Medworth Energy from Waste Combined Heat and Power Facility

The list below includes a record of advice we have provided for this project. For a list of all advice issued by the Planning Inspectorate, including non-project related advice, please go to the Register of advice page.

There is a statutory duty, under section 51 of the Planning Act 2008, to record the advice that is given in relation to an application or a potential application, including the name of the person who requested the advice, and to make this publicly available.

Preview
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Project Update Meeting
Please see attached Meeting Note

04 June 2021
Medworth CHP Limited
response has attachments
Project Update Meeting
Please see attached Meeting Note

15 January 2021
MVV Environment Ltd
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
My family and I live in the small Georgian town of Wisbech and are strongly opposed to the proposal to build an incinerator in the town, 1 mile from our children's school and adding to the significant traffic problems that we already have. I look forward to receiving your answers to my questions below: Over what timescale do you expect to get to 50 megawatts? How much waste will this involve to deliver 50 megawatts? Over what timescale do they expect to get to 50 megawatts? How much waste will this involve to deliver 50 megawatts? Why is proximity to three schools and The Eye Clinic the best site given the volume of lorries, impact on air pollution, and odour concerns amongst others? Why did the developer ignore the planning inspector and issue this scoping report over the Christmas holiday period? Why has the developer failed to follow best practice in developing a proposal in consultation with the community, when consultation did not begin until Spring 2020 at which point Covid-19 hit? How many lorries a week will be required, and how far will they be travelling including from surrounding counties? Why is flood risk land suitable for a waste incinerator when the Environment Agency has raised concerns at house building on such land? What is the risk of contamination in the event of flooding? How would the incinerator plans impact on Wisbech Rail? What impact will the grid connection have on the local community, and is it part of the DCO? What land does the developer plan to compulsory purchase, on what basis, and from whom, in order to build an incinerator of the scale required for its designation as a national infrastructure project?
The proposed application by MWV Environment Ltd (the Applicant) 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 an Applicant’s pre-application programme. The process for applying for a Development Consent Order (DCO) is set out in the PA2008. The timing of the application’s programme is at the discretion of the Applicant. The Applicant is currently carrying out their first round of non-statutory consultation. Further rounds of consultation will take place and the Applicant will advertise these before they are due to commence. Therefore, I would encourage you to contact the Applicant directly with regard to your concerns. The Applicant has a statutory duty to have regard to all consultation responses received and this should be demonstrated in the Consultation Report which is 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.

07 August 2020
Lucy Moody
response has attachments
Project Update Meeting
Please see attached Meeting Note

06 July 2020
MVV Environment Ltd
Enquiry received via post
response has attachments
Please see attached.
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 the PA2008. 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 development, the 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]

16 June 2020
Sue Beel
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
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.

26 May 2020
Beryl Males
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Dear Mr Salter I have some concerns about the incinerator MVV are proposing to build in the town of Wisbech. I live here and I was born here. I would be grateful if you could answer these questions for me: 1. Over what timescale do they expect to get to 50 megawatts? 2. How much waste will this involve to deliver 50 megawatts? 3. The incinerator will have a chimney up to a massive 95 metres high. From how many miles will the incinerator be visible? 4. The incinerator will be just 200 metres from one primary school, 500 metres from another, and 750 metres from the largest secondary school in our district, Thomas Clarkson Academy. The ACIS Eye Clinic is just 350 metres away. Why is this site so close to three schools and the Eye Clinic the best site given the volume of lorries, impact on air pollution, and odour concerns amongst others? 5. Why does the scoping request fail to include valid alternative locations? 6. What alternative sites / solutions were considered? 7. What is the methodology for site selection and when will it be published in line with best practice? 8. How did it consider sensitive receptors like schools, community impact like odour and noise, and visual impact? 9. The scoping request was issued over the Christmas holiday period, yet the report reveals that “the Inspectorate queried whether the scoping request would be premature given the current stage of development”. Why did the developer ignore the inspector and issue this scoping report over the Christmas holiday period? 10. Why has the developer failed to follow best practice in developing a proposal in consultation with the community, which it does not plan to consult until Spring 2020? 11. The developer suggests the incinerator will require lorry movements 7 days a week from 6am to 7pm. Yet almost all the roads in Fenland are single carriageway. The incinerator will require over half a million tonnes of waste, with the report suggesting 523,500 tonnes a year (i) How many lorries a week will be required (ii) how far will they be travelling including from surrounding counties ? 12. The incinerator will be built on land at risk of flooding (known as Flood Risk 3). Yet the developer is silent on the risk this causes of contamination (including to drinking water), in addition to any risk of soil contamination during the construction phase. Why is flood risk land suitable for a waste incinerator when the Environment Agency has raised concerns at house building on such land? 13. What is the risk of contamination in the event of flooding? 14. Later this month the Cambridgeshire Combined Authority will publish its 15-month long report on the next phase of work for Wisbech Rail, yet the incinerator developer appears to plan to dig up the Wisbech Rail line for a Combine Heat and Power (CHP) connection. How would the incinerator plans impact on Wisbech Rail? 15. The developer suggests two proposed options for connection, a 132kv line at the Walpole substation and one joining the National Grid 400kv line to the east of Walsoken. Yet it is not clear whether these are part of the Development Consent Order (DCO). What impact will this have on the local community, and is it part of the DCO? 16. The developer says they have an option on the main site from the current owners, and that it is used for aggregate storage, but then add that compulsory acquisition may be required to obtain land outside of this main site in order to build an incinerator of the scale required for its designation as a national infrastructure project (i) What land does the developer plan to compulsory purchase? (ii) on what basis? (iii) from whom? 17. Why haven't the particles PM 2.5 been measured in the surveys and only PM 10, which are less harmful to human bodies? 18. Do you consider that MVV believes Wisbech to be a softer target than Waterbeach and King's Lynn, where incinerators have been blocked? I look forward to hearing from you. Carla Johnson
Dear Ms Johnson, Thank you for your email of 18 March 2020, regarding 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 the PA2008. 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 development, the 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.

26 May 2020
Carla Johnson
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Dear Secretary of State Re: Medworth Energy from Waste Combined Heat and Power Facility [attachment 1] With the present health crisis caused by the Coronavirus pandemic all planned public consultations and community events regarding the application to build a vast incinerator in the small market town of Wisbech have been cancelled until further notice. There is significant public objection to this project and it is essential for the community to be able to meet with the Applicant and to challenge their many claims. [attachment 2] [attachment 3] The claim by the Applicant and by staff at the Inspectorate that public consultations can continue online via emails may seem reasonable in these unprecedented times but is, nevertheless, totally inappropriate for this community. Large numbers of residents in Wisbech and the surrounding villages do not use the internet, therefore the community do not accept email communication as being a ‘public consultation’ when many residents are prohibited from taking part. All concerned are very aware of the legislation that has permitted the creation of commercial incinerators in the UK, at a time when not enough evidence was known regarding the possible preventable harm and negative health implications that could be created by burning plastic and other waste materials. Therefore, given the unprecedented circumstances where the community are effectively housebound, and no community event can take place, please consider an exception to the legislation by postponing the public consultations and the eventual decision regarding this project for at least three months, or until such times as the government have deemed that public meetings and community events can safely be held. Thank you for your time. Mo Stewart Retired healthcare professional Resident of Wisbech
Dear Ms Stewart, Thank you for your email of 1 April 2020 expressing concerns about the adequacy of consultation in the current unprecedented public health situation. Please accept our sincere apologies for the delay in replying. 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 the PA2008. 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 4] 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 development, the 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 5] We have also published a Frequently Asked Questions document regarding Pre-application consultation and this can be viewed on our website here: [attachment 6] 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.

26 May 2020
Mo Stewart
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
On behalf of the Campaign against the proposed Wisbech Incinerator, (WisWIN - Wisbech Against Incineration) we wish to raise our grave concern that no consultation is taking place with residents and that the Planning Inspectorate are of the view that consultation via email is acceptable. Wisbech is a small rural town and many people do not have digital communication in the form of emails and social media. This is well known locally but was evident when people cued up when we held a Rally in Wisbech Market Place in February when we had a paper petition for people to sign. Over 200 people signed. We subsequently took the petition to Tesco's early in March for two hours on two occasions and we received nearly 1,000 signatures. When checking with residents to ensure they hadn't already signed our MP's petition, many people confirmed they had no computer. We are therefore asking for a delay and have also written to the Leader of Cambs County Council and the Cambridgeshire and Peterborough Mayor raising our concerns and asking for them to request a deferment. We appreciate that there are legal time limits but in this unprecedented time because of the Coronavirus epidemic, this seems a reasonable request.
Thank you for your email of 29 March 2020 expressing concerns about the adequacy of consultation in the current unprecedented public health situation. Please accept our sincere apologies for the delay in replying. As you are aware, 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]

26 May 2020
WisWIN - Wisbech Against Incineration - Virginia Bucknor
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
Dear Mr Salter I have some concerns about the incinerator MVV are proposing to build in the town of Wisbech. I live here and I was born here. I would be grateful if you could answer these questions for me: 1. Over what timescale do they expect to get to 50 megawatts? 2. How much waste will this involve to deliver 50 megawatts? 3. The incinerator will have a chimney up to a massive 95 metres high. From how many miles will the incinerator be visible? 4. The incinerator will be just 200 metres from one primary school, 500 metres from another, and 750 metres from the largest secondary school in our district, Thomas Clarkson Academy. The ACIS Eye Clinic is just 350 metres away. Why is this site so close to three schools and the Eye Clinic the best site given the volume of lorries, impact on air pollution, and odour concerns amongst others? 5. Why does the scoping request fail to include valid alternative locations? 6. What alternative sites / solutions were considered? 7. What is the methodology for site selection and when will it be published in line with best practice? 8. How did it consider sensitive receptors like schools, community impact like odour and noise, and visual impact? 9. The scoping request was issued over the Christmas holiday period, yet the report reveals that “the Inspectorate queried whether the scoping request would be premature given the current stage of development”. Why did the developer ignore the inspector and issue this scoping report over the Christmas holiday period? 10. Why has the developer failed to follow best practice in developing a proposal in consultation with the community, which it does not plan to consult until Spring 2020? 11. The developer suggests the incinerator will require lorry movements 7 days a week from 6am to 7pm. Yet almost all the roads in Fenland are single carriageway. The incinerator will require over half a million tonnes of waste, with the report suggesting 523,500 tonnes a year (i) How many lorries a week will be required (ii) how far will they be travelling including from surrounding counties ? 12. The incinerator will be built on land at risk of flooding (known as Flood Risk 3). Yet the developer is silent on the risk this causes of contamination (including to drinking water), in addition to any risk of soil contamination during the construction phase. Why is flood risk land suitable for a waste incinerator when the Environment Agency has raised concerns at house building on such land? 13. What is the risk of contamination in the event of flooding? 14. Later this month the Cambridgeshire Combined Authority will publish its 15-month long report on the next phase of work for Wisbech Rail, yet the incinerator developer appears to plan to dig up the Wisbech Rail line for a Combine Heat and Power (CHP) connection. How would the incinerator plans impact on Wisbech Rail? 15. The developer suggests two proposed options for connection, a 132kv line at the Walpole substation and one joining the National Grid 400kv line to the east of Walsoken. Yet it is not clear whether these are part of the Development Consent Order (DCO). What impact will this have on the local community, and is it part of the DCO? 16. The developer says they have an option on the main site from the current owners, and that it is used for aggregate storage, but then add that compulsory acquisition may be required to obtain land outside of this main site in order to build an incinerator of the scale required for its designation as a national infrastructure project (i) What land does the developer plan to compulsory purchase? (ii) on what basis? (iii) from whom? 17. How does this fit in with the government target of eliminating greenhouses gases by 2050? I look forward to hearing from you. David Hammond
Dear Mr Hammond, Thank you for your email of 21 March 2020, regarding 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 the PA2008. 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 development, the 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.

26 May 2020
David Hammond
Enquiry received via email
response has attachments
REF: Response to Scoping Opinion Proposed Medworth Energy from Waste Combined Heat and Power Facility (Wisbech) EN010110 [attachment 1] Can you please confirm that the public response to the above published Scoping Opinion is required by the end of March.
In light of your concerns I have contacted the Applicant to fully understand their consultation processes and changes they have made in response to the Governments approach the coronavirus pandemic. As you are aware the public consultation events for Medworth have been cancelled, however, the public consultation itself is still underway. It was launched on 16th March and is currently proposed to run until Monday 4th May. I think perhaps this may be where the mix up regarding consultation on the Scoping Opinion may have come from. The Applicant has information regarding the proposals on their website – [attachment 2]. You can raise your concerns, including those you have on the Scoping Opinion, using the ‘general enquiry form’ here [attachment 3]. Alternatively you can email [email protected] or call 01945 232 231. Furthermore if you have comments regarding the consultation itself you may provide feedback here [attachment 3] using the ‘consultation feedback form’ tab, or in hard copy to ‘Freepost MVV’. All consultation feedback will be reviewed and considered as the project progresses. The Applicant will continue to review the coronavirus situation in relation to their ability to hold community events. Engaging with affected communities is their key priority and they will assess how and when events can be held as the situation progresses.

26 March 2020
Mo Stewart
Enquiry received via meeting
response has attachments
Project Inception Meeting
Please see attached Meeting Note

18 October 2019
MVV Environment Ltd