Nid safbwyntiau’r Arolygiaeth Gynllunio yw’r rhai a fynegir ar y dudalen hon. Yr hyn a ddangosir yma yw cynnwys a gyflwynwyd i’r Arolygiaeth Gynllunio gan y cyhoedd a phartïon eraill â buddiant, sy’n rhoi eu barn ynglŷn â’r cynnig hwn.
Cysylltiad Gogledd Cymru
Derbyniwyd 29/11/2018
Gan Natural Resources Wales
Gan Natural Resources Wales
Sylw
“PROPOSED NORTH WALES CONNECTION
PLANNING INSPECTORATE REFERENCE: EN020015
RELEVANT REPRESENTATION FROM NATURAL RESOURCES WALES (NRW)
1. Introduction
1.1. Our comments are made without prejudice to any further comments we may wish to make in relation to this application and examination, whether in relation to the Environmental Statement (ES), provisions of the draft Development Consent Order (‘DCO’) and its Requirements, Statements of Common Ground (SoCG) or other evidence and documents provided by National Grid (‘the Applicant’), the Examining Body or other interested parties. The following paragraphs comprise our relevant representation as a Statutory Party under the Planning Act 2008 and Infrastructure Planning (Interested Parties) Regulations 2015 and as an ‘interested party’ under s102(1) of the Planning Act 2008.
1.2. We shall continue to provide advice to the applicant through correspondence and meetings with the aim of reaching as many positions of agreement and common ground as possible prior to the examination of the proposals. Our relevant representation is based solely on the information provided within the application documents. Any changes in our position will be reflected in our full written representation and SoCG.
1.3. In addition to being an interested party under the Planning Act 2008, NRW exercises functions under distinct legislation including (but not limited to) the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations (EPR) 2016 (as amended), Water Resources Act 1991 and Marine and Coastal Access Act (MACAA) 2009. For the purpose of clarity, comments from NRW Marine Licensing are titled as such and are produced in Annex A; all other comments pertain to NRW’s advisory role.
1.4. NRW provide the comments below structured according to topic, referencing relevant sections of the Environmental Statement and on NRW’s general purpose in section 16.
2. Flood Risk
2.1. NRW’s principal concern with regard to flood risk is the management of groundwater to be pumped from tunnelling operations. The anticipated volumes have increased substantially with the addition of the drill and blast methodology to the ES. This matter is covered primarily in document 5.12.2.3 and partially in the CEMP (7.4).
2.2. With regard to document 5.12.2.3 NRW have concerns that the features to be created to attenuate ground water pumped from the tunnelling operations are not described in detail. These features will need to be designed to accommodate the maximum potential volume from either of the tunnelling methods proposed (in addition to surface water runoff etc.), not only to prevent the receiving watercourses being overloaded but also to ensure sufficient treatment space for saline/ turbid water (up to 900m3/day for dewatering the tunnel has now been quoted for drill and blast). NRW seek confirmation during the examination that there will be sufficient space within the DCO boundary to accommodate these features. Subsequent to this, the Flood Management plan to be produced as per (schedule 3) Requirement 7. (1) (j) of the draft DCO must also detail that the receiving watercourses will not be overloaded.
2.3. This matter is also partially regulated by the CEMP (doc 7.4, para 8.4.3, WE42) which acknowledges the need to agree a rate of discharge. NRW will discuss this matter with the applicant to attempt to reach an agreed position as part of a SoCG. Reference is also made here to ceasing any discharge upon receiving a flood alert from NRW. This situation will not occur since NRW do not operate a fluvial flood warning scheme for any areas downstream of the discharge points. The CEMP does go further to state “...Where settlement or filtering is not practicable or effective and hence discharge to watercourse is not possible, alternative disposal options will be used...” which NRW welcomes, but as above, we would request confirmation that there would be a practical alternative for the maximum expected volumes.
2.4. With regard to the other flood consequence assessments assessing matters not related to the above (presented in the ES documents 5.12, 5.12.2.1, 5.12.2.2 and 5.12.2.4), while we have some points of clarification to discuss with the applicant, NRW is satisfied with the assessments and conclusions drawn with regard to flood risk.
3. Ornithology
3.1. NRW is concerned that the potential impact on whooper swan has been underestimated in the ES (document 5.9, Ecology) resulting in inadequate mitigation being proposed. One of the key measures in determining the potential effect of collision for this species is the ‘Severity’ (Chapter 5.9 – paragraph 9.7.13) which is measured here against the UK wintering population of 11,000 individuals. Paragraph 9.7.15 goes on to conclude that the development is likely to have a “Minor Adverse effect (not significant)” which is an acceptable conclusion in this context.
3.2. Further on in the chapter when assessing Llyn Alaw SSSI (Paragraph 9.7.407) Reference to the collision effects during operation are again stated as “Minor Adverse effect (not significant)”. However, it is not clear how the ES has a reached this conclusion based on the wintering populations of the SSSI rather than the whole of the UK. There is no assessment made in the context of the Welsh wintering population in either section. NRW consider that assessments made in the context referenced above are likely to indicate a much higher ‘Severity’ and therefore a higher potential collision risk during operation. With a higher collision risk, high visibility markers are likely to be required to appropriately mitigate any such risk in the key areas of higher use in close proximity to Llyn Alaw.
4. European and Nationally Fully Protected Species
4.1. NRW has concerns regarding the temporary severance of Great Crested Newt habitats during construction and that this may adversely affect the Favourable Conservation Status of this species. We consider that this has not been adequately evaluated to date. NRW will attempt to reach an agreed position on an acceptable form of mitigation as part of a SoCG.
4.2. Providing the above concern can be addressed (and matters regarding Cetaceans in section 5. are resolved), NRW is satisfied with the survey effort, assessment, avoidance and mitigation measures identified for the project for European and Nationally Protected Species. NRW is satisfied that providing these measures are appropriately secured through the DCO (and where necessary through derogation licencing) the proposal is not likely to be detrimental to the maintenance of the Favourable Conservation Status of each local population of these species.
5. Marine Mammals
5.1. NRW advises that the baseline data for this topic in ES chapter 5.9 should draw from additional sources (Atlas of Marine Mammals of Wales and CCW Monitoring Report no.68) and be updated, as some species have not been identified as present. Notably a pod of common dolphins (approximately 50 individuals) was present in the Menai Straits over a number of days in 2018. Risso’s dolphin should also be assessed in more detail.
5.2. We would advise that for completeness additional protected sites (Pembrokeshire SAC and Bristol Channel approaches SAC) should be screened in the HRA document 5.23 and referenced in document 5.9.
5.3. Further detail with regards to some of the specifics of the mitigation measures (document 7.7) will need to be defined and appropriately secured to ensure the risks to marine mammals are minimised. Notwithstanding the above, NRW agrees in principle with the potential impact pathways, the likely magnitude of effects and the mitigation measures outlined in the ES with regard to Marine Mammals.
6. Habitat Regulations Assessment
6.1. NRW is concerned that the drainage situation along the boundary of and within Cors Erddreiniog has been misunderstood/ inadequately explained within the environmental statement. A detailed assessment of the hydrological situation on the ground will be required to inform the detailed drainage plan to be produced by the applicant in this location. NRW welcomes the commitment to produce a specific plan for this location and is satisfied that the guiding principles detailed in section 8 of the CEMP (doc 7.4) are sufficient to ensure a suitable plan can be produced.
6.2. Please refer to the Marine Mammals section (5.2) for NRW’s recommendation on the inclusion of two additional sites in the assessment for completeness.
6.3. With regards to other HRA matters (ES document 5.23 Habitat Regulations Assessment Report) NRW is satisfied with the assessment principles and the conclusions reached with regard to potential effects upon protected sites.
7. Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
7.1. Llyn Alaw
NRW has identified in the Ornithology section (3.) matters of concern with regard to this protected site.
7.2. Tre’r Gof
NRW is satisfied that providing the measures defined within the CEMP are strictly adhered to, the proposals are unlikely to impact upon Tre’r Gof SSSI. NRW would note that it will be crucial to ensure phasing of the works appropriately with Wylfa Newydd works to ensure these measures are implemented in strict accordance with the CEMP.
7.3. NRW is satisfied with the remainder of the assessments and conclusions reached within the ES regarding the SSSI’s.
8. Fish
8.1. NRW has points to clarify with the developer regarding the specifics of mitigation measures to be used to avoid and minimise potential impacts on fish species which may be affected by the development. Particularly regarding the type and timings of use of the required deterrent in the Menai Straits which will need to offset direct impacts while minimising any disturbance effect.
8.2. NRW welcome the commitments made by the developer to utilise clear span bridges for watercourse crossings where there are known populations of fish. The watercourse specific surveys, which will inform some of the crossing methods, will have to appropriately characterise the habitats for all fish species which may use the watercourse for any stage of their lifecycle including foraging and migrating. The absence of historic records must not be used to infer that fish are not present in a watercourse and clear justification must be provided where culverting is proposed.
9. Water Framework Directive (WFD)
9.1. The document of primary relevance to WFD is 5.12.2.5, while many of the other chapters also have a bearing on the significance of potential effects on certain receptors. NRW is satisfied with the assessment methodology utilised. However, Until the applicant has appropriately addressed all topic specific issues which relate to the water environment, NRW cannot confirm the WFD assessment in its entirety is appropriate.
10. Invasive Non Native Species (INNS)
10.1. NRW welcomes many of the broad measures presented to date and the commitment to agreeing a specific method statement with regard to INNS. NRW has some matters to discuss with the applicant regarding specific control measures for some INNS species and we will attempt to reach an agreed position as part of a SoCG to ensure the specific method statement to be drawn up will be appropriate to avoid and mitigate any potential effects of INNS.
11. Waste and Materials
11.1. NRW is satisfied with the principles to be adhered to with regards to waste and materials which are to be produced and used onsite. NRW has some points of clarification with regards to document 7.11 of the ES and we will attempt to reach an agreed position as part of a SoCG. Some of the information within this chapter also requires updating to ensure accuracy. The applicant will need to ensure that suitable authorisations (permits, exemptions etc.) are in place for any waste management activity undertaken. These authorisations must be in place before the waste management activity commences.
12. Protected Landscapes
12.1. NRW is satisfied that the proposed connection would result in no significant effects on the Isle of Anglesey AONB and Snowdonia National Park, singularly, or cumulatively. We concur with the ES Chapter 7 Landscape Assessment and ES Chapter 8 Visual Assessment. We have no disagreement with the assessment. The DCO will need to enable the implementation and monitoring of the CEMP (document 7.4), and associated plans, to ensure the reinstatement of landscape within the setting of the AONB.
13. Contaminated Land
13.1. NRW is satisfied with the methodologies to be adhered to with regard to potential contamination along the route and will work with the developer and appointed contractor as the project progresses to ensure the risks from any contamination discovered are minimised.
14. Environmental Management
14.1. NRW is satisfied with the overarching methods detailed in the ES and will continue to work with the developer and any appointed contractors to reduce and minimise the risks from pollution and siltation of watercourses along the working corridor. The applicant will need the relevant permits for discharges and licences to abstract water unless the exemptions criteria are complied with.
15. Air Quality
15.1. NRW is satisfied with the assessment methodology and conclusions drawn in chapter 5.14 and associated appendices with regard to this subject, and that the potential effect on sensitive ecological receptors from the project are not likely to be significant.
16. NRW’s General Purpose
16.1. NRW is satisfied that this advice is consistent with its general purpose of pursuing the sustainable management of natural resources in relation to Wales and applying the principles of sustainable management of natural resources. NRW acknowledges that the principles of sustainable management include taking account of all relevant evidence and gathering evidence in respect of uncertainties, and taking account of the short, medium and long-term consequences of actions. NRW further acknowledges that it is an objective of sustainable management to maintain and enhance the resilience of ecosystems and the benefits they provide and, in so doing meet the needs of present generations of people without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs, and contribute to the achievement of the well-being goals in section 4 of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015.
ANNEX A
17. Marine Licensing Comments
17.1. NRW is of the opinion that works which are licensable under the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 are included in the application, particularly the formation and use of the tunnel under the Menai Straits. To date, NRW has not been approached by the applicant with a formal Marine Licence application.
”
PLANNING INSPECTORATE REFERENCE: EN020015
RELEVANT REPRESENTATION FROM NATURAL RESOURCES WALES (NRW)
1. Introduction
1.1. Our comments are made without prejudice to any further comments we may wish to make in relation to this application and examination, whether in relation to the Environmental Statement (ES), provisions of the draft Development Consent Order (‘DCO’) and its Requirements, Statements of Common Ground (SoCG) or other evidence and documents provided by National Grid (‘the Applicant’), the Examining Body or other interested parties. The following paragraphs comprise our relevant representation as a Statutory Party under the Planning Act 2008 and Infrastructure Planning (Interested Parties) Regulations 2015 and as an ‘interested party’ under s102(1) of the Planning Act 2008.
1.2. We shall continue to provide advice to the applicant through correspondence and meetings with the aim of reaching as many positions of agreement and common ground as possible prior to the examination of the proposals. Our relevant representation is based solely on the information provided within the application documents. Any changes in our position will be reflected in our full written representation and SoCG.
1.3. In addition to being an interested party under the Planning Act 2008, NRW exercises functions under distinct legislation including (but not limited to) the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations (EPR) 2016 (as amended), Water Resources Act 1991 and Marine and Coastal Access Act (MACAA) 2009. For the purpose of clarity, comments from NRW Marine Licensing are titled as such and are produced in Annex A; all other comments pertain to NRW’s advisory role.
1.4. NRW provide the comments below structured according to topic, referencing relevant sections of the Environmental Statement and on NRW’s general purpose in section 16.
2. Flood Risk
2.1. NRW’s principal concern with regard to flood risk is the management of groundwater to be pumped from tunnelling operations. The anticipated volumes have increased substantially with the addition of the drill and blast methodology to the ES. This matter is covered primarily in document 5.12.2.3 and partially in the CEMP (7.4).
2.2. With regard to document 5.12.2.3 NRW have concerns that the features to be created to attenuate ground water pumped from the tunnelling operations are not described in detail. These features will need to be designed to accommodate the maximum potential volume from either of the tunnelling methods proposed (in addition to surface water runoff etc.), not only to prevent the receiving watercourses being overloaded but also to ensure sufficient treatment space for saline/ turbid water (up to 900m3/day for dewatering the tunnel has now been quoted for drill and blast). NRW seek confirmation during the examination that there will be sufficient space within the DCO boundary to accommodate these features. Subsequent to this, the Flood Management plan to be produced as per (schedule 3) Requirement 7. (1) (j) of the draft DCO must also detail that the receiving watercourses will not be overloaded.
2.3. This matter is also partially regulated by the CEMP (doc 7.4, para 8.4.3, WE42) which acknowledges the need to agree a rate of discharge. NRW will discuss this matter with the applicant to attempt to reach an agreed position as part of a SoCG. Reference is also made here to ceasing any discharge upon receiving a flood alert from NRW. This situation will not occur since NRW do not operate a fluvial flood warning scheme for any areas downstream of the discharge points. The CEMP does go further to state “...Where settlement or filtering is not practicable or effective and hence discharge to watercourse is not possible, alternative disposal options will be used...” which NRW welcomes, but as above, we would request confirmation that there would be a practical alternative for the maximum expected volumes.
2.4. With regard to the other flood consequence assessments assessing matters not related to the above (presented in the ES documents 5.12, 5.12.2.1, 5.12.2.2 and 5.12.2.4), while we have some points of clarification to discuss with the applicant, NRW is satisfied with the assessments and conclusions drawn with regard to flood risk.
3. Ornithology
3.1. NRW is concerned that the potential impact on whooper swan has been underestimated in the ES (document 5.9, Ecology) resulting in inadequate mitigation being proposed. One of the key measures in determining the potential effect of collision for this species is the ‘Severity’ (Chapter 5.9 – paragraph 9.7.13) which is measured here against the UK wintering population of 11,000 individuals. Paragraph 9.7.15 goes on to conclude that the development is likely to have a “Minor Adverse effect (not significant)” which is an acceptable conclusion in this context.
3.2. Further on in the chapter when assessing Llyn Alaw SSSI (Paragraph 9.7.407) Reference to the collision effects during operation are again stated as “Minor Adverse effect (not significant)”. However, it is not clear how the ES has a reached this conclusion based on the wintering populations of the SSSI rather than the whole of the UK. There is no assessment made in the context of the Welsh wintering population in either section. NRW consider that assessments made in the context referenced above are likely to indicate a much higher ‘Severity’ and therefore a higher potential collision risk during operation. With a higher collision risk, high visibility markers are likely to be required to appropriately mitigate any such risk in the key areas of higher use in close proximity to Llyn Alaw.
4. European and Nationally Fully Protected Species
4.1. NRW has concerns regarding the temporary severance of Great Crested Newt habitats during construction and that this may adversely affect the Favourable Conservation Status of this species. We consider that this has not been adequately evaluated to date. NRW will attempt to reach an agreed position on an acceptable form of mitigation as part of a SoCG.
4.2. Providing the above concern can be addressed (and matters regarding Cetaceans in section 5. are resolved), NRW is satisfied with the survey effort, assessment, avoidance and mitigation measures identified for the project for European and Nationally Protected Species. NRW is satisfied that providing these measures are appropriately secured through the DCO (and where necessary through derogation licencing) the proposal is not likely to be detrimental to the maintenance of the Favourable Conservation Status of each local population of these species.
5. Marine Mammals
5.1. NRW advises that the baseline data for this topic in ES chapter 5.9 should draw from additional sources (Atlas of Marine Mammals of Wales and CCW Monitoring Report no.68) and be updated, as some species have not been identified as present. Notably a pod of common dolphins (approximately 50 individuals) was present in the Menai Straits over a number of days in 2018. Risso’s dolphin should also be assessed in more detail.
5.2. We would advise that for completeness additional protected sites (Pembrokeshire SAC and Bristol Channel approaches SAC) should be screened in the HRA document 5.23 and referenced in document 5.9.
5.3. Further detail with regards to some of the specifics of the mitigation measures (document 7.7) will need to be defined and appropriately secured to ensure the risks to marine mammals are minimised. Notwithstanding the above, NRW agrees in principle with the potential impact pathways, the likely magnitude of effects and the mitigation measures outlined in the ES with regard to Marine Mammals.
6. Habitat Regulations Assessment
6.1. NRW is concerned that the drainage situation along the boundary of and within Cors Erddreiniog has been misunderstood/ inadequately explained within the environmental statement. A detailed assessment of the hydrological situation on the ground will be required to inform the detailed drainage plan to be produced by the applicant in this location. NRW welcomes the commitment to produce a specific plan for this location and is satisfied that the guiding principles detailed in section 8 of the CEMP (doc 7.4) are sufficient to ensure a suitable plan can be produced.
6.2. Please refer to the Marine Mammals section (5.2) for NRW’s recommendation on the inclusion of two additional sites in the assessment for completeness.
6.3. With regards to other HRA matters (ES document 5.23 Habitat Regulations Assessment Report) NRW is satisfied with the assessment principles and the conclusions reached with regard to potential effects upon protected sites.
7. Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI)
7.1. Llyn Alaw
NRW has identified in the Ornithology section (3.) matters of concern with regard to this protected site.
7.2. Tre’r Gof
NRW is satisfied that providing the measures defined within the CEMP are strictly adhered to, the proposals are unlikely to impact upon Tre’r Gof SSSI. NRW would note that it will be crucial to ensure phasing of the works appropriately with Wylfa Newydd works to ensure these measures are implemented in strict accordance with the CEMP.
7.3. NRW is satisfied with the remainder of the assessments and conclusions reached within the ES regarding the SSSI’s.
8. Fish
8.1. NRW has points to clarify with the developer regarding the specifics of mitigation measures to be used to avoid and minimise potential impacts on fish species which may be affected by the development. Particularly regarding the type and timings of use of the required deterrent in the Menai Straits which will need to offset direct impacts while minimising any disturbance effect.
8.2. NRW welcome the commitments made by the developer to utilise clear span bridges for watercourse crossings where there are known populations of fish. The watercourse specific surveys, which will inform some of the crossing methods, will have to appropriately characterise the habitats for all fish species which may use the watercourse for any stage of their lifecycle including foraging and migrating. The absence of historic records must not be used to infer that fish are not present in a watercourse and clear justification must be provided where culverting is proposed.
9. Water Framework Directive (WFD)
9.1. The document of primary relevance to WFD is 5.12.2.5, while many of the other chapters also have a bearing on the significance of potential effects on certain receptors. NRW is satisfied with the assessment methodology utilised. However, Until the applicant has appropriately addressed all topic specific issues which relate to the water environment, NRW cannot confirm the WFD assessment in its entirety is appropriate.
10. Invasive Non Native Species (INNS)
10.1. NRW welcomes many of the broad measures presented to date and the commitment to agreeing a specific method statement with regard to INNS. NRW has some matters to discuss with the applicant regarding specific control measures for some INNS species and we will attempt to reach an agreed position as part of a SoCG to ensure the specific method statement to be drawn up will be appropriate to avoid and mitigate any potential effects of INNS.
11. Waste and Materials
11.1. NRW is satisfied with the principles to be adhered to with regards to waste and materials which are to be produced and used onsite. NRW has some points of clarification with regards to document 7.11 of the ES and we will attempt to reach an agreed position as part of a SoCG. Some of the information within this chapter also requires updating to ensure accuracy. The applicant will need to ensure that suitable authorisations (permits, exemptions etc.) are in place for any waste management activity undertaken. These authorisations must be in place before the waste management activity commences.
12. Protected Landscapes
12.1. NRW is satisfied that the proposed connection would result in no significant effects on the Isle of Anglesey AONB and Snowdonia National Park, singularly, or cumulatively. We concur with the ES Chapter 7 Landscape Assessment and ES Chapter 8 Visual Assessment. We have no disagreement with the assessment. The DCO will need to enable the implementation and monitoring of the CEMP (document 7.4), and associated plans, to ensure the reinstatement of landscape within the setting of the AONB.
13. Contaminated Land
13.1. NRW is satisfied with the methodologies to be adhered to with regard to potential contamination along the route and will work with the developer and appointed contractor as the project progresses to ensure the risks from any contamination discovered are minimised.
14. Environmental Management
14.1. NRW is satisfied with the overarching methods detailed in the ES and will continue to work with the developer and any appointed contractors to reduce and minimise the risks from pollution and siltation of watercourses along the working corridor. The applicant will need the relevant permits for discharges and licences to abstract water unless the exemptions criteria are complied with.
15. Air Quality
15.1. NRW is satisfied with the assessment methodology and conclusions drawn in chapter 5.14 and associated appendices with regard to this subject, and that the potential effect on sensitive ecological receptors from the project are not likely to be significant.
16. NRW’s General Purpose
16.1. NRW is satisfied that this advice is consistent with its general purpose of pursuing the sustainable management of natural resources in relation to Wales and applying the principles of sustainable management of natural resources. NRW acknowledges that the principles of sustainable management include taking account of all relevant evidence and gathering evidence in respect of uncertainties, and taking account of the short, medium and long-term consequences of actions. NRW further acknowledges that it is an objective of sustainable management to maintain and enhance the resilience of ecosystems and the benefits they provide and, in so doing meet the needs of present generations of people without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their needs, and contribute to the achievement of the well-being goals in section 4 of the Well-being of Future Generations (Wales) Act 2015.
ANNEX A
17. Marine Licensing Comments
17.1. NRW is of the opinion that works which are licensable under the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 are included in the application, particularly the formation and use of the tunnel under the Menai Straits. To date, NRW has not been approached by the applicant with a formal Marine Licence application.
”
