Dear Ms Richards The above are proposing to build a 50 megawatt incinerator in our small Georgian Town of Wisbech. They are making this a national infrastructure to circumnavigate local planning and have ignored planning guidance by failing to put forward alternative sites but have put forward alternatives relating to the design and not its siting which is my understanding of what they have done. My understanding is that in my lifetime it is unlikely to be used to full capacity. This proposed site is within 200 meters of one school, 500 meters from another and 750 meters from our largest school. It meters away from residential areas. We do not need a MEGA incinerator we should be looking to recycle not encourage waste for our future generation to live a healthier life. This small market does not have the infrastructure to cope with the amount of lorries that will be descending on our town which only has single lane carriageways. Our MP Steve Barclay (who is campaigning against this Mega incinerator) and local residents have worked hard to get the railway back into this town so that local people will have better job prospects by having carbon neutral way to expanded their job opportunities in Cambridge, Norwich Peterborough ect. This proposed MEGA incinerator puts that in jeopardy. MVV Environment Ltd have no idea what dangerous items will be on the vehicles heading for the for the proposed incineration. MVV have been less than honest in regard to the downplaying of the dangers this MEGA incinerator will pose to local residents. Not just local residents but anyone eating produce from farmland which surrounds the area from the deposits of particulates coming out of its funnel. I have read the report on PM2.5 and PM10 from AQEG (Air Quality Expert Group) commissioned by DEFRA (Department for Environment Food & Rural Affairs) I have cut and pasted at the bottom of this communication an important part, HEALTH that MVV are failing to bring to residents attention they have in fact gone all out to downplay the dangers by putting a leaflet through residence doors which contains a section MYTH busters, thereby totally disregarding the below report of just how dangerous the particulates exposure is. I am so shocked and appalled by this proposal and MVV’s total disregard for the health and well being of the residents of Wisbech and the surrounding area and further afield by particulates on crops they purchase. Governments are looked upon to protect the health and well being of its citizens if this proposal gets the green light they will have failed. Please think of the ramifications after reading the report below by AQEG and reject this proposal. I have not committed a crime yet MVV Environment Ltd have put a death sentence on my life. (read below) AQEG report 1.3.1 Health effects of PM2.5 10. The Committee on the Medical Effects of Air Pollutants (COMEAP) reports LongTerm Exposure to Air Pollution: Effect on Mortality (COMEAP, 2009) and The Mortality Effects of Long-Term Exposure to Particulate Air Pollution in the United Kingdom (COMEAP, 2010) provide an excellent synthesis of the current evidence on the impact of particulate matter on mortality. There is clear evidence that particulate matter has a significant contributory role in human all-cause mortality and in particular in cardiopulmonary mortality. 11. PM2.5 penetrates deeply into the human respiratory system. The acute effects of particle exposure include increases in hospital admissions and premature death of the old and sick due to diseases of the respiratory and cardiovascular systems. The evidence is that both PM2.5 and PM10 cause additional hospital admissions and deaths on high pollution days. Less severe effects of short-term particle exposure also occur during pollution episodes, including worsening of asthma symptoms and even a general feeling of being unwell leading to a lower level of activity. 12. Long-term exposure to particles is associated with increased levels of fatal cardiovascular and respiratory diseases, including lung cancer, which reveal themselves as increased rates of death in cities with higher concentrations of airborne particles. COMEAP (2009) expressed the view that the best estimate of the chronic health impacts of particulate matter exposure was a 6% increase in death rates per 10 µg m-3 PM2.5 concentration. As with the acute effects of particle exposure no wholly safe level has been identified. regards B Males

Dear Ms Males, Thank you for your email of 18 April 2020 expressing concerns about the proposed Medworth Energy from Waste Combined Heat and Power Facility The proposed application by MWV Environment Ltd is at the Pre-application stage of the Planning Act 2008 (PA2008) process. Therefore, the Planning Inspectorate is unable to consider representations about the merits of any application until it is accepted for Examination. The Planning Inspectorate also does not have the power to intervene in a Developer’s pre-application programme. The process for applying for a Development Consent Order (DCO) is set out in thePA2008. The timing of the application’s programme is at the discretion of the Applicant. The Developer is currently carrying out their first round of non-statutory consultation. Further rounds of consultation will take place and the Developer will advertise these before they are due to commence. Therefore, I would encourage you to contact the developer directly with regard to your concerns. The developer has a statutory duty to have regard to all consultation responses received and this should be demonstrated in the Consultation Report as part of their DCO application. However, if you feel your comments are not being taken into account, I would advise you to write to your local authority and set out why you think the Applicant is failing to conduct its consultation properly. Your comments should be taken into account when the local authority sends the Inspectorate its comments on whether the Applicant has fulfilled its consultation duties. The local authority’s comments on the Applicant’s consultation will be taken into account when the Acceptance Inspector makes their decision whether to accept the application for Examination. Should the DCO application be accepted by the Inspectorate for examination, the applicant has a duty to notify the local community when providing information on how to register as an Interested Party for the purpose of the process. The process under the PA2008 has been designed to allow members of the public and statutory stakeholders to participate in examination of all DCO applications so that anyone interested in the proposed developments, their potential impacts and any relevant matters can be fully engaged in the examination process. Once the examination begins, the Examining Authority will assess all information submitted in the application documents and will consider whether the Applicant has provided the necessary level of information. The Planning Inspectorate has produced several Advice Notes to help provide an overview of the PA2008 process and the opportunities to get involved. They are available at the following link: attachment 1 The following are particularly relevant: Advice Note 8: ‘Overview of the nationally significant infrastructure planning process for members of the public and others’. Advice Note 8.1: ‘Responding to the developer’s pre-application consultation’ Advice Note 8.2: ‘How to register to participate in an Examination’. Please be assured that anyone interested in the proposed developments, their potential impacts and any planning matters can be fully engaged in the examination process. A copy of your correspondence has been placed on our records and will be presented to the Inspector at acceptance together with the application documents and Local Authorities’ comments on the Applicant’s consultation. With regard to the current Coronavirus (COVID-19) situation, please refer to the Planning Inspectorate’s published guidance which will be updated as the situation develops. attachment 2 We have also published a Frequently Asked Questions document regarding Pre-application consultation and this can be viewed on our website here: attachment 3 Please note, in accordance with Section 51 of the PA2008, a summary of your query and our advice will be published on the project’s webpage of the National Infrastructure Website. I hope you find the above information useful.