Meeting Note

File reference EN010005 Triton Knoll EN010019 Hull Biomass EN010021 Dogger Bank EN010029 Brigg EN010030 Killingholme EN010033 Hornsea TR010007 Immingham TR040001 Doncaster Status FINAL Author Eleri Davies

Meeting with Stakeholders Meeting date 08 September 2010 Attendees (IPC) Robert Upton (Deputy Chair and Commissioner) Gideon Amos (Commissioner) Mark Wilson (Case Leader) Tom Carpen (Case Leader) Mike Harris (Case Officer) Eleri Davies (Case Officer) Nikita Perepelov (Assistant Case Officer) Peter Rickett (Press Officer) Attendees (non IPC) Jonathan Monk (Able UK Ltd) Neil Etherington (Able UK Ltd) Mike Stacey (ABP Hull) Tom Jeynes (ABP Hull) Jon Cooper (Centrica) Jenny Haynes (Council for the Protection of Rural England) Teresa Hubery (Doncaster Council) Mel Roberts (Doncaster Council) Ian Crummack (DONG Energy) Claus Norg (DONG Energy) Ian Smith (English Heritage) Jake Newby (Environment Agency) Steven Coe (Environment Agency) Andy Dale (Environment Agency) Gerald Holmes (Federation of Small Businesses) Mark Thomas (Forewind Limited) Gavin Clark (Forewind Limited) John Dennis (Hedon Town Council) Gordon Thurston (Hedon Town Council) Deb Hotson (Hibaldstow Parish Council)

Page 1of 8 Jonathan Akers (Highways Agency/Pell Frischmann) Andy McCormack (Highways Agency/Pell Frischmann) Jacqui Sissens (Highways Agency/Pell Frischmann) Rob Ramshaw (Highways Agency/Pell Frischmann) Penny Taylor (Health and Safety Executive) Helen Stinson (Hull City Council) Cllr Woolmer (Hull City Council) Cllr Welton (Hull City Council) Emma Tindall (Hull City Council) Darren Clarke (Humber Industry Nature Conservation Association) Brenda Gallagher (Lincolnshire County Council) Lance Furniss (Mainstream Renewable Power Ltd) Chris Jenner (Mainstream Renewable Power Ltd) Tom Elder (MCGA) Gwen Lancaster (MCGA) Chris Barwell (North Lincolnshire Council) Jodie Booth (North Lincolnshire Council) William Hill (North Lincolnshire Council) Gordon Kell (North Lincolnshire Council) Dr Terry Matthews (North Yorkshire and Humber Health Protection Agency) Michael Barningham (Natural England) Phil Wallis (North East Lincolnshire Council/Balfour Beatty) Kate Walker (North East Lincolnshire Council/Balfour Beatty) Joanna Heweth (North East Lincolnshire Council/Balfour Beatty) Marcus Asquith (North East Lincolnshire Council/Balfour Beatty) Paul Wheelhouse (Pell Frischmann and Golder Associates) Colm Ryan (Planning Aid East Midlands) Jacqui Barnes (Planning Aid Yorkshire) Rob Gully (RWE) Alex Richards (Scarborough Borough Council) Christopher Hull (Scott Wilson) Nicola Bell (Scott Wilson) Helen Kirk (Thorne and Hatfield Moors) Mark Sturgess (West Lindsey Council) Kim Butcher (National Health Service) Matthew Sutcliffe (Humberside Fire and Rescue) Terry Sillers (Humberside Fire and Rescue) Andy Wainwright (East Riding Council) Location The Guildhall, Hull

Meeting purpose Stakeholder Event

Summary of Introduction and Presentation outcomes • The IPC explained its policy of openness and

Page 2of 8 transparency; any advice given will be recorded and placed on the IPC’s website under Section 51 of the Planning Act 2008 (the Act). • Presentation by IPC Case Leaders

Q&A Session

1. Mike Stacey (ABP). Will public inquiries still be held for the consideration of projects falling below the thresholds outlined in the Act?

IPC: if the IPC is not the Examining Authority then the process would continue under the relevant regime although Section 35 of the Act makes provisions for the Secretary of State (SoS) to direct the IPC to consider a proposal even if it falls below the thresholds for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIPs).

2. Rob Gully (RWE). Two questions: (i) would the IPC consider carrying out further outreach work to support the public in understanding the process?; (ii) will the IPC publish its reasoning should an application not be accepted?

IPC (i): resources to provide for outreach work are not infinite and local outreach event will be held where considered feasible and necessary. Organisations such as Planning Aid also have a potential role to play in community engagement. IPC (ii): full reasons for not accepting an application would be published in accordance with Section 55(7) of the Act.

3. Andy Wainwright (East Riding Council). Are Local Authorities (LAs) expected to duplicate the developer’s consultation with local communities before preparing a Local Impact Report (LIR)?

IPC: an LIR is not mandatory under Section 60 of the Act and there are no legal requirements on consultation, content etc. It is hoped that LAs will take the opportunity to prepare an LIR and opportunities exist for collaborative/joint working between relevant LAs. It is also up to the LA how the LIR is ratified, e.g. by Committee or Delegated Decision.

4. Mark Thomas (Forewind Ltd). Clarification sought on Planning Performance Agreements (PPA) and whether there are model provisions available.

IPC: the Planning Advisory Service (PAS) may be

Page 3of 8 able to provide information on PPAs. Some existing IPC projects have a PPA in place; these are available through promoters’ websites.

5. Gordon Thurston (Hedon Town Council): It is of critical importance to involve Town and Parish Councils in the early stages of projects. Expressed concerns regarding enforcement issues and the need for meaningful sanctions.

IPC: the IPC’s approach to relevant Parish/Town Councils goes beyond what is prescribed in the Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009. The IPC will seek the views of the Parish/Town Councils within which the proposal is located (termed “B” Councils) as well as neighbouring Parish/Town Councils (termed “A” Councils).

IPC: LAs are responsible for enforcement. IPC stressed the importance of the pre-application process in recommending enforceable “requirements” (akin to planning conditions) to be included within the draft Development Consent Order (DCO). Under Section 49(2) of the Act, the applicant must have regard to any relevant responses made under Sections 42, 47(7) and 48 of the Act.

6. Andy McCormack (Highways Agency). Two questions: i) Do the Highways Agency powers of direction against determination of an application under the Highways Act apply to IPC cases?; ii) How much will the IPC be looking for other consents (e.g. under the Highways Act) to be satisfied prior to recommendations/decisions being made?

IPC (i): advised that Article 14 directions do not apply under the 2008 Planning Act. The Highways Agency should seek its own legal advice on powers under the Highways Act and how these relate to IPC projects.

IPC (ii): it is the responsibility of the Highways Agency to provide meaningful input at the pre- application stage. Where an agreement cannot be reached with promoters, then the Highways Agency can make a relevant representation which will form part of the evidence base for the Examining Authority.

Page 4of 8 7. Mike Stacey (ABP). Does the inquiry process and its inquisitorial focus rule out the prospect of formal cross-examination.

IPC: although written representations and an inquisitorial approach are the preferred means of examination, the Examining Authority has the discretion to allow cross-examination if this is considered necessary and appropriate to the case.

IPC: The chair of the Examining Authority may also, under section 101 of the Act, appoint a barrister, solicitor or advocate to cross-examine a person making representations at a hearing.

8. Phil Wallis (North East Lincolnshire Council). Who discharges DCO requirements and what provisions are available in cases of dispute?

IPC: the IPC discharges requirements and the LAs are responsible for enforcement. The IPC is currently looking at this issue to see how it works in practice. It is essential that early discussions on the draft DCO take place to avoid potential disputes at the post-decision stage. The IPC has no powers to make funds available for supporting the LAs enforcement activities.

9. Terry Mathews (Health Protection Agency). Are Health Protection Agency (HPA) and Primary Care Trusts (PCTs) statutory consultees? What is the scope of the LIR is in terms of health issues?

IPC: the HPA and PCTs are statutory consultees. It is up to the LA to determine the scope/content of the LIR and confirmed that it could be appropriate to consider health issues. The IPC noted that a Health Impact Assessment (HIA) has been prepared in relation to another IPC project after local consultation.

10. Michael Barningham (Natural England). The River Humber is a key nature conservation area. As the Competent Authority (CA), does the IPC take Appropriate Assessment (AA) under the Habitats Regulations into account?

IPC: confirmed that it would only be the CA in respect of AA if the relevant National Policy Statement (NPS) is designated. Where an NPS is not designated, the IPC would make a recommendation to the relevant SoS who, as decision-maker, would be the CA.

Page 5of 8

IPC: the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) Scoping and Environmental Statement (ES) preparation processes should allow the opportunity for AA issues to be identified at an early stage.

11. Andy Wainwright (East Riding Council). Are the responses of statutory consultees published and made available on the internet?

IPC: all comments made to the IPC are publicly available. Deadlines are set for comments to be submitted. IPC stressed the importance of the Preliminary Meeting for understanding the examination procedure and timetable.

12. Jake Newby (Environment Agency). Who is responsible for providing an examination venue and where are these held?

IPC: It is the responsibility of the applicant to provide a suitable venue; examinations will be held in the project locality.

13. Chris Barwell (North Lincolnshire Council). What opportunities are there for LAs to highlight issues with the Statement of Community Consultation (SoCC)?

IPC: It is the applicant’s decision what is included in the SoCC however they must have regard to the relevant LAs’ comments. LAs have the opportunity to comment on the draft SoCC under Section 47(2) of the Act at the pre-application stage and on the adequacy of consultation under Section 55(4) of the Act once the application is submitted to the IPC.

14. John Denis (Hedon Town Council). How is regard given to a neighbouring authority which is separated by a geographical feature, e.g. a river?

IPC: the legislation defines neighbouring authorities however the promoter may decide to consult more widely. In the IPC’s experience, boundaries would often run up features such as rivers.

15. Penny Taylor (Health and Safety Executive). Is the IPC the Hazardous Substances Authority (HSA) for NSIPs?

IPC: If the draft DCO includes provisions for

Page 6of 8 Hazardous Substances Consent (HSC), then the IPC/SoS is the HSA. If not included in the draft DCO, then the promoter would have to apply separately for HSC to the relevant HAS.

16. Paul Wheelhouse (Highways Agency). Will the IPC appoint Environmental Consultants to assess the adequacy of an ES?

IPC: it is for statutory consultees and other interested parties to bring to the IPC’s attention areas in the ES which they consider are inadequate. The Chair of the Commission may, at the request of the Examining Authority, appoint an assessor to assist in the examination of the application under Section 100 of the Act.

17. Andrew McCormack (Highways Agency). Will the abolition of the IPC lead to disruption to the processing of applications?

IPC: the Coalition Government has made a commitment to avoid disruption; and transitional arrangements will be put in place to deal with NSIPs submitted to the IPC prior to abolition.

18. Kate Walker (Balfour Beatty): What is the cost of applying to the IPC for a DCO?

IPC: a fee of £4,500 is payable in respect of a decision by the Commission under Section 55 of the Act whether or not to accept the application. Subsequent costs are dependent on the individual scheme. Essentially the fee reflects the number of Commissioners involved (i.e. Single Commissioner/panel of Commissioners) and the length of the examination. For further details, refer to the Infrastructure Planning (Fees) Regulations 2010.

19. Paul Wheelhouse (Highways Agency). How is a decision made on whether an application will be dealt with by a single Commissioner or a panel of Commissioners?

IPC: the Chair of the Commission makes a decision on this matter with reference to Communities and Local Government (CLG) guidance.

20. Jake Newby (Environment Agency). Is the IPC willing to take queries from members of the public on schemes, for instance, queries which may be

Page 7of 8 received by the EA?

IPC: the IPC is willing to answer queries on process matters with all stakeholders but cannot discuss the merits of a scheme.

21. Jenny Haynes (CPRE). Is it possible to register as an interested party after the deadline? In circumstances, for instance, where someone had not been aware of a project previously.

IPC: projects should be sufficiently well advertised to avoid such an issue occurring. There is however a provision to allow interested parties who did not register at the appropriate time to participate in the examination at the discretion of the Examining Authority.

Specific None decisions/follow up required?

Circulation List Peter Bond Tracey Page

List of Acronyms:

AA Appropriate Assessment CA Competent Authority CLG Communities and Local Government DCO Development Consent Order EA Environment Agency EIA Environmental Impact Assessment ES Environmental Statement HIA Health Impact Assessment HPA Health Protection Agency HSA Hazardous Substances Authority HSC Hazardous Substances Consent IPC Infrastructure Planning Commission LA Local Authority LIR Local Impact Report NPS National Policy Statement NSIP Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project PAS Planning Advisory Service PCT Primary Care Trust PPA Planning Performance Agreement SoCC Statement of Community Consultation SoS Secretary of State

Page 8of 8