Many thanks for these details and clarification on the acceptance stage. As promised some of my thoughts and interpretations on how I see CCCs role at the application acceptance stage. I welcome further clarification.
A large proportion of CCC's S.42 response relates to the lack of information submitted by the applicant that would allow us to make an adequate assessment of the scheme. Take site access for example, we did not have any technical drawings relating to the bellmouth access into the site, visibility splays, road widening areas etc with the Draft ES. The omission of these would then make examination difficult. In the event that the formal submission does not include these details then I would argue that this is a valid point for the examiners to take into account. So do I take it we can flag up areas where there is a lack of information which would then prejudice the examiners in their decision making process?
Also another recurring theme in the Draft Environmental Statement relating to Brechfa West was a lack of investigation of alternatives especially relating to site access and grid connection. The assessment of alternatives is fundamental to the EIA Directive. On this basis do we bring these matters to the IPC's attention at the acceptance stage i.e. failure to follow process / legislation?
Does the advice you've quoted below from CLG guidance also relate to consultees such as CCW?
My interpretation of the advice from CLG is that we assess everything other than merits of the scheme and identify areas which are lacking , have been omitted or fail to follow process / legislation to the attention of the examiners. I envisage that much of our assessment will be cross referencing our Section 42 response with the revised ES submitted by RWE Npower.
On this basis I am conscious that a link to the Environmental Statement on your website would not be practical. Hard copies of the ES would allow for more efficient cross examination of issues given the limited timescale that will be available. I envisage that CCW would have the same concerns. Is this something the IPC can insist upon or is it up to Npower? If it is the latter I very much doubt Npower will be forthcoming in providing us with copies. Please could you clarify how the information will be presented at the assessment stage?

As I explained on the phone last week, the IPC when deciding whether or not it may accept an application, it must amongst other matters, have regard to any representations received from any local authority (LA) consultee about the adequacy of the consultation and publicity undertaken by the developer at the pre-application stage (s55(4)(b) 2008 Planning Act (PA 2008)). The IPC therefore only invites LA consultees (including the local authority within whose area a scheme is located and the neighbouring local authorities) to submit an ?adequacy of consultation representation?.
The IPC invites LAs to let the commission know whether the authority considers that the developer has complied, in relation to the application, with the following duties:
- Duty to consult (section 42 of PA 2008)
- Duty to consult the local community (section 47 of PA 2008)
- Duty to publicise (section 48 of PA 2008)
In requesting the 'adequacy of consultation representation' we provide LAs only with a link to the applicant's consultation report. The Environmental Statement (ES) which a developer submits with an application, is not made available to the LAs at this stage - neither in hard copy nor electronically.
As stated in the CLG guidance for local authorities and highlighted in my previous email, it is for the LA concerned to decide what it wishes to include in any
?adequacy of consultation? representations. We would, however, expect the focus to be on whether the developer has complied with chapter 2 of part 5 of PA 2008, not the merits of the application. In drafting the adequacy of consultation response your authority will therefore need to consider whether the issues you're referring to in its view mean that the developer has or has not fulfilled its duty under chapter 2 of part 5 of PA 2008. You may also wish to note that there is no requirement on the developer in the legislation to publish the draft ES at pre-application .
If and when an application is accepted for examination all application documents (including the ES) are published on the IPC web-site at the same time as the developer notifies all prescribed persons and publishes the notification of the accepted application. The notice must also specify a deadline (at least 28 days from the day after the notification is received) by when relevant representation must be made to the IPC. During the specified time the LA can raise any issues with regards to the merits of the application and/or any of the application documents - including the ES.
I hope this answers your questions.