Advice to Environ
Back to listEnquiry
- From
- Environ
- Date advice given
- 21 October 2014
- Enquiry type
Request for comments on draft No Significant Effects Report
Advice given
Thank you for giving the Planning Inspectorate the opportunity to comment on the draft Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA): No Significant Effect Report (NSER) for the Thorpe Marsh Gas Pipeline received on 6 October 2014. The Inspectorate welcomes the opportunity to comment on draft documents as this enables us to provide advice about any omissions or procedural risks for the acceptance or examination stages. This advice forms parts of our pre-application service, details of which are available in the Inspectorate?s pre-application prospectus which outlines the structured and facilitative approach to support the Inspectorate can offer during the pre-application stage.
The Inspectorate notes that the NSER comprises: an introduction; a copy of a screening letter sent to Natural England which identifies European sites and considers likely significant effects and potential pathways (dated 22 July 2013); a copy of Natural England?s response (dated 24 July 2013); and screening matrices. The Inspectorate welcomes and supports early pre-application engagement. The Inspectorate is encouraged by the engagement you have had with Natural England and is pleased to note their agreement with the conclusions of your HRA screening letter. The Inspectorate also notes the NSER is a succinct document and recognises this is primarily due to the applicant?s conclusion of no likely significant effect on any European site. The Inspectorate acknowledges the distance of the pipeline from the European sites and a lack of identified pathways. However, it is important for the purposes of the examination that the Inspectorate is provided with all the necessary information on which to make a robust recommendation to the Secretary of State.
We have now reviewed the documents and have set out some comments below which are intended to support in the preparation of the application. Please note that the comments provided are without prejudice to any decisions taken by the Secretary of State during acceptance or the Examining Authority during examination, if the proposed development is accepted for examination. These comments are not intended to be a detailed review of the draft HRSA and its findings, but are a high level review intended to provide helpful comments/observations as appropriate. As these comments constitute section 51 advice under the Planning Act 2008 (as amended), they will be placed on the Planning Inspectorate's register of advice on the website.
No Significant Effects Report
1.1 Paragraph 1.5 of the NSER states that ?this NSER is considered sufficient to address Regulation 5(2)(g) and the Application does not need to be accompanied by a Habitats Regulations Assessment (HRA) Report?. The Inspectorate reminds the applicant that in actual fact HRA refers to the ?process? designed to meet the requirements of the Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (as amended) (?the Habitats Regulations?) rather than a separate report and that the NSER would form part of this process.
European sites
1.2 The Inspectorate notes that European sites within 10km have been considered in the NSER (Table 1 of Appendix 1.1). The applicant is advised to justify the use of the 10km buffer and to obtain confirmation from Natural England that the all relevant sites and features have been considered.
1.3 In this regard, the Inspectorate notes that the Humber Estuary Special Area of Conservation (SAC) and Special Protection Area (SPA) have been identified in the NSER, although the Humber Estuary Ramsar site has not been identified. The applicant is reminded that European sites include SACs, candidate SACs and SPAs which are protected under the Habitats Regulations. As a matter of policy, the Government also applies the procedures of the Habitats Regulations to potential SPAs, Ramsar sites, and (in England) proposed Ramsar sites and sites identified, or required, as compensatory measures for adverse effects on any of the above sites.
1.4 The Inspectorate considers it would be useful for the NSER to contain a map identifying the location of the European sites in relation to the proposed gas pipeline.
Mitigation
1.5 The letter dated 22 July 2013 from the applicant to Natural England contained in Appendix 1.1 of the NSER refers to a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) which would contain measures to reduce effects to air and water quality. The Inspectorate advises the applicant to identify how the CEMP will be secured in the draft Development Consent Order and to provide a draft copy of the CEMP with the application. It will also be important to ensure that the draft CEMP includes at least the minimum measures required to mitigate the impacts to European sites.
In combination impacts
1.6 Regulation 61 of the Habitats Regulations requires that before any consent, permission or other authorisation can be granted, which would include grant of a DCO, a competent authority must make an assessment of the likely implications for European sites where the plan or project 'is likely to have a significant effect on a European site?(either alone or in combination with other plans or projects)?.
1.7 The Inspectorate notes that at present the NSER does not consider in-combination impacts and advises this is given due consideration prior to submission. Please refer to Planning Inspectorate Advice Note 10 which recommends that the following plans or projects should be considered for in-combination impacts:
? projects that are under construction ? permitted application(s) not yet implemented ? submitted application(s) not yet determined ? all refusals subject to appeal procedures not yet determined ? projects on the National Infrastructure?s programme of projects ? projects identified in the relevant development plan (and emerging development plans - with appropriate weight being given as they move closer to adoption) recognising that much information on any relevant proposals will be limited.
1.8 In particular, the Inspectorate is aware of a number of projects in the region which individually have the potential to result in disturbance and habitat loss/fragmentation for interest features at European sites (ornithology) and therefore recommends that the NSER addresses the potential in-combination impacts of such impacts.
Screening Matrices
1.9 The Inspectorate welcomes the inclusion of the screening matrices with the NSER. The Inspectorate considers that the footnotes in the matrices are relatively brief and lack some detail, however also acknowledges the applicant?s assertion that the proposed development is at distance from the European sites and there are no impact pathways that have been identified.
1.10 For ease of reference, the Inspectorate advises that rather than using ?effect 1, 2, 3 etc? as column headings in the European site matrices, the impacts as detailed in the ?Impacts in submission information? column of the table on page 1 of the matrices document are used; this will avoid the need to refer back to page 1 of the matrices document.