The Planning Act 2008 Application by Whitemoss Landfill Limited The construction of a new landfill void for the disposal of hazardous wastes and continuation of filling at the existing Whitemoss Landfill Examining Authority’s Report of Findings and Conclusions and Recommendation to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government _______________________________________ Wendy Burden Philip Asquith Robert Macey Examining Authority 21 February 2015 1 This page intentionally left blank 2 ERRATA SHEET – Whitemoss Landfill- Ref. WS010003 Examining Authority’s Report of Findings and Conclusions and Recommendation to the Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government Corrections agreed by the Examining Authority prior to a decision being made Main Report Paragraph Correction 4.35 On the seventh line, for ‘met’ substitute ‘meet’. 4.182 For ‘Requirement 19(1)’ substitute ‘Requirement 19’. 6.17 In the first line of the quotation, omit the word ‘for’. 7.11 In the second bullet point, for ‘(r13)’ substitute ‘(r32)’. 7.14 In the penultimate line, for ‘r32(b)(ii)’ substitute ‘r32(2)(b)’ 7.18 In the seventh line, for ‘AS-056’ substitute ‘APP-S106- 03’. Appendix Paragraph/ Correction line Appendix 1 ‘Daniel hunt’ should read ‘Daniel Hunt’ RR0687 Appendix 1 ‘Daniel wood’ should read ‘Daniel Wood’ RR0700 Appendix 1 ‘west lancashire poultry ltd’ should read ‘West RR3237 Lancashire Poultry Ltd’ This page inserted 19 May 2015 Examining Authority’s findings and conclusions and recommendation in respect of the construction of a new landfill void and continuation of filling at the existing landfill at Whitemoss Landfill, White Moss Lane South, Skelmersdale File Ref WS010003 The application, dated 20 December 2013, was made under section 37 of the Planning Act 2008 and was received in full by The Planning Inspectorate on 20 December 2013. The Applicant is Whitemoss Landfill Limited. The application was accepted for examination on 17 January 2014. On the 17 March 2014, Wendy Burden was appointed to be the Examining Authority (ExA) for the examination of this application. The application was made by Whitemoss1 Landfill Limited for the extension and continuation of landfill with hazardous waste at Whitemoss Landfill. The examination of the application began on 21 May 2014 and was completed on 21 November 2014. On the 8 July 2014, Philip Asquith and Robert Macey were appointed as two further members of a panel of three led by Wendy Burden under s68 of the Planning Act 2008. The panel became the ExA for the examination of the application from that date onwards under s62. The development proposed comprises: (a) The construction of a new western landfill void for the disposal of the same range of hazardous wastes as at the existing Whitemoss Landfill site at an input rate of up to 150,000 tonnes per annum (tpa) supported by the existing site infrastructure. (b) The continuation of filling at the existing Whitemoss Landfill site with hazardous waste. (c) As part of the creation of the western landfill void, the extraction and stockpiling of clay and mudstones for use in the construction of the engineered containment system at the site and for exportation. (d) As part of the creation of the western landfill void, the extraction, stockpiling and exportation of general fill materials for use in the construction industry. 1 The Applicant company and the existing landfill site are called Whitemoss Landfill, whereas the place name as given on sign posts within the locality and shown on OS maps is White Moss. We therefore refer to White Moss except where we are referring to the Applicant company and existing landfill site. 3 (e) As part of the creation of the western landfill void, the extraction and exportation of coal. Summary of Recommendation: The Examining Authority recommends that subject to the measures which we identify at 8.12(i) and (ii), the Secretary of State should make the Order in the form attached. 4 Section Contents 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................... 6 2 MAIN FEATURES OF THE PROPOSAL AND SITE ................................. 9 3 LEGAL AND POLICY CONTEXT ...................................................... 15 4 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS IN RELATION TO POLICY AND FACTUAL ISSUES ..................................................................................... 18 5 FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS IN RELATION TO HABITATS REGULATIONS ........................................................................... 88 6 COMPULSORY ACQUISITION ........................................................ 89 7 RECOMMENDED DEVELOPMENT CONSENT ORDER (DCO) ............... 101 8 SUMMARY OF CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS ................ 107 Appendices Contents 1 EXAMINATION LIBRARY 2 EVENTS IN THE EXAMINATION 3 LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS 4 RECOMMENDED DEVELOPMENT CONSENT ORDER 5 1 INTRODUCTION 1.1 The proposed development is a landfill facility for the disposal of hazardous waste in England with a capacity in excess of 100,000 tonnes per annum (tpa) and therefore is a Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project (NSIP) as defined by s14(1)(p) and s30 of the Planning Act 2008 (PA2008). 1.2 Sections 14 and 30 of the PA2008 provide a clear legal definition of a NSIP, which is dependent upon the capacity of the proposed development. The proposal is for a development with a capacity in excess of 100,000 tpa, and it has been accepted by the SoS as falling within the definition contained in the PA2008. 1.3 We addressed the issue of whether the application should be considered as an NSIP in the Notice of Procedural Decisions published on the 30 May 2014 under Rule 8 of the Infrastructure Planning (Examination Procedure) Rules 2010 (as amended) [DEC- G-05]. 1.4 A number of submissions argued that the likely input rates of hazardous waste would be below 100,000 tpa. [EV-PM-009 and others] This submission was contested by the Applicant [eg REP- 1Q-11]. We consider the implications of potentially lower rates of hazardous waste deposits upon the impacts of the proposal as one of the main issues in the examination in Section 4 [4.129] 1.5 The main events of the examination and procedural decisions taken during the examination are listed in detail in Appendix 2. We visited the environs of the site and other locations referred to in representations, such as Beacon Country Park, on a number of occasions throughout the examination on an unaccompanied basis. We carried out an accompanied site inspection on the 15 October 2014 [EV-PM-025]. 1.6 References in the report to Articles or Requirements mean the Articles in the recommended Development Consent Order (DCO) or the Requirements in Schedule 2 (Appendix 4). Any reference in the text to former numbered Articles means the Article as numbered in the application draft DCO [APP-DCO-01]. 1.7 The DCO application was accompanied by a draft agreement under s106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 (as amended) [APP-s106-01]. The agreement was subject to discussion and amendment during the examination and was submitted as a Unilateral Undertaking (UU) [APP-s106-03] before the close of the examination. We consider the provisions of the UU in Section 4. 1.8 Some 3,280 relevant representations were received within the statutory period. Of these, the overwhelming majority were opposed to the project, with submissions on environmental harm and harm to health being most frequent. 6 1.9 Representations were made to the examination that the application was not properly made, submitting that the Applicant had not (in relation to the proposed application that became the application) complied with Section 2 of Part 5 of the PA2008 and particularly the duty to consult landowners as set out in s42(1)(d) [EV-PM-024, AS-008, and others]. This submission was contested by the Applicant [EV-PM-026 and others]. 1.10 This matter was addressed in the Notice of Procedural Decisions under Rule 8 of the Infrastructure Planning (Examination Procedure) Rules 2010 (as amended) published on the 30 May 2014 [DEC-G-05]. The Secretary of State accepted the application for examination on 17 January 2014, having reached the conclusion that the Applicant had complied with Section 2 of Part 5 of the PA2008. We have no remit to review that decision. 1.11 We deal with notifications of persons required under s56(2)(d) including the matter of persons within Category 3 of s57 of the PA2008 within Section 6 on Compulsory Acquisition. 1.12 We carefully considered the submissions on this and all the other matters that were made to us, as they were made, and particularly noting the other consultation and notification activities that took place throughout the process. 1.13 To ensure that all interested parties in the project had every opportunity to participate in the examination, we exercised discretion and accepted late submissions throughout the examination until it closed on 21 November 2014. 1.14 In addition, we exercised the fullest discretion available to us to accept both written and oral submissions from parties who were not interested parties, at all stages of the examination. 1.15 In order to assemble further information on matters raised in submissions for the deadline of the 26 June, a change was made to the examination timetable under Rule 8 of the Infrastructure Planning (Examination Procedure) Rules 2010 (as amended) by letter dated 9 July 2014[DEC-G-06]. The dates for the accompanied site inspection and issue specific hearings were amended to follow the receipt of responses to the ExA’s second round of questions. 1.16 The Applicant has agreed Statements of Common Ground (SoCGs) with West Lancashire Borough Council (WLBC) [PD-L-05, PD-L- 09], Lancashire County Council (LCC) [PD-L-05, PD-L-08, PD-L- 11], the Coal Authority [PD-L-03], the Environment Agency (EA) [PD-L-04 , PD-L-13], and Natural England (NE) [PD-L-06, PD-L- 12]. We also note the correspondence sent by Public Health England to the Applicant, dated 10 July 2014, on areas of common ground between them [PD-L-07].