emails sent to or from an account associated with Epstein released as part of the Justice Department’s publication of millions of files stemming from investigations showed that Warsh and his wife were invited to events that Epstein helped organize. It’s unclear whether they attended, and he has not been accused of wrongdoing.

In a series of heated exchanges with Warren, Warsh said he would divest $100 million in investments but refused to answer whether they involved Epstein, China orTrump and his companies.

“Sounds like your fight might not be with me, but with the Office of Government Ethics,” Warsh said.

Warren, testing Warsh’s “independence and courage” against political interference, then asked him point blank whether he believes Trump won the 2020 presidential election.

“Um, we try to keep politics if I’m confirmed out of the Federal Reserve,” he said. “Senator, I believe that this body certified that election many years ago.”

“That’s not the question I’m asking,” Warren fired back.

Asked if there was anything Warsh disagreed with Trump about, he said he didn’t think he came from “central casting.”

If he did, he would be “older, grayer” and smoking a cigar, he said.

Warren, dismissively, called his answer “cute.”

“If you don’t answer the questions, you don’t have the courage and you don’t have the independence,” she said.

11:15 a.m. — Key Republican will confirm Warsh if DOJ drops Powell probe

Republican Sen. Thom Tillis, who has put his critical vote supporting Warsh on hold over Justice Department investigations into Powell, blasted DOJ over the probe but signaled he’s more than willing to support his nomination.

“If we put everybody in prison in federal government that had had a budget go over, we’d have to reserve an area roughly the size of Texas for a penal colony,” Tillis said. “The problem that I have here is that we had some U.S. attorney … thinking it would be cute to bring Chair Powell under an investigation just a few months before the position was going to be open.”

He urged DOJ to “get rid of this investigation so I can support your nomination.”

The only thing he found to be “the least bit odd” about Warsh is that he has “never seen an episode of Seinfeld.”

Pete Hegseth cancels ‘absurd’ flu vaccine requirement for ‘brave warriors’ in military

American service members will no longer be required to get a yearly flu shot under a new Defense Department policy described by Secretary of Defense Pete Hegseth as an effort to “restore freedom and strength to our joint force.”

Read more:

10:25 a.m. — Warren says installing Trump’s ‘sock puppet’ is a political tactic to ‘artificially juice the economy before midterms’

Warren, the committee’s top Democrat, warned that the president’s attempt to install a “sock pocket” at the Fed would be an “invitation for corruption and economic catastrophe.”

Trump has presided over “one economic failure after another,” with plummeting consumer sentiment and surging costs on fuel, housing and everyday goods in the wake of his “chaotic tariffs” and the Iran war, she said in her opening remarks.

With a dire economic outlook, Trump has “repeatedly and illegally attempted to take over the Fed” to solve his political problems, including installing a “sock poppet” to “artificially juice the economy” before midterm elections, she said.

“The Senate should not be aiding and abetting Trump’s takeover of the Fed,” said Warren, calling Warsh’s potential confirmation an “invitation for corruption and economic catastrophe.”

Stockton Council is considering a request from Cumbria Waste Recycling Ltd is to repurpose an existing industrial site to handle both hazardous and non-hazardous waste, including its treatment, temporary storage and transfer.

They intend to change their existing facilities at Seal Sands near Billingham into a “hazardous waste transfer and treatment facility which will include imports of both hazardous and non-hazardous liquid and solid wastes for treatment, temporary storage and transfer”.

The 1.85-hectare area is on the site of a former chemical processing and production facility.

Stephenson Halliday Ltd has submitted a screening request on behalf of Cumbria Waste Recycling (CWR), for the council to make a “judgment on the likelihood of the project giving rise to significant environmental effects”.

It says in its request: “CWR intend to repurpose much of the existing facility for the purposes of establishing a hazardous waste transfer and treatment facility.

This facility will receive, bulk, and treat both hazardous and non-hazardous waste arising from industrial customers within the Tees Valley area, as well as niche waste streams from specialist operators nationwide.

The request adds: “Under the proposed development, much of the existing site will be retained and repurposed for the purposes of waste storage, bulking, and processing. A new weighbridge will be installed on site for the acceptance of waste. The final design of the facility has yet to be determined.”

The developer says waste would be delivered by road, sampled, analysed then either accepted and stored, rejected and returned, or put into quarantine until discrepancies can be resolved.

“The site is fully capable of safely and securely accommodating hazardous wastes of differing properties within separate, dedicated areas,” says the request.

It says the development mostly involves accepting, bulking and transferring waste, “with almost negligible levels of hazardous waste chemical treatment planned for the future”.

It says none of the principal operations involve chemical treatment of waste, though the company is “exploring the treatment of small quantities of specialist waste”.

Wastes would be stored in five areas – the main warehouse, a flammable waste storage area, a secure storage area or two yards.

“Depending upon the nature of the waste, the site will facilitate waste treatments on suitable, compatible wastes in order to separate, bulk and repackage the waste for transfer offsite to a suitably licensed waste management facility where the waste undergoes additional treatment, is subject to recovery or is subject to disposal,” the developer said.

It is proposed that the facility will deal with about 90,000 tonnes of waste per year for bulking and transfer, about 50,000 tonnes for producing waste-derived fuel, and about 15,000 tonnes of mixed oil and water in liquid wastes. About 10 HGVs would access the facility from Seal Sands Road per day between 6am and 6pm.

The statement adds: “Vehicle movements to and from the site will be limited to normal daytime operating hours and restricted to a 5mph speed limit when on site.

“Waste treatment, including bulking of wastes, will take place inside enclosed tanks and enclosed buildings. The site is constructed of impermeable surfaces with a contained drainage system, which would contain any spillage and prevent its discharge into the environment.”

The developer says the proposed facility “would not result in any significant landscape and visual impacts” and “there will be no adverse traffic and transport impacts”, nor significant impact from noise, dust or smells. It says the treatment facility would employ about 15 people full-time and would support local businesses, suppliers and the local economy.

It adds: “The nature of the operations and variety of wastes to be accepted at the site means that odour may be generated.

“However, the emission of odour will be controlled via an odour management plan that has been prepared as part of the environmental permitting regime, which sets out how odours will be prevented and minimised.”

It asserts the proposed development would make “relatively minimal changes” to an existing industrial site, with no nearby residents which could be affected. It argues the plan will not need an environmental impact assessment in the planning process.