Stakeholder Meeting Note

Author Nik Perepelov

Meeting with RWE npower, County Council (DCC), Torridge District Council (TDC), District Council (NDDC) & North Devon Plus (ND+) Meeting date 13/07/10 Attendees (IPC) David Cliff (Case Leader) Robert Upton (Pre-application Commissioner) David Price (EIA Officer) Nikita Perepelov (Assistant Case Officer) Attendees (non IPC) Gemma Couzens (RWE) Natasha Bacon (RWE) Michael Huntingford (RWE) Peter Quincy (ND+) Ellen Vernon (NDDC) Mike Kelly (NDDC) Vanessa Saunders (TDC) Jamie Evans (DCC) Location Woodland Enterprise Centre, , Devon

Meeting purpose Inception meeting to discuss the IPC and the key procedures relating to applications for development consent introduced by the Planning Act 2008.

Summary of RWE presented an overview of the scheme. Details of the outcomes scheme are available on the RWE website or the IPC website. Key points include: • Intended application submission date of Q2 2012. • Ongoing phase 1 Habitats Directive work on all three proposed onshore connection routes. • Landowners potentially affected by the first two route options (for which please consult the Scoping Report available on the IPC’s website) have been contacted. Landowners potentially affected by the third route will be contacted in due course.

The IPC followed with a presentation of the application procedure for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs) including the key roles of the relevant local authorities within the process. This presentation is available from the IPC on request.

Record of any On the future of the IPC, the government has made a advice given commitment to abolish the IPC, whilst retaining the process and expertise. There has also been a commitment to transitional arrangements for applications already within the existing regime. It is the government’s intention to merge the IPC and the Planning Inspectorate, creating a new body with a distinct unit dealing with major infrastructure. If, as indicated, National Policy Statements (NPS) are designated within the current session of parliament, and prior to the abolition of the IPC, then the IPC will both examine and decide on applications for development consent. Should the NPSs remain in draft, the IPC will make a recommendation to the relevant Secretary of State, with whom the decision will rest.

A local impact report (LIR) is not necessary for the examination of an application to proceed. The content of an LIR is entirely for the local authority to determine, so long as it accords with the definition given in section 60 of the Planning Act 2008 (“the Act”). The examining authority must have regard to any LIR received within the deadline set. Local authorities who are not interested parties for the purposes of section 102 of the Act are not invited to submit an LIR, but may register as interested parties through the submission of a relevant representation at the appropriate time (following the acceptance of an application), and thereby submit their evidence in the form of a written representation.

The importance of ‘front loading’ was emphasised with stakeholders needing to be fully engaged in the development of proposals prior to the submission of a formal application for development consent.

There is no mechanism by which an IPC/Secretary of State decision made under the Act can be appealed. Decisions can be subject to judicial review, so long as the claim is brought within 6 weeks following the issue of the order granting development consent or the statement of reasons (whichever is later).

The MMO will take over as the licensing and consenting authority for FEPA and CPA (soon to be Marine Licenses) from April of next year. A deemed FEPA licence or CPA consent can be included as provisions within a development consent order. Their inclusion or otherwise is for the applicant to determine, in consultation with the relevant bodies. The IPC are working closely with the MMO to align working practices through a memorandum of understanding. This will give applicants and others clarity on agreed working arrangements where such provisions are included, and where they are not.

Planning Performance Agreements are voluntary but can prove useful, for example, in the production of LIRs and the agreement of key dates for different stages of the process.

Specific Liaison around a possible outreach event. decisions/follow up required?

IPC Circulation List Attendees Peter Bond