Representation by Northumbrian Water Limited (Northumbrian Water Limited)
- Date submitted
- 17 December 2021
- Submitted by
- Members of the public/businesses
Northumbrian Water Limited (“NWL”) is appointed by the Water Industry Act 1991 (“WIA”) as water and sewerage undertaker for the Teesside region, which includes the area within which the Net Zero Teesside Project (“the Proposal”) is located. The Applicant is seeking a Development Consent Order (the “DCO”) on land at and in the vicinity of the former Redcar Steel Works site, Redcar and in Stockton-on-Tees, on Teesside (the ‘Site’). The former Steel Works site, along with other land required for the Proposed Development, lies within the boundary of the land controlled by the South Tees Development Corporation (‘STDC’), which is now known as ‘Teesworks’. NWL does not in principle object to the Proposal. However, NWL is included as an occupier/tenant/lessee in relation to multiple plots and is also listed in relation to multiple plots as category 3 land (“NWL Land”). The NWL Land would be subject to compulsory acquisition, temporary possession and/or acquisition of rights in the DCO. The southern and eastern boundaries of the Brans Sands sewage works (leased and operated by NWL) are directly adjacent to the proposed pipeline route of the Proposal, with the access routes to the sewage works encroaching into the proposed red line Boundary of the Proposal. NWL’s technical team is assessing the impact of the compulsory powers upon its operational requirements and until it is satisfied that the protective provisions agreed with the applicant are satisfactory NWL maintains its objection. The NWL owned apparatus to the west, on the River Tees and the River Bank could also be subject to compulsory purchase powers under the DCO, as the proposed red line boundary of the Proposal covers a large area including this NWL apparatus. The proposed gas pipeline will directly cross through the NWL apparatus, should no measures be put into place to protect NWL assets. Whilst discussions have commenced with the Applicant, NWL wishes to register as an Interested Party to ensure adequate provisions are included in the DCO to protect both NWL’s existing and future assets and NWL’s ability to comply with its statutory obligations. At this stage it is unknown how the Proposal will affect the NWL Land, NWL’s assets, apparatus and rights. NWL is in ongoing discussions with the Applicant in relation to its objections and therefore may be able to reach agreement with the Applicant in relation to some of the objections referred to below. NWL hope to receive details regarding the works during the construction stage within and adjacent to NWL’s interests including details of dig depths and micro-drilling potential. An outline of NWL’s principal objections are: 1. Article 17 – Discharge of Water. NWL seeks comfort in the DCO, until such time as it is agreed that its own protective provisions will be included, that Article 17 does not override the need for the Applicant to comply with sections 106 and 118 WIA, which prevent inappropriate connections/discharges being made to the public sewer system that could result in damage to the sewer network and environment. 2. Article 44 – NWL objects to the approval procedure being subject to deemed approvals or consents. These are inappropriate as they cause significant operational risk to NWL. NWL will object to any inclusion within this DCO of deemed approval or consents applying to any approvals or consents that NWL are required to provide in accordance with the provisions of the DCO. Deemed approval is not contained in the Infrastructure Planning (Model Provisions) Order 2009 and although these have been withdrawn, Planning Advice Note 13 (v3 republished February 2019) says the model provisions aid consistency and ensure a lawful set of provisions are applied for. 3. Article 33 – NWL objects to the list of rights set out in Article 33, until sufficient protection is provided in the protective provisions as set out below. 4. NWL request that its own set of protective provisions are applied to ensure that NWL can adhere to their own statutory duties. NWL’s proposed protective provisions have been drafted in accordance with industry standards and adopts the section 185 WIA position. These have been agreed by promoters on a number of different development consent order schemes. However, should these not be accepted and included within the DCO, NWL would have a number of concerns about the protective provisions as currently drafted in Schedule 12 Part 1 including but not limited to the following points: 5 – insufficient protection is provided in the draft DCO for NWL against the activities listed in Article 33 and NWL requires additional wording to be included in the Order which addresses this; 6(2) - Clarity is required in respect of the notice period in 6(2) if plans are not agreed in this time. ; 6(3) – NWL objects to this provision and requires its removal from the DCO as NWL would expect the undertaker to have made full provision in the limits of deviation to include all land required for the purpose of constructing alternative apparatus so that NWL is not required to use its own statutory powers to divert assets as part of the undertaker’s scheme; 6(6) – NWL requires additional wording to be included in the DCO which prevents the execution of any works affecting or impacting upon NWL apparatus without NWL's prior consent and subject to such conditions as NWL may require; 6(7) – NWL requires the 300 millimetre protection zone to be increased in order to protect NWL’s apparatus. 8(1), (3), (5) and (6) – the notice periods in these provisions are too short to consider plans and to determine whether alteration or protection of apparatus is required and if so, to consider NWL's requirement for the same. This could be overcome by requiring the undertaker to consult and agree technical solutions with NWL well in advance of serving notice. 9(2) – NWL requires this provision be removed – if NWL if required to divert apparatus, it should be paid in full for the costs and expenses of having to divert the apparatus. 9(3) and (4) - NWL requires clarity in the DCO as to what amounts to betterment. 5. Insufficient information has been provided at this stage. NWL request further details regarding the works during the construction stage within and adjacent to NWL’s apparatus and operational land. In particular NWL requests details of dig depths and micro-drilling potential. Objections withdrawn via email – see attached