PLANNING APPLICATION TO DEVELOP A HYDROCARBON WELLSITE AND DRILL UP TO TWO EXPLORATORY WELLS FOR A TEMPORARY PERIOD OF UP TO THREE YEARS
SPRINGS ROAD, MISSON
VOLUME 3 – ENVIRONMENTAL STATEMENT
OCTOBER 2015
Island Gas Limited
Planning Application to Develop a Hydrocarbon Wellsite and Drill up to Two Exploratory Wells for a Temporary Period of up to Three Years
Springs Road, Misson, DN10 6ET
Volume 3
Environmental Statement: Main Text
October 2015
October 2015 ii
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Table of Contents
1 Introduction ...... 1 1.1 Preamble ...... 1 1.2 Referencing ...... 1 1.3 Drawings ...... 2 1.4 The Proposed Development ...... 3 2 Environmental Statement ...... 5 2.1 Screening and Scoping of Environmental Impacts ...... 5 2.2 EIA Scoping ...... 5 2.3 The Environmental Statement Content ...... 6 2.4 Documents for Purchase and Inspection ...... 8 3 The Site and Surroundings ...... 9 3.1 Location...... 9 3.2 Surrounding Uses ...... 9 3.3 Topography ...... 10 3.4 Site History ...... 11 3.5 Designations ...... 11 3.6 Sub-surface Well Trajectory ...... 12 3.7 Present Development ...... 13 3.8 Related Development ...... 13 4 Proposed Development ...... 15 4.1 Overview ...... 15 4.2 Wellsite Construction (Phase 1) ...... 15 4.3 Drilling Operations (Phase 2) ...... 16 4.4 Evaluation (Phase 3) ...... 21 4.5 Abandonment, Decommissioning and Restoration (Phase 4) ...... 21 4.6 On-site Arrangements ...... 22 4.7 Duration...... 25 4.8 Operational Hours ...... 26 4.9 Access and Traffic Generation ...... 27 4.10 Staff ...... 28 4.11 Environmental Design and Management ...... 28 5 Alternatives ...... 33 5.1 Introduction ...... 33 5.2 Key Considerations ...... 33 5.3 Methodology ...... 34 5.4 Desk Study ...... 34 5.5 Seismic Survey ...... 35 5.6 Areas of Search ...... 36 5.7 Site Selection ...... 36 6 Transport ...... 47 6.1 Introduction ...... 47 6.2 Policy Context ...... 47 6.3 Assessment Methodology ...... 47 6.4 Baseline Conditions ...... 47 6.5 Proposed Operations ...... 48 6.6 Assessment of Impacts ...... 49 6.7 Mitigation Proposals ...... 50 6.8 Residual Effects ...... 51 6.9 Cumulative Impacts ...... 51 6.10 Statement of Significance and Summary ...... 51 7 Noise and Vibration ...... 53 7.1 Introduction ...... 53 7.2 Policy Context ...... 53
October 2015 iii
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
7.3 Assessment Methodology ...... 53 7.4 Baseline Conditions ...... 55 7.5 Assessment of Impact ...... 55 7.6 Mitigation Proposals ...... 56 7.7 Residual Effects ...... 57 7.8 Statement of Significance and Summary ...... 57 7.9 Vibration ...... 58 8 Air Quality ...... 59 8.1 Introduction ...... 59 8.2 Policy Context ...... 59 8.3 Assessment Methodology ...... 59 8.4 Baseline Conditions ...... 61 8.5 Assessment of Impact ...... 61 8.6 Mitigation Proposals ...... 63 8.7 Residual Effects ...... 64 8.8 Cumulative Effects ...... 65 8.9 Statement of Significance and Summary ...... 65 9 Landscape and Visual ...... 67 9.1 Introduction ...... 67 9.2 Assessment Methodology ...... 67 9.3 Landscape Baseline Conditions ...... 69 9.4 Visual Baseline Conditions ...... 74 9.5 Assessment of Impact – Landscape ...... 76 9.6 Assessment of Impact – Visual ...... 77 9.7 Mitigation Proposals ...... 81 9.8 Residual Effects ...... 81 9.9 Cumulative and Combined Effects ...... 81 9.10 Statement of Significance and Summary ...... 82 10 Lighting ...... 85 10.1 Introduction ...... 85 10.2 Policy Context ...... 85 10.3 Assessment Methodology ...... 85 10.4 Baseline Conditions ...... 86 10.5 Assessment of Impact ...... 86 10.6 Phase 2 Quantitative Light Trespass Assessment (Residential) ...... 87 10.7 Phase 2 Quantitative Light Source Intensity Assessment (Residential) ...... 88 10.8 Phase 2 Quantitative Upward Lighting Ratio (‘sky-glow’) Assessment ...... 88 10.9 Phase 2 Quantitative Illuminance Assessment (Ecological) ...... 88 10.10 Qualitative Obtrusive Lighting Assessment (Phases 1, 3 and 4) ...... 88 10.11 Mitigation Proposals ...... 89 10.12 Residual Effects ...... 89 10.13 Cumulative Effects ...... 89 10.14 Statement of Significance and Summary ...... 90 11 Hydrogeology ...... 91 11.1 Introduction ...... 91 11.2 Policy Context ...... 91 11.3 Assessment Methodology ...... 91 11.4 Baseline Conditions ...... 91 11.5 Environmental Design and Management ...... 96 11.6 Assessment of Impact ...... 100 11.7 Mitigation Proposals and Residual Effects ...... 102 11.8 Residual Effects ...... 102 11.9 Cumulative and Combined Effects ...... 103 11.10 Statement of Significance and Summary ...... 103 12 Hydrology and Flood Risk ...... 105 12.1 Introduction ...... 105 12.2 Policy Context ...... 105
October 2015 iv
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
12.3 Assessment Methodology ...... 105 12.4 Baseline Conditions ...... 105 12.5 Environmental Design and Management ...... 106 12.6 Assessment of Impact ...... 110 12.7 Mitigation Proposals and Residual Effects ...... 114 12.8 Cumulative Effects ...... 114 12.9 Statement of Significance and Summary ...... 115 13 Contaminated Land...... 117 13.1 Introduction ...... 117 13.2 Policy Context ...... 117 13.3 Baseline Conditions ...... 117 13.4 Assessment of Impacts ...... 119 13.5 Mitigation ...... 122 13.6 Residual Effects ...... 122 13.7 Conclusions...... 122 14 Ecology ...... 125 14.1 Introduction ...... 125 14.2 Policy Context ...... 125 14.3 Assessment Methodology ...... 125 14.4 Baseline Conditions ...... 127 14.5 Assessment of Impact ...... 128 14.6 Mitigation Proposals ...... 135 14.7 Residual Effects ...... 137 14.8 Cumulative Effects ...... 137 14.9 Statement of Significance and Summary ...... 137 15 Cultural Heritage ...... 139 15.1 Introduction ...... 139 15.2 Policy Context ...... 139 15.3 Assessment Methodology ...... 139 15.4 Baseline Conditions ...... 140 15.5 Assessment of Impact ...... 143 15.6 Mitigation Proposals ...... 145 15.7 Residual Effects ...... 145 15.8 Statement of Significance and Summary ...... 145 16 Other Issues ...... 147 16.1 Public Health ...... 147 16.2 Socio-economic Impacts ...... 151 16.3 Risks of Accidents and Hazardous Development ...... 151 16.4 Broadband Signal ...... 154 16.5 Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield (Aerodrome Safeguarding) ...... 155 17 Cumulative and Combined Effects ...... 157 17.1 Cumulative Effects ...... 157 17.2 Combined Effects ...... 161 18 Conclusions ...... 163 Appendix A: NCC Scoping Opinion ...... 167
October 2015 v
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
List of Acronyms and Abbreviations
Term or abbreviation Definition AADT Annual Average Daily Traffic ADMS-Roads ADMS-Roads is a dispersion modelling software that has an extensive published track record of use in the UK for the assessment of local air quality impacts, including model validation and verification studies Agricultural Land The Agricultural Land Classification system classifies Classification (ALC) agricultural land in five categories according to versatility and suitability for growing crops through Grades 1 (Excellent) to 5 (Poor). AOD Above Ordnance Datum Aquifer An aquifer is an underground layer of water-bearing rock. Aquifers act as reservoirs for groundwater. Wells drilled into aquifers provide water for drinking, agriculture, and industrial uses. AQMA Air Quality Management Area Baseline The existing environmental conditions (pre-development) at the time of assessment. BDC Bassetlaw District Council BGS British Geological Survey BHA Bottom Hole Assembly Bottom Hole Assembly The BHA is the component of the drill string that includes the core bit, outer core barrel, various subs, and the drill collars. It hangs below the drill pipe and provides weight to the drill or core bit to induce the teeth to penetrate the formation. DECC Department of Energy and Climate Change Defra Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs DfT Department for Transport DMBC Doncaster Metropolitan Borough Council DMRB Design Manual for Roads and Bridges Drill cuttings Drill cuttings are the broken bits of solid material removed from a borehole drilled by rotary, percussion, or auger methods. EA Environment Agency EALs Environmental Assessment Levels EHO Environmental Health Officer EIA Environmental Impact Assessment Embedded mitigation Embedded mitigation measures are measures that are built into the design of a development to avoid, reduce or compensate any adverse effects on the environment that may otherwise have a greater likelihood of occurring. Embedded mitigation measures are taken into account in the assessment of the Proposed Development prior to further or additional mitigation measures being recommended if required.
October 2015 vi
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Term or abbreviation Definition Environmental Impact Environmental Impact Assessment is the process by which the Assessment potential effects of a development or project are on the environment are considered. The assessment predicts the likely effects of a project allowing them to be mitigated (see mitigation measures) and the likely residual effects predicted. EPUK Environmental Protection UK ES Environmental Statement Environmental The document that describes the environmental impact access Statement process and findings. FEH Flood Estimation Handbook FRA Flood Risk Assessment GTA Guidance on Transport Assessment Groundwater Source The Environment Agency has designated Groundwater Source Protection Zone Protection Zones (SPZs) for 2000 groundwater supply sources. These include wells, boreholes and springs used for public drinking water supply. GLVIA3 Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, Third Edition (2013) Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management an Assessment HER Historic Environmental Record HEA Historic England Archive HGV Heavy Goods Vehicle HSE Health & Safety Executive IAQM Institute of Air Quality Management IEEM Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management LPA Local Planning Authority LTOBM Low toxicity oil based mud LVIA Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment. LWS Local Wildlife Site µm Micrometre or micron – unit of length equalling one millionth of one metre or one thousandth of a millimetre MPA Minerals Planning Authority Mitigation measure Measures intended to avoid, reduce or compensate any adverse effects of the Proposed Development on the environment NAQS National Air Quality Strategy NBGRC Nottinghamshire Biological and Geological Record Centre NCC Nottinghamshire County Council NE Natural England NERC Natural Environment Research Council NIA Nature Improvement Area Nitrate Vulnerable Zone A Nitrate Vulnerable Zone is designated where land drains and contributes to the nitrate found in “polluted” waters.
NO2 Nitrogen dioxide
NOx Oxides of nitrogen NOTM Notice to Airmen
October 2015 vii
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Term or abbreviation Definition Notice to Airmen Notice to Airmen is a notice filed with an aviation authority to alert aircraft pilots of potential hazards along a flight route or at a location that could affect the safety of the flight NTS Non-technical Summary – Volume 1 of the ES summarising the Proposed Development and the findings of the EIA in non- technical language. NLDC North Lincolnshire District Council NPPF National Planning Policy Framework OS Ordnance Survey PAH Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbon PC Process Contribution PEC Predicted Environmental Concentration PEDL Petroleum Exploration and Development Licence Photoviewpoint A location from which the Proposed Development may be seen and from which a photograph has been taken as part of the LVIA.
PM2.5 Particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in size.
PM10 Particulate matter less than 10 microns is size. PPG Planning Practice Guidance Proposed Development All of the activities proposed for the Springs Road Site as described in Chapter 4. PRoW Public Rights of Way RAF Royal Air Force Residual effects Effects which remain after mitigation. SAGW Surface Air Guided Weapon Site SFRA Strategic Flood Risk Assessment Site Comprises the area within the planning application boundary (the proposed exploratory wellsite) shown on Drawing 3 of the ES. Site of Special Scientific A Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) is a statutory Interest conservation designation denoting a protected area in the United Kingdom SO2 Sulphur dioxide SPA Special Protection Area Special Protection Special Protection Areas are strictly protected sites classified in Areas accordance with Article 4 of the EC Birds Directive, which came into force in April 1979. They are classified for rare and vulnerable birds (as listed on Annex I of the Directive), and for regularly occurring migratory species SNH Scottish National Heritage SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest TPH Total Petroleum Hydrocarbon TVDSS True Vertical Depth – Sub Sea
October 2015 viii
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Term or abbreviation Definition True Vertical Depth – True Vertical Depth (TVD) is the absolute vertical distance of Sub Sea the well (as opposed to the measured depth – the length of the well). True Vertical Depth – Sub Sea is the TVD minus the elevation above mean sea level of the depth reference point of the well. UK United Kingdom UXO Unexploded Ordnance Viewpoint A location from which the Proposed Development can be seen. Visual receptor People who may have a view of the Proposed Development. VOC Volatile organic compound. Water based drilling A drilling mud in which water or saltwater is the major liquid muds component. Water Framework EC Directive (2000/60/EC) on integrated river basin Directive management. The purpose of the Directive is to establish a framework for the protection of inland surface waters (rivers and lakes), transitional waters (estuaries), coastal waters and groundwater. WLDC West Lindsey District Council Wellsite Comprises the central area within the planning application boundary as shown on Drawing 7 of the ES. An engineered central working area which will be sealed and impermeable. WWTW Waste water treatment works ZTV Zone of theoretical visibility
October 2015 ix
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
October 2015 x
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
1 Introduction
1.1 Preamble
1.1.1 This Environmental Statement (ES) accompanies an application by Island Gas Limited (IGas), a subsidiary of IGas Energy plc, made to Nottinghamshire County Council (NCC), as Mineral Planning Authority (MPA), for full planning permission to develop a hydrocarbon wellsite and drill up to two exploratory wells on land off Springs Road, Misson in Nottinghamshire (see Drawing 1). The Application is for a temporary period of up to 3 years to ascertain the extent of potential shale gas reserves. This Application is solely for the exploration phase and does not involve appraisal or hydraulic fracturing. An application for appraisal and testing of the wells may be submitted should exploration demonstrate a viable reserve, the appraisal works could involve hydraulic fracturing. Should the appraisal and testing prove successful a planning application may then be submitted for a final stage - production. Any future planning applications would be accompanied by full Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and would be subject to public consultation.
1.1.2 Hydrocarbon minerals are vested in the Crown and the rights to explore for and develop such resources are granted in the form of Petroleum Exploration and Development Licences (PEDLs) issued by the Department of Energy and Climate Change. PEDLs 139 and 140 cover parts of Nottinghamshire, Doncaster and North East Lincolnshire (see Drawing 20) and are held by a consortium of companies made up of Total E&P UK Ltd., GP Energy Ltd., IGas, Egdon Resources UK Ltd. and eCorp Oil & Gas UK Ltd. IGas is the operator of those licences and is required by them to explore for petroleum within the boundaries of the licences.
1.1.3 The proposed exploratory wellsite is located within PEDL140 approximately 2.9 km to the north east of Misson village (see Drawings 1, 2 and 20) within Bassetlaw District in Nottinghamshire.
1.1.4 A Non-Technical Summary is included as a separate document and provides a summary of this ES in non-technical language.
1.2 Referencing
Site Comprises the surface area within the planning application boundary (including the proposed exploratory wellsite, and ancillary works) shown by the red line on Drawing 3 (included in Volume 1).
Wellsite Comprises the central area within the planning application boundary as shown on Drawing 7 (included in Volume 1).
October 2015 1
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Subsurface Works As described in Chapter 4, section 4.3.2. The extent of the proposed sub surface vertical and horizontal well trajectory is shown by a dashed red line on Drawing 2 (included in Volume 1).
Proposed The Proposed Development is the proposed exploratory wellsite Development including all of the development proposed within the Site at all phases of development and ancillary development as described in Chapter 4 of this ES.
IGas The Applicant; Island Gas Limited.
1.3 Drawings
1.3.1 The following Drawings should be viewed alongside this ES and are referenced throughout:
Drawing No. Title
Drawings contained in Volume 1:
Drawing 1 Site Context Plan
Drawing 2 Site Location Plan
Drawing 3 Site Plan
Drawing 4 Existing Site Layout Plan & Topographic Survey
Drawing 5 Existing Elevations & Sections
Drawing 6 Proposed Site Entrance & Sightlines
Drawing 7 Proposed Site Layout (Phase 1)
Drawing 8 Proposed Site Elevations & Sections (Phase 1)
Drawing 9 Proposed Site Fencing Plan
Drawing 10 Proposed Site Drainage Layout
Drawing 11 Indicative Site Layout (Phase 2)
Drawing 12 Indicative Site Elevations & Sections (Phase 2)
Drawing 13 Indicative Noise Mitigation Layout (Phase 2)
Drawing 14 Indicative Noise Mitigation Elevations & Sections (Phase 2)
Drawing 15 Indicative Site Lighting Layout (Phase 2)
Drawing 16 Proposed Site Layout Plan (Phase 3)
October 2015 2
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Drawing No. Title
Drawing 17 Proposed Site Elevations & Sections (Phase 3)
Drawing 18 Proposed Site Layout Plan (Phase 4)
Drawing 19 Proposed Site Elevations & Sections (Phase 4)
Drawing 20 Petroleum Exploration and Development Licence (PEDL)
Drawing 21 PEDLs 139 & 140 Geological Context
Drawing 22 Areas of Search & Offset Borehole Locations
Drawing 23 Designations Plan
Drawings included within this ES (Volume 3)
Drawing 24 Site & Setting – Residential Properties & PROW
Drawing 25 Site & Setting – Flood Risk Zones
Drawing 26 Site & Setting – Agricultural Land Classification
Drawing 27 Site & Setting – Ecological and Cultural Heritage Designations
Drawing 28 Conceptual Site Model
1.4 The Proposed Development
1.4.1 In summary the Proposed Development is the development of a hydrocarbon wellsite and the drilling of up to two exploratory wells. The Proposed Development will be carried out in four phases:
• Phase 1: Wellsite construction;
• Phase 2: Drilling of up to two exploratory wells (the first one vertical and the second one horizontal);
• Phase 3: Suspension of wells and assessment of drilling results;
• Phase 4: Well abandonment, site decommissioning and restoration.
1.4.2 Planning permission is sought for a temporary period of up to three years, to allow sufficient time for the above phases to be implemented.
October 2015 3
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
October 2015 4
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
2 Environmental Statement
2.1 Screening and Scoping of Environmental Impacts
2.1.1 Applications for planning permission are required to be accompanied by an ES where either:
• the proposed development falls in one of the categories specified in Schedule 1 of the Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 (the 2011 Regulations); or
• the proposed development is ‘likely to have significant effects on the environment’.
2.1.2 Schedule 2 of the 2011 Regulations contains exclusion thresholds (below which Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) does not normally need to be considered) and indicative criteria and thresholds to help a planning authority determine whether significant effects are likely – also having regard to the location of the Proposed Development.
2.1.3 An application for exploratory drilling does not fall within one of the categories listed in Schedule 1 of the 2011 Regulations for which the carrying out of an EIA is mandatory. The exploratory phase of hydrocarbon extraction would fall within Paragraph 2 of Schedule 2 of the EIA Regulations if the project is likely to give rise to significant environmental effects. The Planning Practice Guidance provides supplementary guidance on EIA and hydrocarbon extraction. It identifies that, it is unlikely that EIA will be required for exploratory drilling operations which do not involve hydraulic fracturing. However, when considering the need for an assessment, it is important to consider factors such as the nature, size and location of the proposed development. IGas is of the view that the Proposed Development is unlikely to give rise to significant environmental effects. However, IGas have undertaken an EIA on the proposed development and are volunteering the submission of an ES so that the impacts of the proposal can be fully assessed, understood and mitigated.
2.2 EIA Scoping
st 2.2.1 A request for an EIA Scoping Opinion was submitted to NCC on 21 May 2015. The Scoping Opinion adopted on 25th June 2015 (included at Appendix A) confirmed that NCC considered the main topics requiring assessment to be as follows:
• transport
• noise;
• air quality;
• landscape and visual;
• lighting;
October 2015 5
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
• hydrogeology
• hydrology and flood risk;
• contaminated land;
• ecology;
• cultural heritage;
• public health;
• community and social; and
• cumulative and combined effects.
2.2.2 The ES which accompanies the application has been prepared in general accord with the EIA Scoping Opinion adopted by NCC. Appendix A includes a comprehensive review of NCC’s scoping comments and includes cross references and comments detailing how each comment has been dealt with in this ES with the relevant cross-references.
2.3 The Environmental Statement Content
2.3.1 The ES summarises the findings from the EIA of the Proposed Development. The EIA has been prepared in accordance with the 2011 EIA Regulations.
2.3.2 The purpose of this ES is to ensure that:
• relevant environmental issues are assessed appropriately;
• potential environmental impacts, associated with the operational phases of the Proposed Development, are identified together with appropriate mitigation measures;
• the proposed mitigation measures will be effective and that they will ensure that any residual impacts are reduced to an acceptable degree; and
• interested parties are given the opportunity to address any relevant issues.
2.3.3 The ES comprises three volumes. Volume 3 - the ES Main Text (this document) draws together all pertinent information about the Proposed Development and is structured as follows:
Chapter 1 Introduction
Chapter 2 Site and Surroundings
Chapter 3 Environmental Statement
Chapter 4 Proposed Development
Chapter 5 Alternatives
Chapter 6 Traffic and Highways
October 2015 6
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Chapter 7 Noise and Vibration
Chapter 8 Air Quality
Chapter 9 Landscape and Visual
Chapter 10 Lighting
Chapter 11 Hydrogeology
Chapter 12 Hydrology and Flood Risk
Chapter 13 Contaminated Land
Chapter 14 Ecology
Chapter 15 Cultural Heritage
Chapter 16 Other Issues
Chapter 17 Cumulative and Combined Effects
Chapter 18 Conclusions
Appendix A Nottinghamshire County Council’s Scoping Opinion
2.3.4 Volume 4 is made up of the individual Technical Appendices A – J and Volume 5 is the Non- Technical Summary which provides a summary of the Environmental Statement in non- technical language. Volume 1 contains the completed application forms and certificates and plans and Volume 2 contains the planning supporting statement.
2.3.5 The environmental impacts of the Proposed Development have been considered by reference to baseline conditions at the time of preparation of the ES (Spring 2015).
2.3.6 The severity or magnitude of environmental impacts are categorised in this ES as “Major/High/Substantial/Severe”, “Moderate/Medium”, “Minor/Low/Slight” or “Negligible”, dependent upon criteria set out in the individual topic chapters. The significance of the potential effect of an environmental impact has then been assessed on the basis of the magnitude of the impact and the sensitivity, importance or value of a resource, receptor or group of receptors.
2.3.7 Account is taken of whether effects are considered to be positive or negative, permanent or temporary, direct or indirect, the duration and frequency of the effect and whether any secondary effects are caused.
2.3.8 Where impacts have been identified which may give rise to significant adverse effects, further mitigation measures are presented (over and above those that are incorporated into the design of the development - embedded mitigation (see Chapter 4)) as a means of avoiding or reducing or compensating any adverse effects on the environment. Where appropriate, the likely effectiveness of the proposed further mitigation and the acceptability of any residual effects are assessed.
October 2015 7
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
2.4 Documents for Purchase and Inspection
2.4.1 Paper copies of the planning application documents and the accompanying ES are available to purchase by request from IGAS, 7 Down Street, London, W1J 7AJ at a cost of £100.00 per set.
2.4.2 Electronic copies on CD (in Adobe Acrobat format) are available from the same address at a cost of £10 each.
2.4.3 The application and ES documents are also available for inspection at the offices of NCC and on the Planning Authority’s website and IGas website www.springsroad.co.uk.
October 2015 8
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
3 The Site and Surroundings
3.1 Location
3.1.1 The proposed exploratory wellsite is located approximately 2.9 km to the north east of Misson village (see Drawing 1), 2.8 km to the south east of Finningley and approximately 6.4 km to the north east of Bawtry, and is within Bassetlaw District in Nottinghamshire. The Site lies to the east of Springs Road, an unclassified road running on a north south axis connecting Misson village to the B1369 Bank End Road to the north of the Site.
3.1.2 The Site (the area within the surface application boundary) area is 5.33 ha in total which includes the internal access road, fencing and gates in addition to the wellsite. The wellsite itself will occupy an area of approximately 0.83 ha within the Site.
3.1.3 The Site forms part of existing commercial premises and is mainly hardstanding – with some grassed areas. Access to the Site is gained by an existing entrance on Springs Road.
3.2 Surrounding Uses
3.2.1 The Site is located within the northern part of a 25 hectare commercial premises (owned by L Jackson & Co Ltd)for a business that specialises in the sale of ex-army trucks, vehicles, plant and equipment. Infrastructure associated with this business includes hardstanding, existing accesses to Springs Road, on-site workshops and storage buildings.
3.2.2 The nearest property to the Proposed Development is Misson Springs Cottage, located to the immediate south of the existing Site access and application boundary, as shown on Drawing 3. This property and its curtilage is within the applicant’s control, and if planning permission is granted, will not be used as a residential dwelling for the duration of the Proposed Development.
3.2.3 Residential properties in the vicinity of the Site are shown on Drawing 24 and include:
• Prospect Farm – around 268 m to the north of the wellsite.
• Levels Farm - around 288 m to the north of the wellsite.
• April Cottage – around 555 m to the north west of the wellsite.
• Range Farm – around 570 m to the south of the wellsite.
• Newlands Farm – around 610 m to the north west of the wellsite.
• Misson Springs Farm – around 716 m to the north west of the wellsite.
• Springs Farm Bungalow – around 875 m to the south west of the wellsite.
October 2015 9
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
• Red House Farm – around 890 m to the south west of the wellsite.
• Springs Farm – around 942 m to the west of the wellsite.
3.2.4 Other than Misson, the other villages in the locality include:
• Finningley (around 2.8 km to the north west of the Site boundary);
• Westwoodside (around 3.8 km to the north east of the Site boundary);
• Austerfield (around 5.2 km to the south west of the Site boundary);
• Misterton (around 6.2 km to the south east of the Site boundary); and
• Bawtry (around 6.4 km to the south west of the Site boundary).
3.2.5 Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield is approximately 4 km to the west of the Site.
3.2.6 Public Rights of Way (PRoW) within the vicinity of the Site are shown on Drawings 23 and 24 and include:
• Bridleway 9 (Low Deeps Lane) which meets Springs Road in the vicinity of Newlands Farm around 495 m to the north west of the Site boundary (at the closest point);
• Bridleway 8 (Deeps Lane) which meets Springs Road in the vicinity of Spring Hill Farm around 885 m to the south west of the Site boundary (at the closest point);
• Bridleway 10 (Middle Wood Lane) which meets Springs Road in the vicinity of Middle Wood Farm around 1.25 km to the south west of the Site boundary (at the closest point);
• Footpath 115 which meets Idle Bank around 1.6 km to the east of the Site boundary (at the closest point); and
• Bridleway 4 which runs along the northern bank of the River Idle around 1.7 km to the south east of the Site boundary (at the closest point).
3.2.7 The majority of the surrounding land use is agricultural with a significant proportion of the farmland in the area dedicated to organic farming.
3.3 Topography
3.3.1 The topography of the Site is relatively flat with little variation across the area. Generally ground levels are around 2.50 – 2.75 m Above Ordnance Datum (AOD) with some localised areas of higher ground to the north west of the former missile pad layout. Levels from west to east along the existing access road fall from around 3.75 m AOD to 3.00 m AOD.
3.3.2 A topographic survey of the Site is included at Drawing 4.
October 2015 10
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
3.4 Site History
3.4.1 The Site lies within former RAF Misson, which consisted of a bombing range, training area and Surface Air Guided Weapon Site (SAGW). RAF Misson was originally established as a bombing range during WWII but soon after that this use ceased and was then used for military training and the SAGW. The overall RAF Misson was kept in control of the Ministry of Defence (MOD) until 1969. Then 242.8 ha of land around the former bombing range was sold off including the SAGW land which was sold to the business which has operated it since as a surplus military vehicle and equipment sale site. The remainder of the land was returned to agricultural use.
3.5 Designations
3.5.1 There are no statutory or non-statutory environmental or planning policy designations which cover the Site. Drawing 23 shows the designations and environmental policy protection areas around the application Site.
Landscape
3.5.2 The Site is not covered by any national or local landscape designations. In terms of landscape character the Site lies within National Character Area 39: Humberhead Levels, as defined by Natural England. The Site is also situated within land defined as 2A: Settled Fens and Marshes Regional Landscape Character Type within the Idle Lowlands County Character Area.
3.5.3 The Site also falls within the Humberside Levels Nature Improvement Area (NIA). NIAs are inter-connected networks of wildlife habitats intended to re-establish thriving wildlife populations and help species respond to the challenges of climate change. NIAs are not a statutory designation and are run by partnerships of local authorities, local communities and landowners, the private sector and conservation organisations with funding provided by the Department for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) and Natural England. This NIA extends to some 49,700 ha and is part of the flatlands straddling the borders of Yorkshire, Lincolnshire and Nottinghamshire.
Historic Environment
3.5.4 The Site is not the subject of any historic environment designations e.g. Scheduled Monument, Listed Building, Registered Battlefield, Registered Park/Garden or Conservation Area. The nearest listed building is Newlands Farm (Grade II) approximately 522 m to the north west of the Site boundary. The nearest scheduled monument is a ‘moated site and fishpond east of Misson village’ approximately 3.1 km to the south west of the Site boundary.
Ecology
3.5.5 There are no ecological designations within the Site. Statutorily designated wildlife sites in the vicinity of the Site (European designations within 10 km and national designations within 2 km) include:
October 2015 11
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
• Hatfield Moor Special Area of Conservation (SAC) approximately 6 km to the north of the Site;
• Thorne and Hatfield Moor Special Protection Area (SPA) approximately 6 km to the north of the Site;
• Misson Training Area SSSI (also referred to as Misson Carr SSSI Nature Reserve) approximately 125 m to the east of the Site (also Misson Carr Nature Reserve);
• Misson Line Bank SSSI approximately 1.7 km to the south-east of the Site;
• River Idle Washlands SSSI approximately 1.9 km to the south-east of the Site; and
• Non-statutorily designated wildlife sites in the vicinity of the Site include various drainage ditches in the locality which are designated as Local Wildlife Sites (as shown on the Bassetlaw Core Strategy and Development Management Policies DPD Proposals Map adopted in December 2011).
Air Quality
3.5.6 The Site is not within an existing or proposed Air Quality Management Area (AQMA).
Hydrology
3.5.7 The Site is within an area defended from the risk of flooding from the River Idle. It is shown as within defended Flood Zone 3 on the Environment Agency’s mapping (see Drawings 23 and 25).
3.5.8 The Site is also in a Nitrate Vulnerable Zone for Surface Water and is 300 m to the east of a Groundwater Source Protection Zone (SPZ) 3.
3.6 Sub-surface Well Trajectory
3.6.1 Drawing 2 shows the extent on the surface within which the vertical and horizontal wells will be drilled subsurface. It shows the indicative sub-surface path of the proposed horizontal well and the extent of the potential variation of the trajectory. . Surface features and receptors that may be within and above the trajectory variation include:
• the existing commercial premises within which the Site itself is situated;
• Springs Road;
• Range Farm;
• Red House;
• The Cedars;
• Morton Villa Farm;
• Middle Wood Farm;
October 2015 12
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
• agricultural land (the majority of which is classified as Grade 2 – see Drawing 26);
• field drains; and
• a short section of Misson Bridleway 8
3.6.2 The proposed horizontal well will be progressed at a depth of at least 2,000 m below the surface and as such will not have any impact on the surface features and receptors detailed above. On this basis effects on these receptors as a result of subsurface works are not considered further in this ES.
3.7 Present Development
3.7.1 As stated above, the Site is located within a 24.3 hectare existing commercial premises, owned by L Jackson & Company Ltd, which is used for the sale of ex-military vehicles and equipment and up until the late 1960s formed part of the SAGW. Features within the Site boundary are shown on Drawing 4. The area of land within the planning application boundary (the Site) currently comprises
• the existing access road from Springs Road into the Site between an avenue of trees with grassland to the north and south;
• hardstanding – including 16 former missile pads which are octagonal in plan, arranged off a square loop road and constructed from reinforced concrete;
• a central area of compacted hardcore;
• periphery grassland and shrubs with bands of trees to the north and east; and
• open surface water drains to the north and east.
3.8 Related Development
3.8.1 A separate planning application has been submitted to NCC for the installation of up to four groups of groundwater monitoring boreholes – each containing up to three boreholes, i.e. up to twelve boreholes in total (Planning Application number 1/15/01034/CDM). The boreholes are part of a programme of Baseline Environmental Monitoring (BEM), as agreed with the Environmental Agency (EA), to be implemented in advance of the Proposed Development and to provide monitoring data throughout the duration of the Proposed Development and for any future developments in the area. Although this development is related to the Proposed Development it is the subject of a separate planning application so the boreholes and monitoring data can be collected in advance of the Proposed Development commencement (should planning permission be granted) and is therefore not included in the description of the Proposed Development as detailed in Chapter 4 of this ES.
October 2015 13
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
October 2015 14
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
4 Proposed Development
4.1 Overview
4.1.1 In summary the Proposed Development is the development of a hydrocarbon wellsite and the drilling of up to two exploratory wells. The Proposed Development will be carried out in four phases:
• Phase 1: Wellsite construction and ancillary works (see Drawings 7 to 10);
• Phase 2: : Drilling Operations - Rig set up (mobilisation) and drilling of up to two exploratory wells (the first one vertical and the second one horizontal) and rig removal (demobilisation)l; (see Drawings 11 to 15);
• Phase 3: Suspension of wells and assessment of drilling results (see Drawings 16 and 17); and
• Phase 4: Well abandonment, site decommissioning, and restoration (see Drawings 18 and 19).
4.1.2 Planning permission is sought for a temporary period of up to 3 years to allow sufficient time for the above phases.
4.2 Wellsite Construction (Phase 1)
4.2.1 Construction of the 0.83 ha wellsite will comprise the:
• erection of perimeter fencing gates and CCTV;
• installation one large wellhead cellar to accommodate up to two wells - reinforced concrete chambers sunk into the ground such that the top is level with wellsite surface;
• construction of the wellsite over the existing ground surface to create a sealed and impermeable site including; covering with a sand protection layer; installing a Fibertex geotextile membrane overlain by an impermeable Bentomat liner and a further Fibertex geotextile membrane; covering with a protective aggregate layer (depth of aggregate will vary across the site to facilitate drainage as shown on Drawing 8);
• construction of the ‘French drain’ type surface water drainage system comprising a perimeter of clean stone contained within an impermeable liner within which a porous pipe will be buried as shown on Drawing 8;
• installation of a surface water attenuation tank on the eastern edge of the wellsite to which the perimeter pipe will drain, as shown on Drawing 10;
October 2015 15
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
• installation of large diameter steel conductors within the wellhead cellar using a truck mounted rig. The gaps between the conductors and the floor of the cellar will be filled with concrete in order to maintain the integrity of the wellsite; and
• siting of temporary security office, site office and mess facilities on the existing hardstanding. Staff and visitors car will also park in this area.
4.3 Drilling Operations (Phase 2)
Rig mobilisation
4.3.1 Initially the drilling operation will involve the set up or mobilisation of drilling rig and associated equipment and materials to be used on site throughout the drilling operation. Drawings 11 & 12 show the indicative layout and elevations of the rig and equipment. This will include:
• main drilling unit and associated blowout preventer (BOP), choke manifold, shale shakers, de-gasser and centrifuge;
• diesel fuelled power generators, a power distribution unit, a power control room and a hydraulic power unit;
• tanks for the storage of diesel, oil based mud, water and cement;
• drilling mud pumps and tanks;
• drill casing storage area and pipe rack for the handling and storage of drill pipe;
• ancillary equipment and materials associated with the drilling operation e.g. drilling fluid and materials, drill cutting handling equipment, mud logging equipment, well cementing equipment, wireline logging equipment, slick line equipment, drilling motors and drill bits, casing, coiled tubing and directional drilling equipment;
• offices and staff accommodation such as a drilling workshop, stores including a chemical store, a drilling mud laboratory, mud logging unit, and well control room;
• lighting for the wellsite and the rig (see Drawing 15 for lighting details); and
• erection of any noise mitigation measures (see Drill Rig Assessment Parameters – 4.3.4).
Subsurface Works
4.3.2 The drilling of the wells (subsurface works), following the mobilisation and arrival of the drill rig on-site, will involve:
• drilling one vertical well to a depth of approximately 3,500 m (see Table 4.1); and
October 2015 16
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
• subject to the results of the vertical well, a second well may be drilled, initially vertically before being deviated and then directed horizontally in a southerly direction within one of the potentially productive horizons.
4.3.3 Between the drilling of the two wells the drill rig will be moved a short distance (i.e. between 5 and 10 m) from one well cellar to another. Inset 4.1 shows and indicative schematic of the proposed subsurface works with the target horizons.
Table 4.1: Anticipated Geology
Anticipated geological formations to be drilled Notes
Mercia Mudstone Group -
Sherwood Sandstone Group -
Zechstein Group -
Pennine Coal Measures Group -
Millstone Grit Group Secondary target
Bowland Shale Primary target
Carboniferous Limestone Supergroup Tertiary target
Inset: 4.1: Indicative Subsurface Works Schematic
October 2015 17
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Drilling and Casing Process
4.3.4 The final well design will depend on the actual conditions encountered during drilling. Due to the need to protect the aquifer, to isolate different pressure regimes and to ensure sufficient strength of the well architecture, it is not possible to drill the entire well in one hole size. Instead, the hole will be drilled at varying diameters which progressively decrease with depth. On completion of each hole section steel casing will run and cemented in place to line the well before the next section of hole is drilled using a smaller bit. The detailed designs of the vertical and horizontal wells are likely to differ but will follow the same construction methodology.
4.3.5 Drilling of the well itself will be achieved using a drill string which comprises drill pipe, a bottom hole assembly (BHA) and drill bit. The purpose of the drill bit is to create the hole. The purpose of the BHA is to add weight to and direct the bit. A down hole motor and down hole measuring equipment may also be included in the BHA. The BHA is run on drill pipe which is rotated from the surface by a top drive (motor) or by rotary drive motor. The drill string is hollow to allow drilling mud to be circulated inside the pipe, through the bit and returned up the annulus. As the hole gets deeper, additional lengths of drill pipe are added to the drill string.
4.3.6 The drilling mud will be circulated by the mud pumps. Two types of drilling muds will be used:
• water based mud (WBM); and
• low toxicity oil-based mud (LTOBM)
4.3.7 Water based mud will be used when drilling through the Sherwood Sandstone aquifer. For deeper sections below the aquifer or where well stability can be problematic and /or maximum lubrication is required during directional drilling and to minimise hole erosion and cuttings, LTOBM will be used. LTOBM is considered to be ‘better’ environmentally than other drilling muds (diesel oil based or conventional mineral oil based muds) in that it was developed specifically to reduce the toxicity of the mud without compromising technical performance and results in less waste than WBM and therefore less transport and handling. The LTOBM and other chemicals required for the drilling process will be carefully selected and approved for use by IGas and will also be approved for use by the Environment Agency through the Environmental Permitting process prior to use. Secondary containment of fuel and fluid storage containers will be within the bunded wellsite and all chemicals would be stored in accordance with their COSHH guidelines.
Drill Rig Assessment Parameters
4.3.8 The drill rig to be used will be determined by rig availability at the time of drilling. There are a number of drill rigs in the UK and Europe suitable to drill the exploration wells. It is not commercially possible for the applicant to reserve an onshore rig for a future drilling operation that does not have planning permission. As such a rig can only be selected and
October 2015 18
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
secured by the applicant once planning permission is granted and a more certain timeframe for drilling the wells can be established.
4.3.9 As the drill rig which would be used on-site will be dependent on availability, the Applicant IGas has reviewed the characteristic elements of different potential drill rigs in order to ensure that the planning application and EIA assesses the characteristics and properties of the drill rig that would result in the maximum adverse impacts in relation to particular environmental and amenity effects such as noise, landscape and visual character, ecology, lighting and cultural heritage (i.e. the tallest drill rig types are assessed in the LVIA). The parameters of the drill rig considered in the technical assessments therefore varies throughout the ES to enable this maximum impact assessment approach to be followed. Table 4.2 below summarises the parameters assessed in each of the relevant technical assessments.
4.3.10 All of the drill rigs considered could be accommodated within the proposed wellsite shown on Drawing 11 and would occupy a similar footprint as that shown on Drawing 11. For the purposes of the drilling phase plans the Bolden 92 drill rig is shown in the layout and elevation plans (Drawings 11 and 12). These plans are indicative.
4.3.11 It is proposed that if planning permission is granted for the Proposed Development, that conditions should be attached to any consent requiring prior to the commencement of drilling operations that details of the rig type are specified, detailed layout and elevation plans of the rig to be used, and a noise report are submitted to and approved by NCC.
4.3.12 The maximum impact approach taken in the planning application and ES towards the rig characteristics will ensure that any potential significant adverse impacts of the development are considered in relation to Development Plan policy and other material considerations and as part of the EIA prior to any decision being taken. Assessment of the maximum adverse effects of the Proposed Development will also ensure that any mitigation measures identified are designed to avoid, reduce or compensate those effects.
4.3.13 The rig selected for this development will be the rig which is available to drill the wells and will meet the night time noise levels and which minimises the visual impact of noise mitigation measures. The noise mitigation measures propose that for certain rigs in order to ensure that night time noise levels are met an acoustic enclosure up to 60 m high (dependent on the rig height) may be required. Whilst the landscape assessment concludes that such a structure for this temporary proposal is acceptable, if a rig is available and noise can be mitigated to the approved night time noise levels without such an acoustic enclosure – then this rig type would be selected over any other rig available. The noise mitigation of an acoustic enclosure up to a height of 60 m is regarded as a mitigation measure which the applicant will seek to avoid and would only erect if no other quieter rigs were available at the time of commissioning. In addition, the Applicant is willing to accept conditions limiting the maximum height of the rig and associated mitigation up to 60m and a night time noise limit of
42dB LAeq,T.
October 2015 19
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Table 4.2: Drill Rig Assessment Parameters
Topic Area Assessment specific parameters Relevant Drawings
Noise (Technical The Noise assessment assesses likely See Drawings11: Indicative Site Layout Appendix B) sound power levels of different rig Plan (Phase 2) components and the different mitigation See Drawings 13 & 14: Indicative Noise measures available for different noise Mitigation Plans levels generated by different rig components are set out in the Noise Assessment including inter alia screening or acoustic enclosures.
Landscape and visual The LVIA assesses the effect of a See Drawing 12: Indicative Site (Technical Appendix maximum drill rig height of 60m on Elevations & Sections (Phase 2) D) landscape and visual receptors. Rig
heights of the rig types that could drill these wells vary and the final rig selected may fall within an approximate range of 32-60m high
The LVIA assesses the effect of a See Drawings 13 and 14: Indicative maximum acoustic tower height of 60m Noise Mitigation Plans and a width of 18m on landscape and
visual receptors and an 8m acoustic barrier along the north west boundary of the Site
Lighting (Technical The lighting assessment is undertaken See Drawing 15: Indicative Site Appendix E) based on the lighting layout for a drill rig Lighting Layout (Phase 2) height of 60m as per the LVIA parameters.
Ecology (Technical The ecological assessment assesses the See Drawing 12: Indicative Site Appendix I) effects of noise as set out in the noise Elevations & Sections (Phase 2) assessment (Technical Appendix B) on See Drawings 13 and 14: Indicative ecological receptors assuming night time Noise Mitigation Plans noise levels of 42dBA are met.
The ecological assessment assesses the See Drawing 15: Indicative Site effect of the lighting layout for a drill rig Lighting Layout (Phase 2) height of 60m on ecological receptors as set out in the lighting assessment (Technical Appendix E).
Cultural Heritage The cultural heritage assessment See Drawing 19: Indicative Site (Technical Appendix assesses the effect of a maximum drill rig Elevations & Sections (Phase 2) J) height of 60m on heritage receptors.
The cultural heritage assessment See Drawings 13 and 14: Indicative assesses the maximum acoustic tower Noise Mitigation Plans height of 60m and a width of 18m on heritage receptors.
October 2015 20
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
4.4 Evaluation (Phase 3)
4.4.1 At the completion of the drilling programme (Phase 2), the wells will be suspended and made safe in accordance with the relevant regulations and industry best practice (e.g. Oil and Gas UK Guidelines for the Abandonment of Wells, Issue 5, July 2015) and all the above ground equipment including the drill rig and facilities referred to above will be removed from Site, with the exception of:
• the wellhead;
• site offices and security; and
• fencing and gates.
4.4.2 The evaluation phase (Phase 3) itself will comprise the period during which the results of the logging and coring will be assessed by IGas. If the results show that flow testing of the well(s) (which could involve well stimulation including hydraulic fracturing) would be worthwhile, a further application for planning permission will be submitted. If the results are negative, the Site will be decommissioned and restored as described below.
4.5 Abandonment, Decommissioning and Restoration (Phase 4)
4.5.1 If the results of the exploration work do not warrant further development, the wells will be made safe by plugging and abandoning in accordance with the relevant regulations and industry best practice.
Decommissioning
4.5.2 At the decommissioning phase, all plant will be shut down and any services such as telecommunications, power, water supplies and other buried pipelines shall be severed and made safe.
4.5.3 The wellheads and any surface valve arrangements will be removed and the well will be plugged and abandoned in accordance with DECC, HSE, Environment Agency and industry (Oil and Gas UK) requirements. This is expected to involve:
• the isolation of aquifers from hydrocarbon bearing intervals and from the surface by permanent barriers in the form of cement plugs;
• the removal of the wellheads and near surface casings to at least 1.5 m below the final ground surface profiles.
Restoration
4.5.4 All construction materials, services below the geotextile membranes and remaining on-site infrastructure (site offices, security and fencing / gates) will all be removed from the site to be reused, recycled or disposed of at a suitably permitted waste disposal facility.
4.5.5 The wellsite area will then be restored to its original condition.
October 2015 21
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
4.5.6 During this phase in particular, appropriate measures will be taken to prevent mud and other deleterious material being deposited on the public highway by vehicles exiting the Site.
4.5.7 An after-care scheme is not proposed – as it is intended that the Site will resume its use as part of the existing commercial business premises following restoration.
4.6 On-site Arrangements
Materials
4.6.1 All domestic water requirements for the four phases of development for the wellsite accommodation and offices will be will be imported by tanker onto site. Wellsite construction materials and fencing will be required to be imported to Site during Phase 1.
4.6.2 The base case for the Proposed Development is that water required to make up other Site operations and drilling fluids during Phase 2 will be imported by tanker (see Technical Appendix A) and stored on-site..
Waste Management
4.6.3 Materials excavated to create the well cellar will be stored on site. Drill cuttings produced during Phase 2 (expected to be around 3,700 tonnes) will be temporarily stored in containers within the sealed section of the Site (within the wellsite). Drill cuttings would be removed from the wellsite weekly to a suitably permitted waste disposal/treatment facility. Any waste water / fluids from the drilling process will be stored as required within the wellsite area and will be removed periodically by tanker to a suitably permitted waste water treatment works (WWTW).
4.6.4 All sewage/waste will be collected in a tank and will be removed periodically by tanker to a suitably permitted waste water treatment works (WWTW). A skip will be provided for the collection and containment of non-hazardous solid waste e.g. packaging waste.
Site Drainage
4.6.5 The proposed Site drainage arrangements are shown on Drawing 10. The Site has been designed so that the central area is level (as shown on Drawings 7 and 10) and the perimeter levels fall away slightly to the wellsite edge and containment bund to facilitate the drainage of surface water away from the centre of the wellsite. A lined perimeter of clean stone will be laid contained within an impermeable liner within which a porous pipe will be buried. Surface water will drain through the clean stone, into the pipe which will drain to a below ground attenuation tank. The tank will be sized to provide sufficient capacity to accommodate site run-off in the event of a 1 in 100 year storm event. The surface drainage system will also have sufficient capacity to contain 110% of the volume of the largest tank on the wellsite. The capacity of the tank will be maintained by using a vacuum tanker to remove run-off water which is not recovered for storage and re-use in the drilling process, as necessary. Water removed in this way will be taken off-site to a suitably permitted WWTW for treatment / disposal. Once constructed the drainage system will be maintained until the wellsite is removed during Phase 4.
October 2015 22
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Lighting
4.6.6 Lighting to be provided is as shown on Drawings 7 and 15 and will include:
• operations / maintenance lighting for use when necessary during the hours of darkness and when needed to provide sufficient illumination to ensure the safety of people moving in and around the items of equipment;
• general / security lighting to be erected around the perimeter of the wellsite for use during drilling operations only; and
• a red, medium intensity obstacle light at the top of the drill rig as required by Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield (RHADS).
4.6.7 Drilling operations during Phase 2 will be undertaken 24 hours per day, seven days per week and therefore during hours of darkness lighting will be required for the rig, anti-collision lights at high level and low level lighting to illuminate the drill rig floor, ground and intermediate level working areas. With the exception of anti-collision lighting, all lighting will be directed inwards and downwards and shrouded to minimise light spillage.
Fencing
4.6.8 The proposed fencing is shown on Drawing 9 and will be erected during Phase 1.
4.6.9 The existing access onto Springs Road will be utilised and will be gated and fenced to the north and the south (within the existing hedgerows) with 2.5 m high welded mesh fencing. The access route through the existing commercial premises will be fenced to the north and the south with 2.0 m high palisade fencing with secondary access gates to the north and south to allow movements associated with the existing use to pass through. The 2.0 m high palisade fencing will be continued around and to the south of the former missile pads and will adjoin the existing commercial premises perimeter fencing to the south east of the former missile pads. 2.0 m high chain linked fencing (topped with three strands of barbed wire) will be used to fence along the north western edge of the application boundary and will adjoin the existing commercial premises perimeter fencing to the north west. A further level of security will be provided by a secondary / inner perimeter surrounding the wellsite using 2.5 m high hoarding. This will be positioned just outside of the existing hardstanding route around the former missile pads and will also be gated as necessary for vehicle and pedestrian access.
Utilities
4.6.10 Power throughout the phases of the Proposed Development will be provided by on-site diesel driven generators. Telephone cables will be brought into the Site.
Emergency Management and Response
4.6.11 IGas recognise that even with the implementation of an effective management system there is the potential for incidents to occur. Emergency planning and response procedures have therefore been developed, in accordance with Environmental Management System (EMS) October 2015 23
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Emergency Preparedness and Response Procedure, to identify risk scenarios, assess environmental consequences and implement appropriate controls. Emergency procedures and contingency plans are regularly updated and exercises carried out in order to maximise their effectiveness and to comply with appropriate legislation. Separate emergency plans are prepared for major operations that involve a significant change to normal site operations.
4.6.12 Emergency response information is provided to all employees and contractors during induction. Specific training is given relating to the employee’s/contractor’s place of work or when new emergency response plans are issued or amended.
4.6.13 Site specific emergency response procedures designed, as necessary to ensure environmental integrity, will be put into place for the Proposed Development following consultation with the emergency services and a site specific Emergency Response Plan (ERP) will be adopted based on the overarching Emergency Preparedness and Response Procedure and advice received from the local emergency services. The adoption of normal emergency procedures applicable to oilfield operations will ensure compliance with the U.K. onshore environmental safety control regime.
4.6.14 The purpose of the ERP will be to set out a working methodology to safely and effectively manage the operations necessary to regain control of a situation under local conditions and will contain details regarding:
• emergency warning and evacuation outside of a pre-defined exclusion zone (this may include businesses and homes in the vicinity depending on the nature of the emergency and the advice provided by the emergency services);
• contact with emergency services e.g. fire services;
• management of traffic / access to ensure access is retained and is not impeded for emergency services;
• continued liaison with emergency services throughout the incident – established point of contact;
• provision of first aid and medical assistance; and
• management of environmental risk e.g. control of fire water.
Fire Water Management
4.6.15 As detailed in section 4.6.3, the wellsite and sealed drainage system have been designed to accommodate surface water run-off in the event of a 1 in 100 year storm event as well as 110% volume of the largest storage tank on the wellsite through the provision of a perimeter containment bund, perimeter French drain and underground storage tank. The drainage tank will be emptied on a regular basis or as required by inspection. It is acknowledged however that in the event of an emergency such as an on-site fire it would be difficult to predict the volume of attenuation that would be required to accommodate fire water run-off.
October 2015 24
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
4.6.16 It is considered that the sealed nature of the wellsite and the surface water attenuation tank provide enough surface water attenuation to allow sufficient time for a secondary containment measure (i.e. pumping of fire water to portable flexi-tank or use of one of the water and mud tanks on-site during Phase 2) to be implemented should it be required as advised by the fire service.
4.6.17 Preliminary consultation with Nottinghamshire Fire and Rescue Service has been undertaken and their advice on the most appropriate form of secondary containment for this development will be incorporated into the ERP.
Spill Management
4.6.18 The use of secondary containment for all tanks on-site in addition to the sealed and bunded wellsite will ensure that any spillages are contained within the wellsite area. All site personnel will be trained to use spill kits which will be available at all times in all areas where materials are stored. An Emergency Spillage Plan will be prepared for the construction phase (Phase 1) as part of the Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP) (see section 4.11.1) and for Phases 2 – 4.
4.6.19 Equipment on-site will be inspected on a regular basis for leaks and damage. Where leaks or damage are identified the equipment will be repaired or taken out of service and any spills cleaned up and recorded.
4.6.20 In addition to the aforementioned procedures:
• IGas have an Integrated Management System Manual, revision 03 dated 9 February 2015 (see Annex F1 of Technical Appendix F), that sets out the standards and procedures to which IGas is committed;
• IGas will prepare a site specific Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan for the Proposed Development at Springs Lane, Misson. The document will record the monitoring locations, analytical suites, sampling frequency and sampling methods, set warning and trigger concentrations for selected determinands and incorporate an action plan to be followed should warnings and triggers be exceeded; and
• IGas will undertake all statutory reporting obligations for the Proposed Development, including data collection and reporting to DECC, EA, HSE and the BGS.
4.7 Duration
4.7.1 Planning permission will be sought for an overall period of up to three years beginning on the date when the development is commenced. The three year period will be necessary to undertake all of the activities as described previously, with Phase 2 taking some 9 months within that three year period.
4.7.2 A breakdown of the expected 9 month period for drilling operations (Phase 2) is set out in Table 4.3 below.
October 2015 25
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Table 4.3: Breakdown of the Period for Drilling Options
Activity Approximate Duration (weeks)
Rig mobilisation 1 to 2
Drilling of vertical well 14
Rig movement 1
Drilling of horizontal well 19
Rig demobilisation 1 to 2
4.8 Operational Hours
4.8.1 Operations during the construction, drilling, evaluation and restoration phases will take place within the times shown in Table 4.4 below.
Table 4.4: Operational Hours
Construction Drilling Evaluation Restoration
(Phase 1) (Phase 2) (Phase 3) (Phase 4)
Monday to 07:00 to 19:00 Continuous 07:00 to 19:00 07:00 to 19:00 Friday
Saturdays 07:00 to 13:00 Continuous 07:00 to 13:00 07:00 to 13:00
Sundays None Continuous None None
Bank Holidays None Continuous None None
4.8.2 Traffic movements during the construction, drilling, evaluation and restoration phases will take place between 07:00 and 19:00 Mondays to Fridays and between 07:00 and 13:00 on Saturdays. There will be no routine traffic movements outside these times and on Sundays or Bank Holidays. Light vans and cars are likely to be used during rig crew changeover which will fall outside these hours.
October 2015 26
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
4.8.3 Drilling operations need to take place continuously, 24 hours a day, seven days a week to enable the wells to be drilled and cased as quickly and efficiently as possible.
4.9 Access and Traffic Generation
4.9.1 All traffic generated by the Proposed Development will be routed to and from the A614 at Blaxton, Bank End Road (B1396) and Springs Road.
4.9.2 The daily average number of traffic movements during the construction, drilling, evaluation and restoration phases (where one vehicle performing a return journey generates two movements) will be as shown in Table 4.5 below.
Table 4.5: Average Number of Movements per Day
Wellsite Rig Drilling Evaluation Restoration
Construction Mobilisation/Demobilisation*
HGVs 36 12 – 16 10 0 36
Light 10 20 40 10 20 Vehicles
* over a two week period
4.9.3 The number of traffic movements generated during rig mobilisation i.e. delivery of the drilling rig and related facilities and set up, will be dependent on the rig which is chosen. On a maximum adverse basis however, it will generate between 120 and 160 HGV movements over a period of up to 2 weeks. This equates to between 12 and 16 HGV movements per day on average. During the same period around 280 associated light vehicle movements will be generated, mainly transporting personnel. This equates to an average of 10 light vehicle movements per day. Around 10 rig components will need to be transported on low loaders and two mobile cranes will be required to lift the rig and site accommodation into position. The delivery of the drill rig may require an oversized / abnormal load vehicle, experience at other oil and gas sites has been to secure the delivery outside of normal working hours. Any oversized / abnormal load deliveries will be a one off during the development of the site and therefore the impact is considered to be minimal.
4.9.4 Movement of the drilling rig across the well cellar to the position required to drill the subsequent horizontal exploratory well is likely to generate around 10 HGV movements per day and an average of 10 car/light van movements per day over a period of some 4 days.
4.9.5 Drilling of the horizontal exploratory well would generate the same type and number of vehicle movements per day as the drilling of the vertical exploratory well, but over a longer period – around 19 weeks instead of 14.
October 2015 27
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
4.9.6 Demobilisation of the drilling rig and related facilities is likely to generate the same type and number of vehicle movements per day as the rig mobilisation and over an equivalent period.
4.9.7 Evaluation of the results of drilling is an offsite operation and there will be little activity at the wellsite itself. There may be visitors or staff going to the Site for monitoring or security purposes etc. and so hours or operation and a small number of vehicle movements have been included.
4.10 Staff
4.10.1 The approximate number of staff employed at the Site per day during the construction, drilling, evaluation and restoration phases will be as shown in Table 4.6 below. During drilling operations staff will comprise two teams of 10 working 12 hour shifts. These teams will be transported to and from the Site as deemed appropriate at the time.
4.10.2 Other personnel engaged at the Site would include security personnel and consultants carrying out monitoring work, suppliers and management support staff.
Table 4.6: Staff Numbers
Construction Drilling Evaluation Restoration
(Phase 1) (Phase 2) (Phase 3) (Phase 4)
Staff 15 - 20 20 5 10
Other Personnel 2 – 5 3 - 8 2 2
4.11 Environmental Design and Management
4.11.1 Environmental design and management measures are also referred to as embedded mitigation and are measures that are built into the design of a development or scheme to avoid, reduce or compensate any adverse effects on the environment that may otherwise have a greater likelihood of occurring. Embedded mitigation measures are taken into account in the assessment of the Proposed Development prior to further or additional mitigation measures being recommended if required as a result of the assessment undertaken. Embedded mitigation measures include:
• design / construction measures that by their very nature avoid or reduce the likelihood of an adverse impact; and
• standard management or ‘good practice’ measures that can reasonably be expected for the type of development being considered to avoid or reduce the likelihood of an adverse impact.
October 2015 28
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Construction Environmental Management Plan
4.11.2 As a general measure to protect surface water from a range of activities associated with construction of this type, best practice would be implemented through a CEMP, whilst the contractors undertaking works on the Proposed Development would comply with relevant guidance during construction, including the relevant Environment Agency PPGs (see Technical Appendix G).
Wellsite design
4.11.3 The wellsite will be constructed with a sand protection layer between the existing Site surface and a Fibertex geotextile membrane. The geotextile membrane will be overlain by an impermeable Bentomat liner and a further Fibertex geotextile membrane, all of which is then covered with aggregate to a depth of 300mm). The design of the wellsite (as shown on Drawing 7) to form a sealed and impermeable working area removes the direct pathway between the activities undertaken on the wellsite and external receptors including soils, groundwater, surface water and ecological receptors.
4.11.4 The construction of the wellsite will be in accordance with the site specific detailed design approved by IGas and will be subject to IGas’ own Construction Quality Assurance (CQA) procedures.
4.11.5 Visual inspections of the wellsite surface and perimeter bunds will be undertaken by site management on a regular basis for the duration of the Proposed Development.
Impermeable liner
4.11.6 The impermeable liner proposed for use (as shown on Drawing 7) is a geosynthetic clay liner, such as a Bentomat liner. The liner is designed to last over 100 years under normal conditions and will therefore be suitable for the duration of the Proposed Development.
4.11.7 The installation of the liner will be subject to the site specific guidance provided by the manufacturer.
Design of the surface water drainage system
4.11.8 The proposed surface water drainage system is shown on Drawing 10 and has been designed to accommodate surface water run-off in the event of a 1 in 100 year storm event as well as 110% volume of the largest storage tank on the wellsite through the provision of a wellsite perimeter containment bund, perimeter french drain and underground storage tank. The design of the sealed surface water drainage system to isolate drainage from the wellsite removes the direct pathway between potentially contaminated surface water and off-site soils, groundwater and surface waters.
4.11.9 The construction of the surface water drainage system will be in accordance with the site specific detailed design approved by IGas and will be subject to IGas’ own CQA procedures and testing where necessary.
October 2015 29
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
4.11.10 Inspections of the perimeter drain and water attenuation tank will be undertaken by site management on a regular basis for the duration of the Proposed Development. Whilst the emptying of the attenuation tank by vacuum tanker for removal off-site will be scheduled, regular inspections will ensure that the tank is emptied as required so as to maintain attenuation capacity.
Well integrity
4.11.11 The following environmental design and management measures (embedded mitigation measures) will prevent or reduce the potential impacts of escape of drilling fluids, gas and formation fluids on groundwater and associated receptors:
• the loss of potentially polluting materials to groundwater during well drilling is minimised by well design that is in accordance with UK regulations, guidelines and industry standards:
o Borehole Sites and Operations Regulations (1995);
o Offshore Installations and Wells
o (Design & Construction etc.) Regulations 1996 (DCR);
o Oil and Gas UK Well Life Cycle Integrity Guidelines (June 2014);
o UKOOG UK Onshore Shale Gas Well Guidelines (2013);
o API Standards; and
o OGUK Guidelines for the Abandonment of Wells, Issue 5 (2015)
• the well design programme has been prepared by the Applicant, in compliance with the above regulations and in accordance with industry good practice;
• the well design programme is approved by IGas’ management, and will subsequently be submitted for review to an independent well examiner and reviewed by the Health and Safety Executive;
• all casing strings installed will be pressure tested and cemented in place to ensure well integrity;
• no hazardous substances (as defined under the Groundwater Directive) will be used in the drilling fluid in all strata above the Zechstein Formation. The drilling mud will be a water based mud;
• below the deep casing, and after the adequate isolation by casing and cement grout, a low toxicity oil based mud (LTOBM) will be used. The LTOBM used will be subject to approval from the Environment Agency;
• to provide control on pressure and retain potentially pollutant materials within containment the following is incorporated:
October 2015 30
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
o a suitably pressure-rated wellhead will be installed onto the well cellar; and
o to provide well control a blow-out preventer (BOP) will be installed when drilling operations are undertaken below the Sherwood Sandstone Group.
• to ensure that the wells do not act as a pathway for future contaminants when the containment of the well is compromised abandonment / suspension will be undertaken using industry best practice as approved by regulators in advance of undertaking the works (DECC, EA and HSE, Oil & Gas UK Guidelines for the Abandonment of Wells).
Materials storage
4.11.12 Standard precautions would also be taken to avoid spread of spillages through the use of secondary containment of fuel and containers within the bunded wellsite and all chemicals would be stored in accordance with their COSHH guidelines.
Emissions control
4.11.13 The drill rig engines (drill rig generators) and on site generator will be fitted with Stage IV emissions control equipment (see Technical Appendix C). European emissions standards for non-road mobile machinery (NRMM) are set as a series of increasingly stringent tiers, of which Stage IV is the most restrictive currently in force. The engines fitted to the drilling rig and generation plant would be compliant with the Stage IV limits.
Emergencies and Spillages
4.11.14 The management measures set out in sections 4.6.8 and 4.6.9 will be incorporated into the management of the Site and are therefore also included as embedded mitigation.
October 2015 31
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
October 2015 32
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
5 Alternatives
5.1 Introduction
5.1.1 The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 (Schedule 4, Part I Paragraph 2 and Part II, Paragraph 4) requires the applicant to include in the ES an outline of alternatives which have been considered and an indication of the main reasons for the choice made, taking into account the environmental effects. Alternative sites have been considered and this section of the ES provides an account of the site selection process. It also summarises the findings of the transport assessment which considered different routes to access the Site.
5.2 Key Considerations
Introduction
5.2.1 Three factors have established the context for the site selection exercise described below:
• the extent of the land over which IGas have been granted the right to explore for (and develop) hydrocarbons (the licence areas 139 and 140);
• the objectives of the proposed exploratory drilling programme; and
• the sub surface geology.
5.2.2 These have been used to select an area of search within which the proposed wellsite has been identified by consideration of both the environmental constraints which are likely to apply both within and nearby the areas of search and the question of site availability.
Licence Areas
5.2.3 IGas has the right to explore for petroleum hydrocarbons within PEDLs 139 and 140 (see Drawing 20).
Objectives of the Drilling Programme
5.2.4 The proposed exploratory drilling at Springs Road is to explore and evaluate the resource potential of the:
• Bowland Shale (primary target);
• Sandstones within the Millstone Grit Group which overlie the Bowland Shale (secondary target); and
• Carboniferous Limestone Supergroup basinal facies (tertiary target).
October 2015 33
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
5.2.5 To achieve these objectives, a vertical well is to be drilled through each of the above targets in order to allow full characterisation of these strata. If the horizontal second well is drilled it will enable the areal extent and heterogeneity of gas bearing rocks to be identified in the target formations.
5.3 Methodology
5.3.1 Given the above key considerations, a four stage methodology to identify a suitable site within either PEDL 139 or PEDL 140 was adopted:
• undertaking a desk study of published and unpublished geological information to identify the most prospective area;
• undertaking a 3D seismic survey to assess the thickness of the target strata and the geological structure;
• defining of “areas of search” for the drilling of the exploratory wells needed to verify the results of the 3D seismic survey; and
• selection of a proposed wellsite involving both consideration of the environmental constraints which are likely to apply both within and nearby the areas of search and the question of site availability.
5.4 Desk Study
Gainsborough Trough
5.4.1 PEDLs 139 and 140 are located over part of the Gainsborough Trough, a buried rift basin which formed during the early part of the Carboniferous period and which contains a thick sequence of sedimentary rocks including the Millstone Grit Group, Bowland Shale and Carboniferous Limestone Supergroup.
5.4.2 The Bowland Shale is the main hydrocarbon source rock for shale gas across the East Midlands. The secondary target, the Millstone Grit Group contains prospective intervals within low porosity and permeability deltaic sands within the Gainsborough Trough. The tertiary target is a series of argillaceous carbonates contained within the Carboniferous Limestone Supergroup.
5.4.3 The British Geological Survey (BGS) report The Carboniferous Bowland Shale gas study: geology and resource estimation (BGS/DECC, 2013) contains estimates of the thickness of the Bowland Shale and Carboniferous Limestone Group across northern and central England based on integration of outcrop, well and seismic data.
5.4.4 The location of the Gainsborough Trough as mapped by the BGS is shown below (extracted from the BGS Bowland Shale Gas Study report). The BGS data indicate that the strata within and overlying the Gainsborough Trough are approximately 3,500 m thick in the study area.
October 2015 34
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Offset Wells
5.4.5 A number of wells have been drilled in the two licence blocks in the past (see Drawing 22). These include Scaftworth B2, Everton 1, Everton 2 and Misterton 1. These wells are termed “offset wells”. Data from these wells has been used to help define the area of search within the Gainsborough Trough.
5.4.6 Scaftworth B2 is the key offset well, having intersected both the Bowland Shale and Carboniferous Limestone Supergroup. It was drilled by BP in 1982 and reached a depth of 2,312 m True Vertical Depth - Sub Sea (TVDSS). The most recent wells are two coal bed methane wells drilled by GP Energy in 2010 at Everton 2 and Misterton. These were drilled to 1,224 m and 560 m TVDSS respectively.
5.4.7 Scaftworth B2 penetrated the Carboniferous Limestone Supergroup by 70 m in order to evaluate the full section of the shallower Bowland Shale as well as the most prospective sections of the underlying strata. Everton 1 successfully tested gas and condensate flows from a sandstone within the Millstone Grit Group. Flow tests of this formation have also been undertaken in the nearby Gainsborough and Beckingham fields.
5.5 Seismic Survey
5.5.1 The results of the desk survey and the results of the offset wells led to an area within PEDLs 139 and 140 being defined and within the footprint of the Gainsborough Trough to the north of Scaftworth B2 off-set well where a potential wellsite could be located. A 3D seismic survey was shot in 2014 over an area of approximately 7,000 hectares. The extent of this survey is shown on Drawing 22.
October 2015 35
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
5.5.2 Analysis of the survey results confirmed a relatively simple geological structure in a basin centred position. The survey allowed better definition of the areas of search for an exploratory wellsite within the Gainsborough Trough in which the project objectives could be met.
5.6 Areas of Search
5.6.1 Two areas of search were identified for the exploration wells within PEDLs 139 and 140 (a northern area and a southern area) - the boundaries of which are shown on Drawing 22. These were defined as the best areas of search for exploration wells from a reservoir and structure point of view having had regard to factors including geological structure and the thickness and depth of the target strata as identified by the 3D seismic survey.
5.7 Site Selection
General
5.7.1 The significance of the areas of search in the context of site selection is that drilling from locations outside the boundaries would not achieve the objectives of the exploration programme.
5.7.2 The choice of location for the wellsite was therefore within the two areas of search defined by the seismic survey and took into account:
• a range of environmental and planning constraints;
• site availability; and
• logistics.
Constraints
5.7.3 The following environmental and planning constraints were considered where they apply within the areas of search or within 2 km of the area of search boundary:
• National Parks
• Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty
• Special Areas for Conservation
• Special Protection Areas
• Ramsar Sites
• National Nature Reserves
• Sites of Special Scientific Interest
• Ancient Woodland
• Local Nature Reserves
October 2015 36
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
• Nature Improvement Areas
• Local Wildlife Sites
• World Heritage Sites
• Registered Battlefields
• Scheduled Monuments
• Registered Parks and Gardens
• Listed buildings
• Conservation Areas
• Flood Zones 2 and 3
• Groundwater Source Protection Zone 1
• Air Quality Management Areas
• Agricultural land quality
• Green Belt
• Road network
• Land within 200 m of a residential property
5.7.4 Drawings 24 to 27 show where any of the above constraints apply either in the areas of search or the surrounding area as defined above.
5.7.5 Based on the constraints mapping the following key criteria were identified as providing a basis for the identification of a suitable location for a potential wellsite within either the northern or southern areas of search:
• sites should be more than 200 m from residential properties (see Drawing 24);
• there should be no access constraints, including the presence of public rights of way on potential access routes (see Drawing 24);
• sites should not be adjacent to or within Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI) or Local Wildlife Sites (LWS) - see Drawing 27;
• sites should be more than 200 m from listed buildings (see Drawing 27);
• sites at lower risk of flooding (i.e. Flood Zone 2 rather than Flood Zone 3a) should be selected if possible (see Drawing 25); and
• land with a lower Agricultural Land Classification (ALC) grade should be identified where possible (see Drawing 26).
October 2015 37
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Assessment – Southern Area of Search
5.7.6 Using the constraints mapping shown on Drawings 24 to 27, the suitability of the southern area of search was assessed for suitable locations for a wellsite. In summary, this constraints assessment identified that:
• the whole of the southern area of search is Grade 3 agricultural land with the exception of two relatively small parts – one of which is Grade 4 (which coincides with the River Idle LWS) and the other north west of Nettleham Well Farm is Grade 2;
• LWSs are present within the south and east of this area of search;
• Misson village includes residential properties and a number of listed buildings; and
• the whole of area is at risk of flooding – the land at a lower risk of flooding (i.e. Flood Zone 2 instead of Flood Zone 3) forms a substantial area in the centre of the area of search centred around Misson village.
5.7.7 The highway access to this area runs through Misson village.
5.7.8 The net effect of these constraints is that despite the Southern Area of search being predominantly in Flood Zone 2 and with soils of Grade 3 it is not preferred for development of a wellsite because:
• land within and around Misson village is within 200 m of residential properties and close to listed buildings;
• the area with a lower risk of flooding (i.e. Flood Zone 2 instead of Flood Zone 3) is mainly within 200m of residential properties;
• the southern and eastern parts of the site are not preferred due to proximity to Local Wildlife Sites;
• the main parts of this area of search which are not within 200 m of residential properties or in Flood Zone 3 are between Rugged Butts Lane and Bracken Hill Lane to the north west of Misson village and land on each side of Top Road and Eastwood Lane to the east of Misson village is at the western end. Access to this part of the southern area of search would involve HGV traffic accessing any site passing through Misson village and using lanes shared with public rights of way; and
• the part of this area of search which lies to the south of the River Idle is difficult to access.
5.7.9 On the basis of this assessment, no suitable candidate exploratory wellsites were able to be identified in this southern area of search
October 2015 38
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Assessment – Northern Area of Search
5.7.10 Using the constraints mapping shown on Drawings 24 to 27, the suitability of the northern area of search was assessed for suitable locations for a temporary exploratory wellsite. In summary, this constraints assessment identified that:
• the majority of the area of search is Grade 2 agricultural land with only the part which lies to the south of the River Idle being Grade 3 agricultural land;
• the commercial premises at the site of the former RAF Misson is an area of previously developed land within a predominantly agricultural area;
• there are two SSSIs which occur within the central part of the northern area of search;
• residential properties are concentrated along Springs Road;
• the whole of the northern area of search is at risk of flooding with the area with land a lower risk of flooding (i.e. Flood Zone 2 instead of Flood Zone 3) at the western end.
5.7.11 The net effect of these constraints is that the northern area of search is preferred for development of a wellsite because it contains land in the centre and south of the area of search which is greater than 200 m from residential properties or listed buildings (albeit in Flood Zone 3), not adjacent to the SSSIs and which is accessible via either Springs Road or Levels Lane.
5.7.12 The majority of the suitable land within the northern area of search is Grade 2 agricultural land with only the part which lies to the south of the River Idle being Grade 3 agricultural land. However, the latter is difficult to access and is therefore not preferred.
5.7.13 Land at the western end of the northern area of search which is in Flood Zone 2 and at lower risk of flooding is either within 200 m of residential properties, or requires access via Deeps Lane and Middle Wood Lane which are both bridleways and as such is not preferred.
5.7.14 The part of the northern area of search which lies to the south of the River Idle is Grade 3 agricultural land, but is difficult to access and is therefore not preferred.
5.7.15 On the basis of this assessment it was decided not to rule out sites comprising Grade 2 agricultural land (as the proposed use is temporary and good soil handling practice etc. could ensure that this land could be returned to its original condition) and to identify land in or around the existing commercial premises at the site of the former RAF Misson for possible wellsite locations.
Possible Site Options
5.7.16 Two possible site options became available for the application site.
i. Agricultural land fronting Springs Road in front of the commercial buildings; and
October 2015 39
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
ii. Part of the land within the existing commercial premises, behind the existing buildings to the east side of Springs Road.
5.7.17 Scoping Opinions were sought from NCC on both sites; for the Agricultural Site in January 2015 and the Commercial Site in May 2015.
5.7.18 In selecting which site to proceed with the following criteria were considered:
• the overall impact on amenity that could be caused to the community and environment during construction and drilling operations including noise, visual impact, traffic and access and air quality;
• the impact on the environment in terms of ecological impacts, landscape character and visual impacts, archaeological and historic environment impacts, agricultural impacts, and hydrological impacts; and
• the suitability of the site from a logistics and security perspective.
Choice of Site
5.7.19 As a result of this assessment the land within the existing commercial premises was selected as the preferred site for development because:
• it is previously developed land located within the curtilage of a commercial site;
• it is directly accessible from Springs Road with existing access;
• the site is set back and well screened by existing commercial buildings
• it is not within 200 m of a residential property ;
• it is not within or immediately adjacent to an ecological designation (SSSI); and
• is not crossed by PRoW.
5.7.20 Whilst, the Proposed Site is located within Flood Zone 3, alternative land at lower risk of flooding (i.e. Flood Zone 2) in both the northern and southern areas of search is either close to residential properties or only accessible using PRoW.
5.7.21 Having regard to the results of the constraint mapping and assessment exercise described the application Site was considered as the preferred choice.
Alternative Routes
5.7.22 The alternative routes for HGV traffic which have been considered (and the reasons for the route chosen) are described in the Transport Assessment included in this ES (Technical Appendix A). In summary there are five potential HGV route options available to / from the Site and local highways of ‘A’ status:
• Route A: North to B1396, west to A614 (through Blaxton);
October 2015 40
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
• Route B: South (through Misson) on Springs Road – Station Road – Top Street – Newington Road to the A614;
• Route C: North to B1396, east to Idle Bank, and north to A18;
• Route D1: North to B1396, east to A161 (through Haxey); and
• Route D2: North to B1396, east to A161 (via Akeferry Road).
th th 5.7.23 Traffic counts were conducted between 12 and 18 March 2015. Based on this, all of the proposed routes can be considered to be operating well within their link capacity.
5.7.24 Road safety collision records have been obtained from the DfT for these routes for the period 2009 to 2013. These show that there have been approximately as many collisions on Route B as might be expected for a road of this type and the volume of traffic recorded by the traffic surveys (excluding the short section between the A614 and A638). Routes A, C and D all perform worse than could be expected for their road types and traffic volumes; however, there have been approximately twice as many collisions on Routes C and D than could have been expected. Route A is performing marginally worse than could be expected, and this is likely due to collisions at its junction with the A614.
5.7.25 The routes have been assessed in terms of constraints:
• geometric and others (e.g. level crossings);
• road safety;
• proximity to residential properties; and
• proximity to other sensitive receptors (e.g. schools).
5.7.26 Route A is the preferred route, as it represents the most direct route to the A-road network and largely avoids sensitive receptors. Route D2 is the preferred alternative. Routes B, C and D1 were found to be unviable. Route B passes through Misson Village, Route C is unsuitable due to being of restricted width on Idle Bank Road whilst there is a weight limit on Route D1.
October 2015 41
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Drawing 24: Site Setting – Residential Properties and Public Rights of Way
October 2015 42
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Drawing 25: Site Setting – Flood Risk Zones
October 2015 43
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Drawing 26: Site Setting – Agricultural Land Classification
October 2015 44
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Drawing 27: Site Setting – Ecological and Cultural Heritage Designations
October 2015 45
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
October 2015 46
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
6 Transport
6.1 Introduction
6.1.1 This Chapter provides a summary of the Transport Assessment included at Technical Appendix A (in Volume 4), which considers traffic and transportation issues associated with the Proposed Development.
6.2 Policy Context
6.2.1 A review of the relevant policy and legislation is included in Technical Appendix A.
6.3 Assessment Methodology
6.3.1 Most local highway authorities continue to use the withdrawn Guidance on Transport Assessment (GTA, Department for Transport (DfT), 2007) to establish the development thresholds that trigger a transport assessment and / or a transport statement, and for methodological guidance. With specific reference to the GTA, Technical Appendix A examines existing Site conditions along all potential routes to / from the Site and the ‘A’ road network. It then identifies a preferred route, and examines in more detail the impact of the development on this route in terms of highway geometry, road safety and congestion. This is in line with the requirements expressed in responses to NCC’s Scoping Opinion (Appendix A to the ES). Given the nature of the development, the assessment does not consider matters relating to public transport, non-vehicular traffic and/or PRoW.
6.3.2 In addition the Guidelines for the Environmental Assessment of Road Traffic (Institute for Environmental Assessment, IEA, 1993) states that highway links (i.e. roads) should be separately assessed (for environmental impacts) when the number of HGVs increases by more than 30%. Where such environmental impacts of traffic have been identified in this assessment they have been considered in separate Chapters 7 and 8 in this ES (i.e. noise and air quality).
6.4 Baseline Conditions
6.4.1 This section describes the existing highway conditions near to the Site. It describes the main routes to / from the Site, and also provides baseline traffic survey and road safety data.
6.4.2 There are five potential HGV route options available to / from the Site and local highways of ‘A’ status:
• Route A: North to B1396, west to A614 (through Blaxton);
• Route B: South (through Misson) on Springs Road – Station Road – Top Street – Newington Road to the A614;
October 2015 47
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
• Route C: North to B1396, east to Idle Bank, and north to A18;
• Route D1: North to B1396, east to A161 (through Haxey); and
• Route D2: North to B1396, east to A161 (via Akeferry Road).
th th 6.4.3 To inform this study, traffic counts were conducted between 12 and 18 March 2015. Based on this, all of the proposed routes can be considered to be operating well within their link capacity.
6.4.4 Road safety collision records have been obtained from the DfT for these routes for the period 2009 to 2013. These show that there have been approximately as many collisions on Route B as might be expected for a road of this type and the volume of traffic recorded by the traffic surveys (excluding the short section between the A614 and A638). Routes A, C and D all perform worse than could be expected for their road types and traffic volumes; however, there have been approximately twice as many collisions on Routes C and D than could have been expected. Route A is performing marginally worse than could be expected, and this is likely due to collisions at its junction with the A614.
6.4.5 The routes have been assessed in terms of:
• constraints – geometric and others (e.g. level crossings);
• road safety;
• proximity to residential properties; and
• proximity to other sensitive receptors (e.g. schools).
6.4.6 Route A is the preferred route, as it represents the most direct route to the A-road network and largely avoids sensitive receptors. Route D2 is the preferred alternative.
6.4.7 Route B, C and D1 were found to be unviable. Route B passes through Misson village, Route C is unsuitable due to being of restricted width on Idle Bank Road whilst there is a weight limit on Route D1.
6.5 Proposed Operations
Access
6.5.1 The Site benefits from an existing point of access onto Springs Road. This is associated with the existing commercial site dealing with military surplus, such as ex-army all-wheel drive vehicles from 4x4 land rovers to 8x8 cargo trucks through to plant (wheeled loaders and excavators etc.) and equipment. The existing points of access are suitable for use by articulated vehicles and the visibility is good.
Traffic
6.5.2 During the construction and restoration phases (phases 1 and 4), the Site would generate 20 light van / car movements and 36 HGV movements per day; and, during the drilling phase
October 2015 48
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
(phase 2), the Site would generate 40 light van / car movements and 10 HGV movements per day which would include the supply of operational water to the Site in tankers. These phases constitute the peak periods of activity at the Site.
6.5.3 Approximately 15 staff would be employed on-site during the construction of the wellsite and the same number will typically be employed during each shift during the drilling operation (phase 2). Other personnel based at the Site from time to time would include consultants carrying out monitoring work, suppliers and management support staff.
Hours of Operation
6.5.4 Site construction, operation and restoration works will normally take place within the following times:
• Monday to Friday (excluding Bank Holidays) 07:00 to 19:00 hours; and
• Saturdays 07:00 to 13:00 hours
6.5.5 Drilling, however, will take place for 24 hours per day seven days a week.
Length of Operations
6.5.6 From the start of construction to the end of Site restoration it is expected that the operation would be completed in 3 years (1,095 days) during which HGV movements would occur on approximately 400 days. The proposals would not be a continuous operation.
Summary
6.5.7 The Site benefits from an existing access which is used by large and heavy vehicles. Traffic flows to / from the Site would vary depending on development phases, with the most intense activity being during the construction and restoration phases (Phases 1 and 4).
6.6 Assessment of Impacts
Overview
6.6.1 The purpose of this section is to assess the potential impacts of the Proposed Development in the context of the baseline conditions. This section focuses on traffic impact and road safety. As the preferred option, Route A has been taken forward for detailed consideration.
Traffic Impact
6.6.2 The change in traffic flow that could be expected on Route A with the Proposed Development (at times of its peak traffic generation, i.e. Phase 1) has been calculated. In terms of guidelines issued by the Institute for Environmental Assessment (IEA), the changes in overall traffic flow would not be at a sufficient volume to create a perceptible traffic impact. However, the increase in HGV movements through the short length of Route A through Blaxton would be in excess of the IEA thresholds for HGV movements. As such, this impact has been assessed elsewhere in the ES (within Technical Appendix B: Noise; and Technical Appendix C: Air Quality).
October 2015 49
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
6.6.3 The resulting changes in road traffic noise levels indicates that for receptors along the B1396 and A614 route corridors the resulting noise impacts are likely to be imperceptible, and the resultant impact is considered to be very low. For receptors along the Springs Road corridor noise level changes may just be perceptible, however the resulting impact is considered to be low. The resulting temporary changes in road traffic noise levels are therefore considered to be acceptable.
6.6.4 The Air Quality assessment (Technical Appendix C) concludes that the additional traffic generated by the Proposed Development would not raise the concentration of nitrogen
dioxide, PM10 or PM2.5 at receptors located along the local road network linking the Site and the A614 at Blaxton during any phase of the works. Therefore, the effect of construction and operational phase road traffic emissions would not be significant.
6.6.5 The GTA thresholds requiring a full Transport Assessment are not triggered by the development as the development would not have any highway capacity impacts - particularly given that the overall background traffic volumes on both Spring Road and the B1396 are low.
Road Safety Impact
6.6.6 The Proposed Development would not have a material impact on either road safety or highway capacity. The route to the Site is satisfactory for the type of vehicles proposed; including oversized vehicles for large plant and equipment, and no mitigation is warranted given the relatively short period through which operations are to be conducted, and the low overall number of vehicles to be generated by the Site.
6.7 Mitigation Proposals
6.7.1 Whilst the assessment of the Proposed Development does not warrant any mitigation measures NCC Highways specifically asked for the junction of Springs Road / B1397 to be assessed in terms of road safety.
6.7.2 In the period 2002 to 2013 (nine years), there have been five collisions (three of which were classed as ‘Serious’). As is identified in this assessment, the junction benefits from good visibility and collisions here are likely to be a result of turning traffic having difficulty perceiving the speed of oncoming traffic on the B1396. Collision records obtained from NCC over the last five years show that two of the three most recent (5 year) collisions involved a vehicle turning right out of the minor arm and an ahead moving vehicle, and one involved a vehicle turning right into the minor arm.
6.7.3 This issue could be addressed by the introduction of:
• revised advance warning signage (conforming to diagram 506.1 of TSGRD); and
• use of road markings (conforming to diagram 1024 ‘SLOW’ of TSRGD).
6.7.4 Notwithstanding the above, IGas would be willing to accept a planning condition requiring the submission of a Traffic Management Plan, which would be agreed with the local
October 2015 50
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
highway authority and which would include details of how IGas intend to manage vehicles and drivers.
6.8 Residual Effects
6.8.1 Residual effects are the same as set out in Section 6.5.
6.9 Cumulative Impacts
6.9.1 The following potential / existing developments have been identified near to the Site:
• proposed extension of Newington Sand Quarry;
• proposed erection of a solar photovoltaic development on approximately 15.84 ha of land off Bawtry Road;
• quarrying of sand and gravel at three sites - two off Bawtry Road to the south of Misson Village and one from a site in Finningley; and
• the existing production of mushroom substrate at Tunnel Tech North factory off Bawtry Road.
6.9.2 The above developments relate to the highway south of Misson village and would therefore impact on Route B only rather than the preferred Route A. The Finningley and Rossington Regeneration Route Scheme (FARRS) was also noted by some parties in response to the Scoping Opinion. However, it is not considered that the FARRS route would have any impact on the Proposed Development.
6.10 Statement of Significance and Summary
6.10.1 The Transport Assessment has considered the transport impacts associated with the Proposed Development. A preferred HGV route has been identified which would route north to the B1396, then west to the A614 (via Blaxton). This route is the shortest route available and is preferred over alternative options.
6.10.2 The Proposed Development would generate both HGV and staff trips. The most intense period of activity would be during the construction and restoration phases (Phases 1 and 4); however, even during these periods the numbers of vehicles would not be at a level to create material highway capacity issues or road safety risks. The increase in HGV numbers through Blaxton may create environmental impacts associated with traffic, and this has been considered elsewhere in the ES (within Technical Appendix B: Noise; and Technical Appendix C: Air Quality). The effects of an increase in HGV numbers located along the local road network linking the Site and the A614 at Blaxton during any phase of the works have been assessed as being acceptable.
6.10.3 The Proposed Development would not have a material impact on either road safety or highway capacity. The route to the Site is satisfactory for the type of vehicles proposed, and no mitigation is warranted given the relatively short period through which operations are to be conducted, and the low overall number of vehicles to be generated by the Site.
October 2015 51
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Notwithstanding this, improvements to the B1396 / Springs Road junction could be undertaken. No nearby developments have been identified which would cause a cumulative impact requiring further examination as part of this assessment.
6.10.4 Overall, there should be no highway-related reason to refuse the Proposed Development.
October 2015 52
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
7 Noise and Vibration
7.1 Introduction
7.1.1 This Chapter provides a summary of the Noise Assessment undertaken by Xodus Group included at Technical Appendix B (in Volume 4). The assessment determines the baseline conditions of the Site and assesses the impact of the Proposed Development upon the identified baseline and provides recommended mitigation measures to ensure the development can proceed in an environmentally acceptable manner.
7.2 Policy Context
7.2.1 Chapter 4 of Technical Appendix B provides a full review of the relevant Policy and Legislation including:
• Policy M3.5 of the Nottinghamshire Minerals Local Plan;
• Noise Policy Statement for England;
• National Planning Policy Framework (NPPF);
• Planning Practice Guidance (PPG);
• British Standard 5228;
• British Standard 8233;
• British Standard 4142; and
• World Health Organisation Guidelines.
7.3 Assessment Methodology
7.3.1 Nottinghamshire County Council (NCC) was consulted prior to undertaking the noise assessment to agree the scope and methodology to be used. The Council stated that:
7.3.2 “As drilling operations will be continuous throughout the day and night, it is preferable to
ensure that noise levels do not exceed 42 dB LAeq,T at any nearby receptors to ensure compliance with night time noise levels in PPG for minerals operations. Accepting that drilling may be considered as a construction activity due to its temporary nature, we may consider an alternative noise limit when determining significance of effects in accordance
with the ABC method in BS5228:1 with any limits in excess of 45 dB LAeq, T needing to be justified by correspondingly higher levels of ambient noise during the night time period, which is unlikely to be the case at this location.”
7.3.3 NCC also expressed concerns about the use of BS4142:2014, stating that if the night-time levels of noise are low, this could result in overly restrictive noise limits. Given the temporary October 2015 53
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
nature of the operation, NCC stated that they would be content with a noise limit of 45 dB LAeq
at the façade of residential properties (equivalent to a free-field noise level of 42 dB LAeq).
7.3.4 Consultation with the Environmental Health Department of Bassetlaw District Council was undertaken to agree the locations of the noise monitoring equipment for the baseline assessment.
7.3.5 Unattended noise monitoring was undertaken by AECOM from 13th to 19th March 2015 at two locations. One measurement position was adjacent to the rear garden of Misson Springs Cottage at a point at the furthest location from Springs Road. This location was selected to be representative of the amenity areas of properties fronting onto Springs Road. The other location was at a distance 100 m to the east of Springs Road in order to reduce the impact of road traffic movements on the monitoring results and be generally representative of other sensitive receptors in the locality that do not front onto Springs Road.
Construction
7.3.6 The Site is an existing commercial site and so there will be no major earth movements required to create the wellsite. For the purposes of construction noise modelling, it has been assumed that, as a worst case, all of the equipment proposed for construction will be utilised on-site at the same time for 100% of the time.
Traffic
7.3.7 Traffic noise calculations have been carried out based on Annual Average Daily Traffic (AADT) Drawings with and without construction traffic, as shown in Table 7.2, Technical Appendix B, for Springs Road, the B1396 and the A614.
Drilling
7.3.8 Drilling operations are planned to operate on a 24 hour basis and, as such, it is the night- time situation rather than the daytime which will be more critical. At the present time no decision on the exact rig to be utilised on the Site has been made. The choice of rig will depend on several factors including rig availability, at the time the wells are to be drilled, if planning permission is granted. Consequently, the noise characteristics from four typical types of rigs were assessed to determine the suitability of the Site with regard to potential noise impacts and the types of mitigation required. To do this four different rig types were assessed (Drillmec HH-220, Bentec T-49, Bentec T-208 and Bolden 92).
7.3.9 It should be noted that these four rigs are typical of the type of rig that might be used. Different rigs produce different noise levels and noise characteristics and the rigs selected were considered to give a typical range of the noise levels and characters that could occur from any selected rig. This would also enable different noise mitigation measures to be assessed as part of the EIA. The rigs assessed are typical and form part of the range of rigs in terms of power, ability, height (32 - 60m) and top drive that could be selected to drill the wells at Springs Road depending on availability. It is expected that other rigs of a comparable type will have a similar noise footprint. If an alternative rig was to be proposed,
October 2015 54
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
a further noise report would be prepared to determine how the noise emission differs from that presented in this report and which mitigation measures would be appropriate to be applied from those discussed in this report in order to ensure that noise is reduced to as low as practicable and meets required daytime and night-time levels.
Noise Model Methodology
7.3.10 The noise emissions from the proposed activities have been modelled using the CadnaA environmental noise prediction software. This model calculates the contribution from each noise source input as a specified source type (e.g. point, line, area) octave band sound power levels at selected locations. It predicts noise levels under light down-wind conditions based on hemispherical propagation, atmospheric absorption, ground effects, screening and directivity based on the procedure detailed in ISO 9613.
7.3.11 The ground between the Site and the receiver locations has been assumed to be soft although no attenuation has been taken for foliage, despite the relatively dense woodlands to the east of the Site. Terrain contour data has also been entered in the model based on OS land contours, although the land is fairly flat. The Site buildings have been included and these provide some degree of screening as well as reflecting surfaces.
7.3.12 The model has been run using a receiver height of 4 m in order to investigate the noise impact from night-time operations.
7.3.13 The same noise modelling techniques have been used by Xodus on several rigs in the UK and worldwide and there is a high degree of confidence in the model. The main area of uncertainty relates to source noise level data for two of the rigs modelled given that Xodus has not undertaken the measurements on either rig. However, once the final rig has been chosen, Xodus will be able to provide detailed noise control advice to ensure that the rig meets or exceeds the level of mitigation specified in this report.
7.3.14 Various iterations of the model were run for each rig: one assuming no further acoustic mitigation measures and iterations including additional mitigation or low noise equipment.
7.4 Baseline Conditions
7.4.1 Prevailing background noise levels were found to be relatively low in the location, with
ambient noise levels during the daytime in the general range of 40 to 53 dB LAeq. Noise levels in the locality are dominated by road traffic movements on Springs Road and to a lesser extent from aircraft at Robin Hood Airport. As a result of reduced volumes of road traffic in the evening and night time, ambient noise levels drop to a level in the range of 20 to 38 dB
LAeq, which are indicative of rural locations away from major sources of man-made noise.
7.5 Assessment of Impact
Construction Noise Assessment
7.5.1 An assessment of noise from construction has been undertaken based on the ABC thresholds from BS5228 and the baseline ambient noise levels in the area. The assessment
October 2015 55
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
demonstrates that even with a worst case (and unlikely) scenario of all plant operating at the same time during the construction period, noise levels will be lower than the daytime threshold. No construction works will be undertaken at evening or at night. Consequently no significant impact is expected from Site construction activities.
Traffic Noise Assessment
7.5.2 The resulting changes in road traffic noise levels indicates that for receptors along the B1396 and A614 route corridors the resulting noise impacts are likely to be imperceptible, and the resulting impact is considered to be very low. For receptors along the Springs Road corridor noise level changes may just be perceptible, however the resulting impact is considered to be low. The resulting temporary changes in road traffic noise levels are therefore considered to be acceptable.
Drilling Noise Assessment
7.5.3 The PPG on noise from mineral extraction requires that “for any operations during the period 22.00 – 07.00 noise limits should be set to reduce to a minimum any adverse impacts, without imposing unreasonable burdens on the mineral operator. In any event the noise limit
should not exceed 42 dBA LAeq,1h (free field) at a noise sensitive property.” The approach taken for this assessment has been to utilise best available techniques to reduce noise from the drill rigs to as low as possible without placing overly restrictive burdens on the operator. For example, experience at a previous wellsite shows that limiting the speed of the top-drive could potentially lead to technical issues with the well and, as a worst case, well failure. Consequently, the mitigation measures developed as part of this assessment take into account various factors including practicability, safety and technical constraints.
7.5.4 Noise modelling for the four rigs showed that there was potential for each rig to exceed the
42 dB LAeq (free-field) noise limit from the PPG unless further mitigation measures were considered. Consequently, a range of mitigation measures have been investigated as part of the assessment in order to reduce noise from drilling operations to as low as practicable. These mitigation measures are explained in detail in Section 10 of Technical Appendix B and summarised below.
7.6 Mitigation Proposals
7.6.1 The approach taken for this development has been to utilise best available technology to reduce noise levels from the candidate drilling rigs to as low as reasonably practicable. Notwithstanding this, it is not known which drilling rig will be utilised. Consequently, it is difficult to specify the exact noise mitigation measures that will be installed. Nevertheless, it is possible to provide recommendations for best practice. Chapter 10 of Technical Appendix B provides details of possible engineering noise control measures for the rigs based on specific noise measurements on the candidate rigs combined with experience of carrying out noise control on other drilling rigs. These mitigation measures will be finalised once the rig has been chosen and a noise control report will be prepared detailing the specific mitigation measures to be installed and their effect on ambient noise levels in the vicinity.
October 2015 56
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
7.6.2 A summary of the potential mitigation measures are as follows:
• Hydraulic Power Unit – acoustic enclosure;
• Mud Pumps – acoustic enclosure, fitted with high specification exhaust silencers if diesel driven;
• Generators – installed in high specification enclosures, exhaust silencers, acoustic louvers;
• Shale shakers – enclosure of localised screening;
• Centrifuge – enclosure with an internal acoustically absorptive lining;
• Rig – full rig enclosure or acoustic barriers erected;
• Top Drive – acoustic enclosure; and
• noise monitoring.
7.7 Residual Effects
7.7.1 The noise assessment undertaken by Xodus Group assesses the baseline ambient noise levels and residual noise levels with mitigation in place. Once mitigation measures are in place, it is expected that noise levels will be below the WHO guideline limit for onset of sleep
disturbance as well as the PPG 42 dB LAeq (free-field) noise limit for night. Daytime noise
levels during drilling will also be well below the PPG absolute noise limit of 55 dB LAeq.
7.7.2 It is an important consideration that any noise impact from drilling will be temporary in nature, lasting around nine months. Furthermore, the impacts due to drilling noise modelled as part of this assessment have been based on worst case assumptions, such as the receiver location (receptor) always being down-wind from the drill rig and the rig operating at its maximum capacity 24 hours a day throughout the drilling programme. In reality, this will not be the case and there will be significant periods within the 9 month drilling programme when noise levels are less than predicted and assessed in this report. The report aims to assess the maximum noise levels and characteristics of different rig types.
7.8 Statement of Significance and Summary
7.8.1 Noise modelling for the four representative rigs showed that there was potential for each rig
to exceed the 42 dB LAeq (free-field) noise limit from the PPG unless further mitigation measures were considered. Consequently, a range of mitigation measures have been investigated as part of the assessment in order to reduce noise from drilling operations to as low as practicable. The approach taken was to utilise best available techniques to reduce noise from the drilling rigs to as low as possible taking into account various factors including practicability, safety and technical constraints.
7.8.2 With respect to the impacts of noise on health, it is the effect on sleep that is likely to be the primary concern. The absolute noise level assessment showed that noise from drilling
October 2015 57
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
activities can be mitigated so that it falls below the WHO guideline levels for onset of sleep
disturbance effects and the PPG absolute noise limit of 42 dB LAeq. It can therefore be concluded that there will be no adverse impact on health.
7.8.3 With respect to the impact on quality of life (amenity, enjoyment of property etc.), it is the daytime and evening periods that are of greatest concern (people will generally be sleeping at night). The noise modelling established that the development will result in, at most, a 1 dB increase in ambient noise during the day and at most 4 dB in the evening. This change in noise level is unlikely to be noticeable during the daytime and could be just noticeable in the evening. It was therefore only considered to be a minor to moderate impact, and it is unlikely that this would seriously affect the quality of life of even those in close proximity to the drill rig, especially when the short term nature of the impact is taken into consideration.
7.8.4 In terms of the absolute noise level assessment, noise from plant will be significantly less
than the 55 dB LAeq absolute noise limit in the PPG for the daytime. Thus, taking both the temporary change in noise level and absolute noise level assessment into consideration, it is considered that the Proposed Development will not result in an adverse impact to quality of life.
7.9 Vibration
7.9.1 Assessment of the impacts of vibration concludes there are no anticipated impacts that would arise due to ground borne vibration resulting directly from the drilling operations. The drills are rotary bored only and therefore impart relatively small amounts of energy into the ground, for example compared to percussive pilling techniques. Data available for continuous flight augers suggests that ground borne vibration would be imperceptible at distances of around 20 metres. Vibration levels from the drilling operations are not expected to be significantly different in magnitude. Consequently, at the nearest receptors (typically over 300 metres from the rig) ground borne vibration would be considerably lower, and certainly not perceptible. The resulting impact from ground borne vibration resulting directly from the drill rig is considered to be Negligible.
October 2015 58
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
8 Air Quality
8.1 Introduction
8.1.1 This Chapter provides a summary of the findings of the air quality assessment included at Technical Appendix C (in Volume 4). The assessment determines the baseline conditions of the Site and assesses the impact of the Proposed Development upon the identified baseline.
8.2 Policy Context
8.2.1 A review of the relevant policy and legislation is included in Technical Appendix C.
8.3 Assessment Methodology
8.3.1 There is currently no statutory guidance on the method by which an air quality impact assessment should be undertaken. Several non-statutory bodies have published their own guidance relating to air quality and development control (EPUK, 2010) or to the assessment of the significance of air quality effects (IAQM, 2009).
8.3.2 This section will explain the methods used to assess the significance of:
• the impact of fugitive emissions of particulate matter from wellsite activities;
• the impact of emissions from operations at the Site; and
• the combined impacts of combustion emissions from the Site and from vehicles on the local road network (see Technical Appendix A).
8.3.3 Potentially affected air quality sensitive receptors have been identified for each element of the assessment and the magnitude of the change in air quality statistics at each receptor has been considered.
Dust
8.3.4 The methodology described within the EA guidance (Environment Agency, 2011a) contains the following steps which have been followed in this assessment:
• identify potential dust sources (hazards);
• identify representative receptors where there is relevant exposure;
• risk management (mitigation);
• probability of exposure (magnitude of impact); and
• consequence and the overall risk (significance).
October 2015 59
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
8.3.5 Potential sources include all activities associated with the works that have the potential to
generate emissions of dust and particulate matter (PM10) to the extent that such emissions could impact upon levels of deposition and soiling and/or an increase in concentrations of
airborne PM10 where there is relative sensitive exposure.
Road Traffic Emissions
8.3.6 The magnitude of road traffic emissions for the baseline and with development scenarios are calculated from traffic flow data. The assessment considers the impact of road traffic emissions at receptors adjacent to roads in the vicinity of the Proposed Development.
8.3.7 This assessment follows current guidance for the determination of baseline pollutant concentrations, and uses emissions factors for road traffic calculated from Defra’s Emission Factor Toolkit (Version 6.0.2) (Defra, 2014).
Combustion Plant Emissions
8.3.8 The assessment considers the impact of process emissions on local air quality, under normal operating conditions, from the primary generator and the drill rig generators. The assessment considers impacts in the year in which the facility is due to commence operation, 2016.
8.3.9 The dispersion of emissions is predicted using the dispersion model ADMS 5. The results are presented in both tabular format and as contours of predicted ground level process contributions overlaid on mapping of the surrounding area.
8.3.10 The pollutants considered within this assessment from the on-site generators are those most commonly associated with emissions from diesel plant, namely:
• Oxides of Nitrogen (NOX), as Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2);
• Particulate Matter (as PM10 and PM2.5); and
• Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs), as benzene.
8.3.11 A comparison has been made between predicted model output concentrations, and short- term and long-term Environmental Assessment Levels (EALs), set out within Horizontal Guidance Document, H1 Annex F (Environment Agency, 2011b).
Odour
8.3.12 During the drilling process there is the potential for gases, including hydrogen sulphide to be released to atmosphere as a fugitive emission. However during drilling the mass of gas emitted is unlikely to be large enough to be detectable as an odour at any location beyond the Site boundary and therefore has not been considered further in this assessment.
October 2015 60
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Receptors
8.3.13 Ground-level concentrations of the modelled pollutants relevant to human health have been predicted at discrete air quality sensitive receptors. The receptors have been selected to be representative of residential dwellings in the areas around the Proposed Development.
Prediction of Air Quality Impacts
8.3.14 This assessment has used the latest version of dispersion model software ‘ADMS-Roads’ to quantify baseline pollution levels at selected receptors. ADMS-Roads is a modern dispersion model that has an extensive published track record of use in the UK for the assessment of local air quality impacts, including model validation and verification studies.
8.4 Baseline Conditions
8.4.1 The assessment has used background air quality monitoring data held by Defra. In order to represent a conservative approach, it has been assumed that background concentrations will not decrease in future years. Therefore baseline background concentrations have also been used for the projected commencement year of 2015.
8.4.2 Where Defra data have been used in the assessment, short-term background concentrations have been calculated by multiplying the selected annual mean background concentration by a factor of two.
8.5 Assessment of Impact
8.5.1 This section presents the modelling results for emissions to air from the proposed drill rig generators and primary generator. In the tables within this section, any small discrepancies in ‘total’ reported process contributions from the diesel generator emissions are due to rounding.
Modelling Results for NO2
Emissions from Road Traffic
8.5.2 The annual mean NO2 concentrations for all receptors are well below the annual mean NO2
objective. The maximum change in NO2 concentration is at R5 (residential receptor on Springs Road - Newlands Farm). This change is well below the objective so this will result in a negligible impact in terms of road transport.
Emissions from the Drilling Rig and Generator
8.5.3 Oxides of nitrogen are emitted in the largest quantity (in terms of mass) from the drill rig generators and primary generator. This section focuses on the change in local annual mean
NOX and NO2 concentrations that would occur as a result of the operation of the drill rig
generators and primary generator. The largest predicted increase in Annual Mean NO2 concentrations occur in close proximity to the primary generator and drill rig generators. The - maximum predicted Process Contribution (PC) to short term NO2 concentrations is 1.82µg m
October 2015 61
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
3. - Such an impact is less than 10% of the 99.79th percentile 1-hour EAL for NO2 of 200 µg m 3, and can be considered to be insignificant.
th 8.5.4 The largest predicted increase in 99.79 Percentile NO2 1 hour concentrations occurs in close proximity to the primary generator and drill rig generators. The maximum predicted PC 3. to short term NO2 concentrations is 16.68µg/m Such an impact is less than 10% of the -3 99.79th percentile 1-hour Environmental Assessment Level (EAL) for NO2 of 200 µg m , and can be considered to be insignificant.
Modelling Results for PM10
Emissions from Road Traffic
8.5.5 The annual mean PM10 concentrations for all receptors are less than 75% of the annual
mean PM10 objective. The maximum change in PM10 concentration is at R5. All of the
changes are imperceptible and as the PM10 concentrations are so far below the annual mean objective value this will result in a negligible impact in terms of road transport at all receptors located within 200 m of the local road network.
Emissions of PM10 from the Drill Rig and Generator
8.5.6 The predicted changes are imperceptible and as the PM10 concentrations are so far below the annual mean objective value this will result in a negligible impact at all the selected sensitive receptors.
Annual Mean PM2.5 Concentrations at Discrete Receptors
Emissions from Road Traffic
8.5.7 The annual mean PM2.5 concentrations for all receptors are well below the annual mean
PM2.5 objective. All of the changes in PM2.5 concentration are imperceptible and as the PM2.5 concentrations are well below the annual mean objective this will result in a negligible impact in terms of road transport.
Modelling Results for All Pollutants from the Drill Rig and Diesel Primary generator (for the Protection of Human Health)
8.5.8 The maximum Process Contribution (PC) and Predicted Environmental Concentration (PEC) within the modelled domain have been calculated. The results show that the maximum PC/PEC values for each of the modelled pollutants are well within their respective EAL criteria for the protection of human health.
Modelling Results: Impact on Designated Wildlife Sites
8.5.9 The impact of emissions to air from the drill rig and generator at designated ecological receptors can be screened out as insignificant at all the selected sensitive receptors, with the exception of the Misson Training Area SSSI. The potential significance of effects of this on the SSSI are discussed within the ecology assessment (see Technical Appendix I, Ecological Impact Assessment). The Ecological Impact Assessment states that ‘the impact
October 2015 62
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
from emissions would be short term and localised. It is likely that any response of vegetation to the temporary change in air quality due to the Proposed Development would be below the limit of detection. Any impact on sensitive vegetation is not likely to be significant.’
Impact of Dust on Sensitive Receptors
8.5.10 Phase 1 of the Proposed Development will include limited excavation works for the installation of the wellhead cellar and the surface water attenuation tank. The wellsite itself will be constructed using imported materials and will be constructed on top of the existing hardstanding and compacted aggregate on-site. There is therefore limited potential for the generation of dust during construction and decommissioning.
8.6 Mitigation Proposals
Emissions of NO2 from Road Traffic
8.6.1 The annual mean NO2 concentrations for all receptors are well below the annual mean NO2 objective and have been assessed as resulting in a negligible impact in terms of road transport. On this basis no mitigation measures are proposed.
Emissions of NO2 from the Drilling Rig and Generator
8.6.2 Of the modelled pollutants, oxides of nitrogen are emitted in the largest quantity (in terms of mass) from the generators and drill rig.
8.6.3 The largest predicted increase in Annual Mean NO2 concentrations has been assessed as -3 being less than 10% of the 99.79th percentile 1-hour EAL for NO2 of 200 µg m , and can be considered to be insignificant. On this basis no mitigation measures are proposed.
th 8.6.4 The largest predicted increase in 99.79 Percentile NO2 1 hour concentrations has been - assessed as being less than 10% of the 99.79th percentile 1-hour EAL for NO2 of 200 µg m 3, and can be considered to be insignificant. On this basis no mitigation measures are proposed.
Emissions of PM10 from Road Traffic
8.6.5 The annual mean PM10 concentrations for all receptors are less than 75% of the annual
mean PM10 objective. All of the changes are imperceptible and as the PM10 concentrations are so far below the annual mean objective value this will result in a negligible impact in terms of road transport at all receptors located within 200 m of the local road network. On this basis no mitigation measures are proposed.
Emissions of PM10 from the Drill Rig and Generators
8.6.6 The predicted changes are imperceptible and as the PM10 concentrations are so far below the annual mean objective value this will result in a negligible impact at all of the identified sensitive receptors.
October 2015 63
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Annual Mean PM2.5 / PM10 Concentrations at Discrete Receptors
8.6.7 The annual mean PM2.5 concentrations for all receptors have been assessed as being well
below the annual mean PM2.5 objective. All of the changes in PM2.5 concentration are
imperceptible and as the PM2.5 concentrations are well below the annual mean objective this will result in a negligible impact in terms of road transport. On this basis no mitigation measures are proposed.
8.6.8 The assessment of the predicted change in annual mean concentrations of PM10 shows that the maximum PC/PEC values for each of the modelled pollutants are well within their respective EAL criteria for the protection of human health. On this basis no mitigation measures are proposed.
Dust
8.6.9 Phase 1 of the Proposed Development will include limited excavation works for the installation of the wellhead cellar and the surface water attenuation tank. The wellsite itself will be constructed using imported materials and will be constructed on top of the existing hardstanding and compacted aggregate on-site. There is therefore limited potential for the generation of dust over a three month period, similarly there is limited potential for dust to be generated during phase 4 of the Proposed Development when the wellsite is removed and the Site is restored to its original state. The potential to generate dust during phases 2 and 3 is much lower. The Scoping Opinion adopted by NCC on 25th June specifically requested that a Dust Management Plan be prepared to accompany this application, a Dust Management Plan is therefore included at Annex C2 to Technical Appendix C.
8.6.10 Management measures that will be employed on-site for the duration of the Proposed Development to manage dust generation will be implemented as standard good working practice (as detailed in the Dust Management Plan) and it is therefore not considered that any further mitigation measures are required.
Designated Wildlife Sites
8.6.11 The impact of emissions to air from the drill rig and generator at designated ecological receptors can be screened out as insignificant at all the selected sensitive receptors, with the exception of the Misson Training Area SSSI. The available baseline data indicates that acid deposition at Misson Training Area SSSI already exceeds the lower range critical load without the Proposed Development. Technical Appendix I assesses the potential significance of effects of the Proposed Development with regard to acid deposition as a result of the Proposed Development in the context of the existing baseline exceedance and discusses any required mitigation measures.
8.7 Residual Effects
8.7.1 Residual effects are anticipated to be the same as predicted impacts
.
October 2015 64
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
8.8 Cumulative Effects
8.8.1 Several committed developments have been identified within the local area of the Proposed Development. These are as follows:
• proposed extension of Newington Sand Quarry;
• proposed erection of a solar photovoltaic development on approximately 15.84 ha of land off Bawtry Road;
• quarrying of sand and gravel at three sites - two off Bawtry Road to the south of Misson Village and one from a site in Finningley; and
• the existing production of mushroom substrate at Tunnel Tech North factory off Bawtry Road.
8.8.2 Following a review of the details available for the developments identified the following conclusions have been made.
8.8.3 As detailed in Technical Appendix A (Transport), the above developments relate to the highway south of Misson village and would therefore not impact on the preferred transport route for the Proposed Development. On this basis the assessment of potential air quality effects of additional traffic movements from the Proposed Development and the other developments as a result of exhaust emissions along the preferred route is not required and no cumulative effects in terms of air quality are identified.
8.8.4 The dust management proposals / measures for the other quarrying developments identified have been reviewed and are considered to be fit for purpose. On the basis that the activities associated with the Proposed Development most likely to generate dust would be limited in duration and that the proposed dust management measures proposed in this assessment (see Annex C2 of Technical Appendix C) are adhered to, it is not considered that there would be any cumulative effects as a result of dust emissions from the Proposed Development and other potential dust generating activities identified.
8.8.5 During the drilling process there is the potential for odorous gases, included hydrogen sulphide to be release to atmosphere as a fugitive emission. However during drilling the mass of gas emitted is unlikely to be large enough to be detectable as an odour at any location beyond the Site boundary and therefore has not been considered further in this assessment. On this basis it is considered that there will be no cumulative effects as a result of odour emissions from the Proposed Development and those reportedly experienced from Tunnel Tech North.
8.9 Statement of Significance and Summary
Emissions from off-site vehicle movements
8.9.1 The baseline and with-development concentrations of nitrogen dioxide and particulate matter
(PM10, PM2.5) have been quantified for the receptors located along the local road network
October 2015 65
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
linking the Site and the A614 at Blaxton. In the 2015 baseline and 2015 with-development
scenario all of the receptors have annual mean nitrogen dioxide, PM10 and PM2.5 concentrations that are less than 75% the national air quality standard values. The additional traffic generated by the Proposed Development would not raise the concentration of these pollutants at any receptor location during any phase of the development. Therefore, the effect of phase 1 and 2 road traffic emissions would be not significant.
Emissions from On-site operations
8.9.2 The impact of emissions from onsite power generation during the Proposed Development have been estimated at residential properties in the surrounding area and at designated nature conservation sites. The nature of these emissions is that they will occur for less than a year and therefore predicted changes to annual mean concentrations of oxides of nitrogen, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter and VOCs would be very small or imperceptible in magnitude.
8.9.3 At the closest portion of the Mission Training Area SSSI (Receptor E1) the maximum 24 hour NOx concentration is predicted to be slightly above the national air quality objective value, but this criterion would be achieved over the majority of the SSSI and at all other designated sites. The magnitude of change in the rate of acid deposition and nutrient nitrogen deposition at all designated sites has been estimated. The long term significance of the effect of the predicted impact on Mission Training Area SSSI and the other designated sites is considered in the ecological assessment undertaken for the Proposed Development and included at Technical Appendix I: Ecology).
Fugitive emissions of dust
8.9.4 This assessment has considered the potential risk of dust impacts occurring during the Proposed Development. The assessment has identified the activities that have the potential to generate dust emissions, the nearest sensitive receptors to those activities, appropriate control measures and the magnitude and frequency of potential impacts.
8.9.5 The assessment identified that there will be occasions when potentially dust generating activity is undertaken within close proximity to sensitive receptors. However, dust control measures would be sufficient to minimise emissions so that any impact beyond the Site boundary would not be a significant impact.
October 2015 66
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
9 Landscape and Visual
9.1 Introduction
9.1.1 This Chapter provides a summary of the findings of the landscape and visual impact assessment included at Technical Appendix D (in Volume 4). This reports the findings of an assessment of the likely effects on landscape and visual amenity arising from the Proposed Development.
9.2 Assessment Methodology
Introduction
9.2.1 The methodology adopted for this assessment is based upon guidance contained within the following published documents:
• Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, Third Edition (2013) Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management and Assessment (referred to as GLVIA3 in this assessment).
• An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment (2014) Natural England.
9.2.2 These publications form the standard reference for undertaking landscape character and visual assessments in the UK.
9.2.3 In addition, photoviewpoint photography accompanying this assessment has been undertaken in accordance with guidance given in Landscape Institute Advice Note 01/11 Photography and Photomontage in Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment unless stated otherwise.
9.2.4 The matrix linking sensitivity of receptor to magnitude of effects in order to determine significance is set out below in Table 2.2. GLVIA3 dictates that the determination of significance is not a prescriptive process and the methodology used (see Technical Appendix D) can be used as a guide to how combinations of sensitivity and magnitude are typically combined. In this LVIA reasoned explanation of judgements on significance are based on consideration of the factors set out in Annex D4 of Technical Appendix D using the matrix as a framework. However, conclusions of significance may differ from those when supported by evidence and explanation of viewpoint and potential mitigation.
9.2.5 Following the classification of an effect using this methodology, a clear statement is then made as to whether that effect is significant or not significant. As a general rule, major and moderate effects are considered to be significant, whilst minor and negligible effects are considered to be not significant. However, professional judgement can also be applied, including taking account of whether the effect is permanent or temporary, its duration/frequency and / or its likelihood.
October 2015 67
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Study Area
9.2.6 Definition of the Study Area may be determined either by specific development type guidance, for example in the case of wind farms the Scottish Natural Heritage (SNH) guidance identifies suggested radii for visual analysis based on the height of turbines, or determined by professional judgment based on the anticipated Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) informed by digital terrain modelling of the Proposed Development.
9.2.7 The GLVIA3 suggests that the Study Area should cover the geographical area from which the Proposed Development would potentially be visible. The area should also be proportionate to the Proposed Development itself and may include refinement by professional judgement.
9.2.8 In the case of the Proposed Development, the Study Area of the assessment was defined by a combination of the ZTV, professional judgement and field survey verification. The combination of these factors has resulted in a Study Area that encompasses up to 5 km from the Site. Beyond this distance it is anticipated that the Proposed Development would be unlikely to give rise to significant landscape or visual effects.
9.2.9 Individual visual receptors have been identified through the baseline interpretation of mapping of the ZTV as well as through professional judgment. The process involves defining the scope of the assessment, description of characteristics of the development, establishment of the visual baseline, identification of visual receptors and selection of assessment of photoviewpoints structured by receptor groups (e.g. residents, users of recreational spaces, business users and motorists).
Assessment Process
9.2.10 This assessment establishes the baseline landscape and visual conditions of the Study Area. Paragraph 3.16 of the GLVIA3 states that the level of detail provided in a baseline assessment should be appropriate and proportional to the scale and type of development and the significance of the landscape and the visual effects likely to occur.
9.2.11 Following assessment of the baseline landscape and visual context of the Proposed Development this LVIA assesses the:
• sensitivity of both landscape and visual receptors derived by a combination of susceptibility and value;
• magnitude of effect derived from scale/extent, duration and reversibility, whether adverse of beneficial; and
• significance of the effects based on a comparison of sensitivity of receptor and magnitude of effect.
th 9.2.12 Proposed photoviewpoint locations were submitted to NCC on 5 May 2015 in order to obtain agreement / comment. NCC responded on the 19th May confirming that the proposed photoviewpoints were acceptable as they include close residential receptors, adjacent
October 2015 68
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
PRoW and the edges, or high viewpoints within, adjacent settlements. A similar request for consideration of photoviewpoint acceptability was also sent to Doncaster Metropolitan Council (DMBC) on 13th May 2015. A response was received on 15th May 2015 offering opinions on additional locations within the administrative boundary of Doncaster. In response, a second site visit was undertaken in May 2015, and viewpoints 17 and 18 added to the assessment. The proposed photoviewpoints were also submitted to Bassetlaw District Council (BDC) on 3rd July for comment.
9.2.13 In total 19 photoviewpoints have been chosen to represent the typical range of views of the site from within the Study Area.
9.2.14 The potential landscape and visual effects resulting from the Proposed Development which have been assessed may be summarised as:
• direct temporary change in the landscape character of the Site during construction arising from the presence of heavy machinery and construction activity;
• indirect temporary changes in landscape character within the Study Area during construction as a result of views of machinery, traffic movements, dust and potential ancillary impacts such as lighting;
• temporary change in visual amenity within the Study Area arising from views of the Proposed Development during construction;
• temporary change in landscape character of the Site during drilling operations and the evaluation period as a result of a new land use;
• temporary change in visual amenity within the Study Area arising from views of the Proposed Development during drilling and the evaluation period;
• temporary change in visual amenity within the Study Area arising from views of the drill rig contained in acoustic enclosure; and
• permanent change in landscape character of the Site and visual amenity within the Study Area post restoration.
9.3 Landscape Baseline Conditions
Site Context
9.3.1 The surrounding landscape exhibits a largely rural character, characterised by low lying arable farmland bordered by a combination of linear drainage ditches and hedgerow field boundary treatments. The Site is located within the northern part of a 25 hectare commercial premises for a business that specialises in the sale of ex-army trucks, vehicles, plant and equipment. Infrastructure associated with this business includes hardstanding, existing accesses to Springs Road, on-site workshops and storage buildings. The reinforced concrete hardstanding within the area of the proposed wellsite will be retained for the duration of the temporary 3 year development period beneath the temporary wellsite. The
October 2015 69
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
buildings and hardstanding to the immediate west and to the south west of the wellsite area are those associated with the commercial premises. The buildings are at least 8m in height from ground level to ridge and each of the five buildings covers an area of approximately 2,700 m2.
9.3.2 Vegetation and mature hedgerows add a rural definition to the northern and eastern limits of the Site.
Landscape / Townscape Character & Receptors within the Study Area
9.3.3 At a national scale the Site and 5km Study Area lies within National Character Area (NCA) 39: Humberhead Levels, as defined by Natural England. Stretching from the Vale of York in the north to the northern edge of Retford in the south, this NCA is characterised by a low- lying and large scale agricultural character.
Regional Landscape Assessments
9.3.4 The East Midlands Regional Landscape Character Assessment (EMRLCA) was commissioned in 2009 by the East Midlands Landscape Partnership. The document aims to facilitate the protection, management and planning of the East Midlands region in accordance with the objectives of the European Landscape Convention (ELC). The assessment presents a strategic regional tier designed to fall below NCAs and provide a framework for more detailed landscape assessments at the district and local scale. The assessment identifies 31 Regional Landscape Character Types (RLCTs) across an area encompassing the administrative counties of Derbyshire, Leicestershire, Northamptonshire, Nottinghamshire and Rutland.
9.3.5 Lying at the northern extent of the assessment’s Study Area, the Site is situated within land defined as 2A: Settled Fens and Marshes RLCT. Land use in this area is dominated by productive agriculture and exhibits a complex history of land drainage. The scarcity of settlement and access results in a remote and isolated character, exacerbated in areas by the featureless horizons and vast skies. Whilst woodland cover is generally sparse, tree belts often form a backdrop to many panoramic views within the area.
Local Landscape Assessments
9.3.6 The Landscape Character Assessment of Bassetlaw encompasses five County Character Areas as identified by NCC. Created using the GIS based ‘Living Landscapes Project’ methodology, these boundaries relate broadly to the extent of NCAs. Forming the northernmost limit of the district and stretching to the north of the settlements of Worksop and Retford, the Site falls within Idle Lowlands County Character Area. County Character Areas are refined into homogeneous units defined as Landscape Description Units and further subdivided into manageable survey units known as Landscape Character Parcels. The purpose of this methodology is to identify Draft Policy Zones which assess the landscape in terms of its landscape character, condition and sensitivity providing a greater understanding of what makes the landscape within Bassetlaw locally distinctive. Definitions of sensitivity are relative to the district and do not relate to a specific development type.
October 2015 70
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
9.3.7 The Idle Lowlands County Character Area forms an extensive low lying region closely associated with the basin of the River Idle. The landscape consists of sparsely inhabited levels and former carrlands now cultivated for arable production. Agricultural land use land relies on arterial drainage and pumps which drain into the embanked River Idle. The Character Assessment of Bassetlaw (2001) states that ‘the pattern of landscape within the region is closely related to the inherent capability of the land, particularly with regard to the natural constraints of drainage and soil fertility’. The uniformity of the topography in the area dictates that differences in landscape character are therefore derived more by variations in land use and settlement.
Establishing the value of the landscape
International and national designations
9.3.8 The Site itself does not lie within any area designated in terms of specific national statutory landscape designation such as National Park, Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty or any local designation such as an Area of Great Landscape Value.
Local landscape designations
9.3.9 The Study Area of this assessment encompasses Finningley Conservation Area, located within the administrative area of DMBC. This Conservation Area is characterised by a low density residential village with buildings generally set back from the road. Hedges or brick walls with decorative detailing and brick coping generally typify the boundary treatments within this area.
Site Specific Landscape Character Baseline Assessment
9.3.10 The site-specific assessment deals both with the Site and land lying within land defined as the Study Area defined on Figure D1 (included at Technical Appendix D) and adds detail to the less specific assessments undertaken at a broader scale, including those published by BDC.
Physical Influences
9.3.11 The landform of the wider Study Area is defined by a low-lying flat landscape, influenced largely by the broad floodplain of the meandering River Idle. An artificially drained Carr landscape predominates, characterised by the rectilinear pattern of drainage ditches. The prevalence of low-lying sparsely inhabited levels and former carrlands reflects the general trend within the Idle Lowlands RCA (published by BDC) where it is noted that ‘the levels of the Idle Lowlands continue to one of the most distinguishing features of the region’.
9.3.12 The wider Study Area is devoid of topographical high points although the landform rises very slightly towards the western extent of the Study Area towards the settlements of Austerfield and Hayfield Green. Misson village itself is located on sandlands surrounded by lower lying levels which create the impression the village is situated on an island of higher ground enclosed by former wetland. In terms of the Site, an existing rectilinear drain runs parallel with the boundary of the Site at its northern and eastern extent.
October 2015 71
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Influence of Human Activity
Settlement
9.3.13 The agricultural context of the locality is reflected in the settlement pattern of small rural villages accessed by a network of minor roads. Isolated farmsteads are also located in an interspersed pattern within the low lying landscape. The villages of Misson, Westwoodside, Finningley and Blaxton form the principal settlements within the Study Area, divided by sparsely populated agricultural land. Located within closest proximity to the Site, Misson generally has a strong local brick vernacular. The flat low lying nature of the topography often results in the heightened visual presence of settlements in the wider landscape, protruding above the horizon. Located on the main frontage to Springs Road, Misson Springs Cottage and Levels Farm form the residential properties within closest proximity to the Site. Misson Springs Cottage is a property in the control of the applicant and will not be used for residential purposes for the duration of the Proposed Development.
Communications
9.3.14 The Doncaster to Lincoln Rail Line bisects the Study Area east-west, lying broadly parallel with the B1396 Bank End Road towards Westwoodside. However, this does not form a dominant linear landscape feature within the locality although vegetation does partially border the route. The carriageway of the A614 road, connecting Blyth to Goole, is located within the western extent of the Study Area and runs through the villages of Austerfield, Finningley and Blaxton. The low lying landscape also accommodates Springs Road to the north of Misson, from which the Site is accessed.
Land use
9.3.15 Land use in the locality is dominated by agriculture intensively cultivated for arable production. The intensification of this farmland is facilitated by the arterial drainage and pumping of the low lying Carrs and levels. Drainage ditches therefore form the predominant field boundary treatment, enclosing medium to large scale rectilinear fields. In general, the Study Area forms a low lying setting of agricultural land use interspersed with sparse rural settlement and small villages.
Vegetation
9.3.16 Arable land use, demarcated by linear drainage ditches and hedgerow field boundaries, characterise the backdrop of the Study Area. Woodland in the locality is generally restricted to small plantations and patches of semi-natural vegetation associated with the River Idle. Woodland blocks that are present often afford a sense of distant enclosure within an otherwise open rural setting. The importance of hedgerow trees in providing tree cover within the Study Area boundaries is recognised within Idle Lowlands – Policy Zone 02: Misson, which recommends the conservation of hedgerow field boundary treatments. In general, the absence of large scale tree cover combined with the flat low lying topography provides an open landscape setting.
October 2015 72
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Public Rights of Way
9.3.17 A network of Public Rights of Way (PRoW) dissect the agricultural landscape of the Study Area (see Figure D1 included at Technical Appendix D), broadly following rectilinear field boundaries, local lanes / tracks and drainage features. A number of PRoW are also discernible as lines through arable crops. Bridleway 4, to the south-east of the Site, provides a connection from the course of the River Idle to the northern extent of Misson. This route partially occupies the embankment parallel to the river. Running in an east to west direction from South Carr Farm to land south of Lamholme, Bridleway 116 forms a continuation of this route parallel with the River Idle. PRoW are also accessed via Springs Road itself, including Bridleway 9 at Newlands Farm and where Bridleway 4 emerges adjacent to Nettlehall Farm.
Landscape Condition/Quality
9.3.18 Arable farmland forms the dominant land use within the wider Study Area. The nature of this agricultural land use dictates that the landscape is predominantly well managed, with a specific emphasis on artificial drainage of the land. The Landscape Character Assessment of Bassetlaw provides Draft Policy Zone boundaries derived from the assessment of Landscape Character Parcels. By virtue of the coherent pattern of landscape elements with some detracting features, the landscape condition of Idle Lowlands – Policy Zone 02: Misson which contains the Site is described as moderate. The published landscape character assessment of Bassetlaw concludes that the combination of a moderate sense of place, high visibility and the dominance of the low lying landform results in the definition of a high overall landscape sensitivity. However, definitions of sensitivity in this context are in accordance with the Living Landscapes methodology rather than the sensitivity of the landscape to a specific development type as is now the case under GLVIA3. We therefore consider that the conclusions of sensitivity are not in accordance with more recent guidance and that a development specific assessment provides a more robust stage in the assessment hierarchy.
9.3.19 Landscape actions for Idle Lowlands – Policy Zone 02: Misson have identified the requirement for ‘Conservation and restoration’ of the area. Specific importance is placed on conservation of the open rural character of the landscape and the drainage ditches / hedgerows which delineate the historic field pattern. In terms of built features, the need to conserve the local brick vernacular in Misson and contain new development within existing field boundaries is also noted.
Interactions between the Proposed Development & Landscape Receptors
9.3.20 Interactions between the Proposed Development and landscape receptors would potentially occur in two ways; through direct loss of landscape elements (i.e. subtractive changes which change landscape character) or through additions which change landscape character (additive).
9.3.21 The Proposed Development utilises an area of existing hardstanding and previously developed land located within an existing commercial premises on Springs Road. The
October 2015 73
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
application boundary of the Site also encompasses an existing access road from Springs Road.
9.3.22 The Proposed Development would not involve the loss of characteristic landscape elements in the form of drainage ditches as field boundaries, arable farmland or low tree and woodland cover. The temporary nature of the Proposed Development also dictates that landscape mitigation treatments in the form of woodland belt planting would be largely ineffective as a level of maturity would not be achievable in the time frame of the proposals. Therefore change in landscape character would be largely as a result of additions to the immediate landscape which are atypical / incongruous or not characteristic.
9.3.23 Indirect effects from the Proposed Development on landscape character beyond the Site would be dependent on inter-visibility within the wider Study Area.
9.4 Visual Baseline Conditions
ZTV Analysis
9.4.1 The Study Area of the assessment has been defined, in part by the ZTV of the Proposed Development established by initial analysis of topographic maps, 3D digital modelling and terrain analysis and is based on the maximum theoretical visibility of the Proposed Development, based on a maximum of 60 m height for the drill rig.
9.4.2 The lack of topographical variation within the Study Area results in the theoretical visibility of the Proposed Development from large swaths of the Study Area. However, the ZTV extent is also influenced by built form and vegetation which reduce the availability of some longer distance views.
9.4.3 Beyond the extent of the 5 km Study Area identified it is anticipated that the Proposed Development would be unlikely to give rise to significant landscape or visual effects. Although the ZTV output indicates views are theoretically possible from long range vantage points, such as farmland, to the north-west of Misterton, the Proposed Development is likely to form only a minor element of the open panoramas due to viewing distance. Overall, the cluster of built form in the immediate vicinity of the Site aids in the definition of the Site within the locality. However, direct views towards the Site diminish with increasing viewing distance.
Range of People and Places Potentially Affected
Views from Residential Locations
9.4.4 Although there are isolated individual properties within the Study Area, the sparsely populated nature of the landscape determines that the number of occupants of residential properties forming highly sensitive visual receptors would be limited The nature of the low- lying landform also acts to preclude elevated vantage points towards the Proposed Development from the wider Study Area. The effect of low-lying landform dictates that views within close proximity are likely to have the greatest likelihood for significant visual effects.
October 2015 74
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
9.4.5 As indicated by the extent of the ZTV output, potential views of the Proposed Development would be available from settlements, including Misson. Although the ZTV suggests views are potentially available from the northern edge of Austerfield, the Proposed Development would be indistinct and views limited to the upper extents of the 60 m high rig.
9.4.6 Although the results of the ZTV indicates views towards the Proposed Development are potentially available from Westwoodside, these views are limited by the combination of low lying topography, intervening vegetation and viewing distance. Views from properties within Finningley are also limited by these factors in addition to the extent of woodland cover to the south of the settlement and parallel with the A614 road. Views from Austerfield are similarly reduced by distance and intervening vegetation.
Views from Public Rights of Way
9.4.7 Views towards the Site are available from the network of PRoW which cross the agricultural landscape of the Study Area (as shown on Figure D1, Technical Appendix D).
Views from Roads
9.4.8 Views towards the Site are principally obtained from the network of minor roads / tracks which characterise the landscape of the Study Area. Full or partial views of the Proposed Development would be available from Springs Road which follows the lines of rectilinear field boundaries north from Misson. This route continues north towards the carriageway of the B1396 Bank End Road, connecting the villages of Blaxton and Westwoodside. The A614 Bawtry Road would afford long distance views towards the Site. However, the approximate north-south direction of the road facilitates mainly oblique and roughly perpendicular views to the direction of travel.
Interactions between the Proposed Development and Visual Receptors
9.4.9 The nature of the flat landform and the low lying position limits the availability of views towards the Site from within the wider Study Area. Long viewing distances also further obstruct opportunities to view the Site in isolation. With the exception of the adjacent built form of the existing commercial premises, land falling within the planning application boundary is generally not well defined within the wider landscape.
9.4.10 The nature of the Proposed Development will introduce a temporary vertical element into predominantly rural views in the form of a drill rig. The height of the Proposed Development dictates that it will be visible against the sky within open views characteristic of the Study Area. The nature of the wide panoramas available from within the Study Area suggests though that the Proposed Development may form only a minor component of middle to long distance views.
October 2015 75
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
9.5 Assessment of Impact – Landscape
Landscape Receptors
9.5.1 NCA 39: Humberhead Levels which contains the Site is of a regional scale and incorporates such varied landscape components that any changes in the scale of the site level would not be significant on its overall character and is not considered further.
9.5.2 For the purposes of the assessment, the landscape effects of the Proposed Development have been assessed at the DPZ level as defined by the Landscape Character Assessment of Bassetlaw. Direct effects on landscape character would be confined to Idle Lowlands – Policy Zone 02: Misson. The assessment of the landscape effects arising from the Proposed Development on this DPZ has formed part of the assessment.
Landscape Value
9.5.3 Overall, based on the factors contributing to landscape value, the Site is assessed as being of low landscape value in virtue of its poor quality, land use, low scenic quality and lack of nature conservation interests. The Site is generally not representative of the surrounding rural land use and exhibits a lack of features considered to be rare as described above.
9.5.4 However, the Study Area itself is assessed as being of overall medium landscape value. Despite the lack of landscape designations related to quality, the combination of landform and large scale openness within the Study Area retains a positive character and sense of place. The conservation interest and recreational value attached to the wider Study Area also contributes to the value derived from the area.
Landscape Assessment
9.5.5 Effects on landscape character are assessed during the phases defined below:
• Phase 1 - Temporary effects arising from construction activity, including machinery and vehicles required to construct the temporary wellsite and set up the ancillary features;
• Phase 2 – includes operation of the drill rig at the proposed height of up to 60 m and any noise mitigation measures;
• Phase 3 – involves the removal of the majority of the temporary features from the wellsite are including the drill rig and associated equipment. Although the perimeter fencing, security fencing around the well cellar and the site office and security hut will remain on-site the effects on landscape character will be neutral and these are therefore not assessed further; and
• As the nature of Phase 4 involves the reversion back to landscape elements consistent with the existing baseline (i.e. removal of the remaining temporary features and a restoration of the baseline land use, landform and land surface) it is considered that during Phase 4 effects on landscape character will be neutral and these are therefore not assessed further. October 2015 76
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
9.5.6 NCA 39: Humberhead Levels which encompasses the Site is assessed as being of low sensitivity to the Proposed Development due to:
• the extensive nature of the NCA renders it of low susceptibility to a very localised change;
• the scale of the Proposed Development in comparison with the geographical coverage of the NCA;
• the very limited loss of characteristic landscape features; and
• the absence of any landscape designations of value.
9.5.7 The assessment focuses on the potential effect on the baseline character of each of the identified RLCT and Policy Zones which accommodate the Site as listed below:
• 2A Settled Fens and Marshes RLCT; and
• Idle Lowlands – Policy Zone 02: Misson.
9.5.8 As both the areas listed above ‘host’ the Site, any anticipated effects on landscape character will be assessed. Further discussion of other previously defined LCTs are not included within this assessment as no significant direct landscape effects are anticipated. The assessment of likely effects on these areas and the Site itself are set out in Tables 9.1 and 9.2 below. Following completion of Phase 4, the Proposed Development is not anticipated to have any residual effect on landscape character. As a consequence, the effects on landscape character following operation have not been assessed.
9.6 Assessment of Impact – Visual
9.6.1 Changes in views may give rise to adverse or beneficial visual effects through obstruction in views, alteration of the components of the view and through the opening up of new views by the removal of landscape elements. The Proposed Development would not entail any significant removal of landscape elements and changes in visual amenity / views would relate entirely to effects arising from visibility of the Proposed Development during its temporary construction and operational stages.
9.6.2 The Proposed Development, when compared to the baseline situation, constitutes the temporary addition of an industrial visual detractor within an existing rural context. However, as only a three year temporary permission is sought, of which the drill rig will be present for only 9 months, the Proposed Development would not form a permanent component of the landscape.
October 2015 77
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Table 9.1: Summary of landscape effects
Landscape Sensitivity of receptor Magnitude Significance Magnitude Significance receptor of of of of potential landscape potential landscape landscape effects landscape effects effect effect
During Phase 1 During Phase 2
Phase 1: Low Low Negligible
Site Phase 2: Low Medium Minor Adverse
Phase 1: Medium Very low Negligible Policy Zone 02: Misson Phase 2: Medium Low Minor Adverse
2A Settled Fens Phase 1: Medium Very low Negligible and Marshes RLCT Phase 2: Medium Very low Negligible
9.6.3 The assessment has assessed the effects on visual amenity at the phases defined below:
• Phase 1 - Temporary effects arising from construction activity, including machinery and vehicles required to construct the temporary wellsite and set up the ancillary features; and
• Phase 2 - the proposed height (up to 60m) of the drill rig dictates that the structure would punctuate the horizon line in locations within the wider Study Area.
9.6.4 The Proposed Development will include temporary horizontal strip lighting and high level aircraft anti-collision lighting mounted on the rig structure to facilitate 24 hour usage (as well as lighting within the perimeter of the Site). Lighting is considered in detail in Chapter 10 and Technical Appendix E. In terms of the LVIA it is considered that the proposed lighting will be proportionate to the health and safety requirements of safe operation, the duration of effects from lighting will be short, reversible and there are few receptors in proximity. Overall, it is assessed that there will be no significant effects on visual amenity as a result of lighting, taking these factors into account.
9.6.5 As the nature of the Proposed Development post operation involves the removal of all elements of potential visual impact and replicates baseline views, it is considered that visual
October 2015 78
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
effects in Phases 3 and 4 will be neutral on the baseline view from each location. Consequently, a visual assessment of the development post Phase 2 has not been considered further within this document.
9.6.6 No views or significant change in visual impact would occur at photoviewpoints 14 and 15 (see Figure D1 at Technical Appendix D). These locations were visited and the view recorded as part of the baseline assessment. However, these have not been taken forward to the detailed visual assessment due to the absence of views at all stages of the Proposed Development.
9.6.7 The extent to which the Proposed Development would give rise to additional visual impact to that identified in the baseline visual assessment has been considered in relation to the representative photoviewpoints.
Table 9.2: Summary of Visual Effects
Significance
Photoviewpoint Location During Phase During Phase 2 Post Phase 2 1
View looking north-east from Moderate 1 Minor Neutral Red House, Springs Road Adverse
View looking south from the junction of Bridleway 9 with Moderate 2 Minor Neutral Springs Road (opposite April Adverse Cottage)
View looking north-east from the junction of Bridleway 4 with 3 Neutral Minor Adverse N / A Springs Road at Nettleham Well Farm
View looking north-west on 4 Bridleway 4 parallel with the Neutral Minor Adverse N / A River Idle
View looking south from Bank 5 Neutral Minor Adverse N / A End Farm on Bank End Road
View looking north-east from the track forming the line of the 6 Neutral Minor Adverse N / A dismantled railway on Springs Road, Misson
October 2015 79
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Significance
Photoviewpoint Location During Phase During Phase 2 Post Phase 2 1
View looking east from Public 7 Footpath 5 adjacent to Crow Neutral Minor Adverse N / A Wood / Spen Close Plantation
View looking north-west from pumping station at the junction 8 Neutral Minor Adverse N / A of Carr Road and Hundreds Lane
View looking south-east from 9A the unnamed road off Old Neutral Neutral N / A Bawtry Road, Finningley
View looking south-east from the track off Public Footpath 4 9B Neutral Minor Adverse N / A at the southern edge of Finningley
View looking north from 10 Bridleway 24 parallel with Neutral Minor Adverse N / A Magnus Drain, Everton Carr
View looking north-east from 11 Footpath 4 south of Austerfield Neutral Minor Adverse N / A Waterworks
View looking south-west from 12 Monkham Bridge, Neutral Minor Adverse N / A Westwoodside
View looking north-west from 13 the bridge over Cornley Drain Neutral Minor Adverse N / A on Cattle Road, Misterton Carr
View looking north-west from 14 the Public Footpath 7 on High N / A N / A N / A Street, Gringley on the Hill
October 2015 80
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Significance
Photoviewpoint Location During Phase During Phase 2 Post Phase 2 1
View looking north-west from 15 N / A N / A N / A Carr Lane, Misterton
View looking west from the Moderate 16 junction of Public Footpath 115 Neutral N / A Adverse with Idle Bank
View looking north-east from 17 Bridleway 3 at the northern Neutral Minor Adverse N / A edge of Austerfield
View looking south-east from 18 residential properties on Old Neutral Minor Adverse N / A Bawtry Road, Finningley
9.7 Mitigation Proposals
Landscape Mitigation
9.7.1 Due to the temporary nature of the Proposed Development, landscape mitigation treatments in the form of woodland belt planting would be largely ineffective as a level of maturity would not be achievable in the time frame of the proposals. However, retention of vegetation and hedgerow boundary treatments located along the northern and eastern boundaries of the Site would form integral components of the Proposed Development.
Visual Mitigation
9.7.2 No visual mitigation is proposed.
9.8 Residual Effects
9.8.1 Residual effects will be the same as the effects summarised in Section 9.5 and 9.6.
9.9 Cumulative and Combined Effects
9.9.1 In relation to the Proposed Development, the potential for cumulative effects relates primarily to inter project cumulative effects either with existing developments or future schemes with planning consent or in the planning process which have yet to be built.
9.9.2 Known developments in this category are listed below:
October 2015 81
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
• proposed extension of Newington Sand Quarry (for which an application has been made);
• proposed erection of a 5MW solar photovoltaic development on approximately 15.84 ha of land of Bawtry Road (for which a scoping request has been made);
• quarrying of sand and gravel at three sites - two off Bawtry Road to the south of Misson Village and one from a site in Finningley; and
• the existing production of mushroom substrate at Tunnel Tech North factory off Bawtry Road.
9.9.3 No cumulative landscape effects with other developments have been identified and the temporary, short duration/nature of the Proposed Development suggests that the host landscape is of low susceptibility to cumulative effects arising from the Proposed Development.
9.9.4 Similarly, no in combination or sequential visual effects with other projects have been identified or are likely given the limited visibility from representative viewpoints within the Study Area.
9.10 Statement of Significance and Summary
9.10.1 The significance of the Proposed Development on landscape character has been assessed by comparison of the sensitivity of the landscape with the magnitude of the landscape effects. The Site is assessed as being of low landscape value in virtue of its poor quality land use, low scenic quality and lack of conservation interests. However, the Study Area itself is assessed as being of overall medium landscape value. Given the existing industrialised context of the Site, effects on the Site are predicted to be non-significant at all stages. The Proposed Development is also not anticipated to result in the loss of characteristic landscape features. However, the Proposed Development would result in indirect landscape effects arising from the visibility of the incongruous drill rig within the existing rural context. The Proposed Development would be limited in scale, of short duration and reversible resulting in a negligible loss of openness. No significant landscape effects are anticipated at Phases 1, 2 and post Phase 2.
9.10.2 Visual effects of the Proposed Development have been evaluated for 19 representative locations in the wider study area. Two additional photoviewpoint locations were visited and the view recorded as part of the baseline assessment. However, these were subsequently scoped out of the assessment as no significant change or visual effect is predicted. The combination of the low lying topography with a lack of elevated vantage points, intervening vegetation and the sparsely populated nature of the Study Area restricts views towards the Proposed Development. Where the vertical nature of Phase 2 protrudes above the horizon line, this will generally form only a minor component of a wide open view. Based on the results of the visual assessment, Photoviewpoints 1, 2 and 16 would potentially exhibit a significant effect at the temporary operational stage. However, the period of operation of the drill rig which forms the element generating the effect is of short duration, entirely reversible,
October 2015 82
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
and it is assessed that taking the very low magnitude of effect into consideration it is not significant on visual amenity overall. All remaining visual effects are predicted to be non- significant or neutral at all stages.
9.10.3 It is concluded that effects on Photoviewpoints 1, 2 and 16 at the operational stage require weighing in the planning balance and acknowledgment, as is the case with wind farms, that any development of this type by virtue of its vertical scale will have visual impact. All other visual and landscape effects were assessed as non-significant at all stages.
9.10.4 Overall, taking these factors into account, there are no overriding landscape or visual reasons, identified by this LVIA, to suggest that the development would cause significant harm to landscape or visual amenity.
October 2015 83
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
October 2015 84
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
10 Lighting
10.1 Introduction
10.1.1 This Chapter provides a summary of the findings of the lighting impact assessment included at Technical Appendix E (in Volume 4). The Appendix assesses the potential effects on sensitive receptors arising as a result of the installation of artificial lighting associated with the Proposed Development.
10.2 Policy Context
10.2.1 A review of the relevant policy and legislation is included in Technical Appendix E.
10.3 Assessment Methodology
Residential Receptors
10.3.1 Key existing residential properties which have the potential to be impacted by obtrusive light from the Proposed Development have been identified and adopted as receptor locations within the lighting model. Receptor locations are shown at Annex E1 (Appendix E).
10.3.2 The Scoping Opinion stated Institution of Lighting Professionals (ILP) Environmental Zone E2 as being relevant to the area in which the Proposed Development is located. Accordingly, the obtrusive lighting criteria associated with Environmental Zone E2 have been adopted for this assessment. The permitted light trespass limit at a residential receptor before curfew is 5 lux and post-curfew (typically considered to be 23:00 hours) is 1 lux. The permitted source intensity limit when viewed from a residential receptor before curfew is 7.5 kcd and post-curfew is 0.5 kcd. The permitted Upward Lighting Ratio (ULR) (i.e. ‘skyglow’ limit) for lighting installations is 2.5%. As the lighting requirements for the Proposed Development will not definitively change during the hours of darkness, there would be little point in imposing a lighting curfew for the development Site. However, in order to represent a reasonable maximum adverse scenario, only the ILP post-curfew obtrusive lighting criteria have been adopted for the purposes of this assessment.
10.3.3 For each Environmental Zone, obtrusive light limits for exterior lighting installations have been determined. These are summarised in Technical Appendix E and are intended to support decision makers in establishing whether artificial lighting is detrimental to local amenity or a potential statutory nuisance.
Ecological Receptors
10.3.4 Following consultation with the Project Ecologist, it has been concluded that potentially sensitive ecological receptors are present at the SSSI nearby to the Proposed Development Site (see Technical Appendix I: Ecology). As only limited research is available as to what levels of artificial light can be tolerated and the associated effects, what is considered to be a
October 2015 85
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
relatively conservative approach has been taken by adopting a 0.5 Lux illuminance criterion for light trespass to sensitive ecological receptors. Such a light level can be considered to be low, and is of a similar order to light levels experienced during a full moon phase. As this criterion would be achieved at the ‘boundary’ of an ecological receptor, the illuminance within the receptor boundary can be expected to be significantly lower. This would be particularly so in the case of woodlands; where trees themselves would provide a screening action.
10.3.5 For the purposes of this assessment, the effects of the Proposed Development at ecological receptor locations are considered to be ‘negligible’ if the lighting level falls below 0.5 lux criterion, ‘minor adverse’ for levels up to 1.0 lux, ‘moderate adverse’ for levels up to 3.0 lux and ‘major adverse’ where levels exceed 3.0 lux.
Detailed 3D Light Modelling
10.3.6 Light modelling has been undertaken using DIALux software, an independent lighting model which is capable of calculating exterior artificial lighting scenes. The model incorporates recognised calculation methodologies and is commonly used for exterior lighting assessments throughout Europe.
10.4 Baseline Conditions
10.4.1 A desk study was undertaken which identified relevant legislation, planning policy, good practice guidance and local designations in relation to lighting, following the standard methodology outlined in Lighting in the Countryside: Towards Good Practice, DEFRA, 2001 (Ref. 1.18).
10.4.2 A site visit was undertaken on 6th May 2015 in order to establish the baseline lighting situation during both daytime and night time hours. As a result of the site visit undertaken it is considered appropriate that the Site and immediately surrounding residential area should be classified as Environmental Zone E2 – Low District Brightness, in accordance with the ILP Guidance Notes. This classification is generally representative of relatively dark outer suburban locations.
10.5 Assessment of Impact
Proposed Lighting
10.5.1 It is anticipated that the key temporary lighting sources during phases 1, 2 and 3 would include the following:
• general floodlighting and security lighting associated with meeting health and safety and security requirements to parking areas;
• security and health and safety lighting associated with specific on-going working areas, where equipment is stored and safety hazards may be present; and
• lighting required for operational purposes for daytime working during the latter part of the afternoon in winter and also night-time working.
October 2015 86
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
10.5.2 Phase 2 works will be undertaken 7 days per week, 24 hours per day and therefore the lighting will be in continuous use during hours of darkness. For the purposes of this impact assessment an indicative lighting design has been produced (see Drawing 15). The final selection of luminaires and positioning shall be determined by the responsible lighting engineer in the lighting requirements for the Site, but bearing in mind any adverse obtrusive lighting impact that the selection may have. Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield (RHADS) require a red, medium intensity obstacle light at the top of the drill rig for the duration of the drilling phase.
10.5.3 The following lighting has been included in this assessment:
Table 10.1: Proposed Lighting
Lighting Requirement Lighting Details
20No. Cooper Crouse-Hinds Pauluhn HBA4-3T8 C1D2 Derrick lighting fitted with 3No. 32W T8
8No. Cooper Crouse-Hinds Pauluhn HBA4-3T8 C1D2 Undercroft lighting fitted with 3No. 32W T8
4No. Crouse-Hinds EVMA92401-RA739 Cast aluminium housing, formed semi-specular aluminium reflector, clear Pipe rack lighting glass linear prismatic lens with moulded white acrylic reflector fitted with 1No. clear 400W pulse start metal halide mounted at 8m high
8No. Champ® FMV1000 High Wattage HID Floodlights Operational area lighting fitted with 1000W metal halide lamp mounted at 12m high
15No. Cooper Crouse-Hinds CPMV2W042/UNV cast aluminium housing, formed semi-specular aluminium Welfare and storage cabin lighting reflector, clear prismatic glass lens fitted with 1No. Philips PL-T 42W/30/4P
10.6 Phase 2 Quantitative Light Trespass Assessment (Residential)
10.6.1 The level of light trespass from the Proposed Development at residential receptor locations has been modelled. The results of the modelling demonstrate that the effect of light trespass from the Proposed Development would be negligible at all residential receptor locations. There would be no identified adverse lighting trespass effects at any residential receptor locations.
October 2015 87
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
10.7 Phase 2 Quantitative Light Source Intensity Assessment (Residential)
10.7.1 The level of light intensity associated with each individual light source for the Proposed Development when viewed from each residential receptor location has been modelled. The results of the modelling demonstrate that the effect of light source intensity from the Proposed Development would be negligible at all but one residential receptor location where the effects are minor.
10.8 Phase 2 Quantitative Upward Lighting Ratio (‘sky-glow’) Assessment
10.8.1 ‘Sky-glow’ has been assessed quantitatively by means of an upward lighting ratio assessment. The upward lighting ratio associated with the Proposed Development has been modelled. The results of the modelling demonstrate that the effect of upward lighting ratio from the Proposed Development would be negligible. There are no identified adverse upward lighting ratio effects. The level of upward lighting ratio has been predicted to be 1.0%, this coupled with the use of ‘white’ light sources demonstrates that sky-glow would be minimised as far as practicable.
10.9 Phase 2 Quantitative Illuminance Assessment (Ecological)
10.9.1 The level of light trespass from the Proposed Development at ecological receptor locations has been modelled. The results of the modelling demonstrate that the effect of light trespass from the Proposed Development would be negligible at all ecological receptor locations. There are no identified adverse light trespass effects at ecological receptors. The level of light trespass at ecological receptors has been predicted to be 0 – 1%. It should also be noted that the assessment has been considered at the boundary location of the receptors, and that the effects beyond the boundary will be far lower.
10.9.2 Overall, the effects arising from the Proposed Development during Phase 2 are negligible.
10.10 Qualitative Obtrusive Lighting Assessment (Phases 1, 3 and 4)
10.10.1 As the lighting associated with the other phases will be minimal, it is considered that a qualitative assessment is appropriate. Provided that the same luminaires are adopted and aimed as per those for the Phase 1, then the associated effects during the phases 1 and 3 will be lower. However, as source intensity is not a cumulative effect based on the quantity of luminaires, it is possible that the source intensity effects may be equal to those experienced during Phase 2.
10.10.2 Site lighting provided during Phases 1 and 3 would be limited to certain areas of the Site at any one time and its use would be short-term for security purposes or emergency works only. Potential disturbance from lights associated with plant and construction vehicles during Phases 1 and 4 is considered unlikely and minimal (as working hours should be limited to daytime standard hours). However, should any night-time works be required, particularly during the winter months, lighting associated with such works would be temporary and intermittent in nature.
October 2015 88
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
10.10.3 Therefore, it is considered that the effects for light trespass, source intensity, ecological illuminance, and sky-glow will all be negligible during Phases 1, 3 and 4.
10.11 Mitigation Proposals
10.11.1 At detailed design stage, the Applicant would prepare a detailed lighting scheme design, drawing upon the indicative lighting scheme design as already considered in this assessment (see Drawing 15). The detailed lighting scheme design would control obtrusive light to suitable limits and would include the following mitigation measures as part of good lighting design practice:
• use of an increased number of floodlights to achieve zero uplift for floodlights;
• careful rotation of floodlights and/or use of shields, baffles, shrouds to minimize source intensity;
• use of zero uplift for pipe rack lighting luminaires;
• careful consideration to luminaire positioning and orientation;
• adoption of luminaires with minimal upward lighting ratio;
• mounting height for main floodlighting not to exceed 12m;
• mounting height for pipe rack luminaires not to exceed 8 m;
• derrick luminaires to be rotated inwards by 20 degrees; and
• use of ‘low intensity’ lighting to the derrick.
10.11.2 It is considered that the effects for light trespass, source intensity, ecological illuminance, and sky-glow will all be negligible during Phases 1, 3 and 4 and therefore no mitigation measures are proposed.
10.12 Residual Effects
10.12.1 The results of the modelling demonstrate that the effect of light source intensity from the Proposed Development would be negligible at all but one residential receptor location where the effects are minor. With the adoption of the mitigation measures as set out in section 10.6 above, it is expected that the minor effect would reduce to negligible. Therefore, there can be considered to be no identified adverse light source intensity residual effects to residential receptors.
10.12.2 It is considered that the residual effects for light trespass, source intensity, ecological illuminance, and sky-glow will all be negligible during Phases 1, 3 and 4.
10.13 Cumulative Effects
10.13.1 Site assessment indicates that there is no visual relationship between any of the committed developments and the Proposed Development. Indivisibility between the sites is restricted by existing development and trees. As such, there would be no lighting effects additional to October 2015 89
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
those as described within this assessment above to identified receptors, or to other potential receptors. As such, no cumulative lighting effects are predicted
10.14 Statement of Significance and Summary
10.14.1 It is concluded that with the adoption of the mitigation measures recommended that there can be considered to be no identified adverse light source intensity residual effects to sensitive receptors as a result of the lighting associated with the Proposed Development.
October 2015 90
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
11 Hydrogeology
11.1 Introduction
11.1.1 This Chapter provides a summary of the findings of the hydrogeological assessment included at Technical Appendix F (in Volume 4). The assessment determines the baseline conditions of the Site and assesses the impact of the Proposed Development on groundwater resources and groundwater quality.
11.2 Policy Context
11.2.1 A review of the relevant policy and legislation is included in Technical Appendix F.
11.3 Assessment Methodology
11.3.1 The assessment methodology identifies the potential sources of impact as well as the receptors that could potentially be affected. In addition, there needs to be a clear mechanism via which the source can have an effect on the receptor.
11.3.2 The identification of potential receptors has been undertaken through a study of baseline data. The sources and potential mechanisms for impact are identified through a review of the details of the Proposed Development, including the size and nature of the development, potential construction methodologies and timescales. This is undertaken in the context of local conditions that are relevant to groundwater and within a 5km radius of the Proposed Development.
11.3.3 Once receptor sensitivities and potential impacts are identified, it is necessary to determine the effect on the receptor, so that potential mitigation measures can be identified to counteract any significant adverse effects. An assessment of the significance of each effect has been undertaken based on the methodology provided in the Web-based Transport Analysis Guidance; specifically the Water Environment Sub-Objective WebTAG Unit 3.3.11.
11.4 Baseline Conditions
Topography and Drainage
11.4.1 The topography at the location of the Proposed Development is described in Chapter 3. To the east of the Site the land slopes gently eastwards to Misson Training Area Site of Special Scientific Interest at 1 m AOD. Drainage is towards this woodland area via a series of artificial field bounding drains that are believed to discharge to Warping Drain or to North Carr Drain, both of which eventually discharge to the River Idle. The topography rises gently to the west of the Proposed Development, reaching 5 to 6 m AOD at Spring Hill Farm approximately 800 m away. There are also several small ponds in the vicinity of the Proposed Development.
October 2015 91
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Artificial ground
11.4.2 An environmental site investigation was undertaken by AECOM in May 2015 (see Chapter 13) and comprised a set of trial pits. The trial pits showed the presence of made ground (artificial ground) at some locations within the Proposed Development. However no made ground was recorded in trial pits E1, E3, E4, E8 and E9.
11.4.3 In trial pit REA-1 the made ground comprised clayey, sandy, gravelly cobbles of dolomite to 0.3 m depth; trial pits E5, E6 and E7 comprised similar lithology but to a greater depth of 0.5 m. In trial pit E2 the made ground comprises ashy, gravelly sand to 0.6m depth.
Superficial geology
11.4.4 Geological scale mapping indicates that superficial deposits are extensive over the low-lying land in the wider study area. However at much of the site of the Proposed Development the mapping suggests there are no superficial deposits present and that the bedrock is exposed.
11.4.5 Trial pit logs from the environmental site investigation undertaken by AECOM in May 2015 (see Technical Appendix H) may suggest the presence of superficial deposits in some parts of the Proposed Development with a thickness of up to around 2m. The logs indicate a mixture of lithologies with a dominance of either sand or clay depending on the location. However, it is possible these also represent weathered Mercia Mudstone.
11.4.6 To the north, west and southwest of the Proposed Development (including the land around Misson village) there are River Terrace Deposits. Peat is the youngest of the superficial deposits formed during the post-glacial period (Flandrian) and is found extensively in the area to the east of the Proposed Development and overlies the River Terrace Deposits and / or Hemingbrough Glaciolacustrine Formation deposits. Alluvium is a post-glacial flood plain deposit comprising mainly fine-grained silt and clay laid down during flooding events. Alluvium is mapped in small localised areas to the south of the Proposed Development, although in the wider area these deposits form ribbons along surface water courses.
Bedrock geology
11.4.7 Geological mapping shows that the Proposed Development is located on the western edge of the Triassic Mercia Mudstone Group outcrop. The western edge of the outcrop is marked on the geological map as being 500 m west of the Proposed Development below superficial deposits. The trial pit logs from the May 2015 environmental site investigation record the presence of Mercia Mudstone (see Chapter 13). The full sequence of the Sherwood Sandstone Group will be encountered beneath the Proposed Development, followed by Permian and then Carboniferous strata.
11.4.8 The Mercia Mudstone Group strata are described as red silty mudstones with thin beds of fine-grained sandstone and siltstone and of gypsum. Only the lowest part of the Group is likely to be present at the Proposed Development. The underlying Sherwood Sandstone Group comprises reddish brown, evenly bedded, poorly cemented, locally pebbly sandstone with thin beds and lenses of dark red mudstone and siltstone. The lowest beds form a
October 2015 92
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
transitional sequence with the underlying Roxby Formation of the Zechstein Group, which comprises shale rich mudstones and siltstone with thin beds of fine-grained sandstone and seams of gypsum, anhydrite and halite.
11.4.9 The exploratory wells will penetrate older Carboniferous strata including the Pennine Coal Measures, Millstone Grit and the Craven Group of the Gainsborough Trough basin, but these are not considered to contain potable groundwater and they are not described in detail here.
Structural geology
11.4.10 The younger Permian and Triassic strata lie unconformably on the Carboniferous strata and dip gently to the east with a gradient of about 1 in 40 (1.4° dip). The structural contours on the base of the Triassic Sherwood Sandstone Group illustrated on the regional hydrogeological map indicate there are no broad scale fold structures present and only slight changes in the direction of dip from due east.
11.4.11 Faulting affects the Carboniferous, Permian and Triassic strata, although the superficial deposits mask the fault positions and so they are mapped in most detail where the superficial deposits are absent or there are coal mines. There are no surface fault traces marked within 5 km of the Proposed Development. The nearest documented surface fault trace lies 6.5 km to the south and is aligned west-east and downthrows the Sherwood Sandstone Group approximately 10 m to the north. A second fault lies to the north-north west at 8 km distance with the 10 m throw of the fault to the south.
Groundwater
Aquifers
11.4.12 The Environment Agency classifies the River Terrace Deposits and Alluvium superficial deposits as Secondary A Aquifers. This type of aquifer contains “Permeable layers capable of supporting water supplies at a local rather than strategic scale, and in some cases forming an important source of base flow to rivers”.
11.4.13 The Hemingbrough Glaciolacustrine Formation and Peat are classified by the Environment Agency as unproductive strata defined as “rock layers or drift deposits with low permeability that have negligible significance for water supply or river base flow”.
11.4.14 The Environment Agency classifies the Mercia Mudstone Group as a Secondary B aquifer, defined as “predominantly lower permeability layers which may store and yield limited amounts of groundwater due to localised features such as fissures, thin permeable horizons and weathering. These are generally the water-bearing parts of the former non-aquifers”. It has also defined this aquifer as a water body under the Water Framework Directive.
11.4.15 The Environment Agency classifies the Sherwood Sandstone Group as a Principal aquifer, defined as “layers of rock or drift deposits that have high intergranular and/or fracture permeability - meaning they usually provide a high level of water storage. They may support
October 2015 93
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
water supply and/or river base flow on a strategic scale”. It has also defined this aquifer as a water body under the Water Framework Directive.
11.4.16 The Permian and Carboniferous strata outcrop over 11 km to the west of the Proposed Development. Whilst some of these strata are classified by the Environment Agency as aquifers at outcrop, they are present at depths of over 300 m beneath the Proposed Development and therefore do not support potable water supplies or provide river base flow within the study area. The focus of this assessment is therefore on the superficial deposits and the Triassic Mercia Mudstone Group and Permo-Triassic Sherwood Sandstone Group.
Groundwater Occurrence and Quality
11.4.17 Groundwater occurs in the granular superficial deposits and bedrock at the Proposed Development. There may be hydraulic continuity between groundwater in the superficial deposits and the upper horizons of bedrock, with similar groundwater levels in both strata. However the layers of silt or clay within the superficial deposits and deeper horizons of mudstone within the Mercia Mudstone and Sherwood Sandstone Groups may provide layers of low permeability and impedance to vertical flow.
11.4.18 Prior to large scale groundwater abstraction it is anticipated that natural groundwater flow in the Sherwood Sandstone Group would have been eastwards emerging near the boundary with the Mercia Mudstone Group in a series of springs or groundwater seepages that fed wetlands. The names “Misson Spring Road”, “Misson Springs” and “Springs Farm” could all be an indicator that in the past there were springs in the area.
Groundwater Source Protection Zones
11.4.19 The Environment Agency mapping indicates that the wider regional outcrop of the Sherwood Sandstone Group is designated as a SPZ (i.e. where it is not overlain by the Mercia Mudstone Group). Most of the area is Zone 3 representing the total catchment where groundwater flows to a source. The Proposed Development is not mapped as being within this protection zone. However, owing to the influence of existing groundwater abstractions, the groundwater in the Sherwood Sandstone Formation beneath the Proposed Development will flow towards the groundwater abstractions to the northwest or west.
11.4.20 There are designated inner and outer source protection Zones 1 and 2 associated with the existing groundwater abstractions at Finningley, Austerfield and Highfield Lane (public water supply). Zone 2 is calculated based on a travel time to the source of between 50 and 400 days and Zone 1 is calculated based on a travel time to the source of less than 50 days. However these Zones are over 3 km from the Proposed Development and are not therefore considered as being at risk and are not considered to be potential receptors in this assessment.
11.4.21 The sub-surface works pass beneath the Source Protection Zone 3 but at considerable depth below the base of the Sherwood Sandstone Aquifer. Due to the significant thickness of strata between the sub-surface works and the aquifer there is considered to be no potential for the sub-surface works to impact on water quality in the aquifer.
October 2015 94
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Anthropogenic influences and historical land uses
11.4.22 The Site lies within an agricultural area, and it is possible that the historic agriculture use may have introduced chemicals to the ground (e.g. nitrate, phosphate, herbicides, pesticides and fungicides), which may have leached into the shallow groundwater table.
11.4.23 The Proposed Development is also located within a former RAF Misson that was operational from 1960 to 1963. This location could provide a potential source of contamination to the environment of refined hydrocarbons / BTEX compounds and potentially heavy metals. However there was no visual or olfactory evidence of contamination during the ground investigation (see Chapter 13).
11.4.24 There are no landfill sites (Permitted or historic) within 2 km of the Proposed Development. There are no recorded pollution incidents with 3 km of the Proposed Development.
Ground gas sources
11.4.25 Possible locations/sources that might generate natural or anthropogenic ground gas are:
• methane, carbon-dioxide, carbon monoxide and radon are ground gases that are associated with the Coal Measures that underlie the site at significant depth. It is unlikely this provides a source of ground gas or dissolved gas in the Sherwood Sandstone Group because of the thickness of overlying low permeability strata of Upper Carboniferous or Permian age that would trap the gas. There is an absence of faulting shown on geological maps that could provide a vertical pathway for ground gas at the Proposed Development. However it is not possible to rule out the presence of faults in the near vicinity of the Proposed Development because superficial deposits can mask their presence;
• leaks from municipal gas mains. However there are no known gas mains in the vicinity of the Proposed Development; and
• peat and organic matter rich soils can be sources of methane and these are located immediately east of the Proposed Development.
11.4.26 The scope of the Proposed Development does not include hydraulic fracturing. However, gas encountered during drilling is considered within this assessment.
Designated sites
11.4.27 The SSSIs in the vicinity of the Site (see section 3.5) are situated on superficial deposits of Hemingbrough Glaciolacustrine Formation, River Terrace Deposits, Alluvium and Peat. The bedrock at depth is expected to comprise Mercia Mudstone Group mudstones. The SSSIs are not expected to be significantly influenced by groundwater contributions from the bedrock geology based on the existing conceptual model for the assessment area. However it is possible they are in part dependent upon groundwater conditions within superficial deposits.
October 2015 95
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
11.4.28 Based on the existing conceptual model and the distance from (and nature of) the Proposed Development, the River Idle Washlands, Misson Line Bank and Haxey Grange Fen SSSIs are not considered further within this assessment. However the Misson Training Area SSSI has the potential to be impacted by the Proposed Development.
Summary of Potential Groundwater and Groundwater Dependent Receptors
11.4.29 The baseline conditions described above provide a conceptual model for the Proposed Development and surrounding area. The receptors that are assessed to have the potential to be impacted by the Proposed Development are shown in Table 11.1.
Table 11.1: Sensitivity of Resources / Receptors
Receptor Sensitivity Rationale
Sherwood Sandstone Principal aquifer providing potable water to a large High Group Principal aquifer population
Groundwater abstractions Abstractions for public water supply (i.e. potable water), from the Sherwood High which are located to the west and down gradient of the Sandstone Group Proposed Development.
The SSSI is not expected to be significantly dependent on groundwater conditions. However it is located near to Misson Training Area SSSI Low Proposed Development and therefore included as a receptor.
River Terrace Deposits and Secondary A aquifer. Alluvium Secondary A Low aquifer
Mercia Mudstone Group A groundwater resource with a low quality and rarity at a Secondary B aquifer Very Low local scale. (sandstone horizons)
11.5 Environmental Design and Management
Proposed development and potential impacts
11.5.1 The description of the Proposed Development is provided in Chapter 4. This section introduces the way that potential environmental impacts will be avoided, prevented, reduced or offset through embedded mitigation measures also detailed in Chapter 4. The measures
October 2015 96
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
are those that are standard (not new or untested) and where there is confidence that the measure is deliverable.
Management and procedures
11.5.2 The management and procedures that will prevent or reduce impacts on the identified hydrogeological receptors are as follows:
• IGas Integrated Management System Manual, revision 03 dated 9 February 2015 (see Annex F1 of Technical Appendix F), sets out the standards and procedures to which IGas is committed to uphold at all sites;
• IGas will prepare a site specific Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan for the Proposed Development at Springs Lane as required by an Environmental Permit. The document will record the monitoring locations, analytical suites, sampling frequency and sampling methods, set warning and trigger concentrations for selected determinands and incorporate an action plan to be followed should warnings and triggers be exceeded; and
• IGas will undertake all statutory reporting obligations for the Proposed Development, including data collection and reporting to DECC, EA, HSE and the BGS.
Baseline monitoring
11.5.3 A programme of Baseline Environmental Monitoring (BEM) will be agreed with the Environment Agency and implemented in advance of the Proposed Development. This is the subject of a separate planning application (see Chapter 3). The proposed design of the monitoring boreholes will allow the installation of groundwater sampling equipment (to allow water quality analysis); allow representative ground gas samples to be collected and allow continuous gas monitoring equipment to be installed; and allow accurate manual groundwater level measurement and installation of data loggers. The frequency of the monitoring and the range of parameters (e.g. water quality, level, ground gas, dissolved gas) to be measured will be agreed with the Environment Agency.
11.5.4 The monitoring will continue beyond the baseline monitoring phase and into the construction, testing, operation and abandonment phases. This will allow early identification of any impacts on groundwater from the Proposed Development.
Construction (Phase 1)
Staff Awareness/Training
11.5.5 The contractor(s) will ensure that Site personnel are fully aware of the potential impact to water resources associated with the proposed construction works and procedures to be followed in the event of an accidental pollution event occurring. This will be included in the site induction and training, with an emphasis on procedures and guidance to reduce the risk of pollution.
October 2015 97
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Pollution Plans
11.5.6 Plans to deal with accidental pollution will be drawn up and agreed with the Environment Agency prior to construction commencing and also be included within the CEMP. Any necessary equipment (e.g. spillage kits) will be held on-site and site personnel would be trained in their use. The Environment Agency would be informed immediately in the unlikely event of a suspected pollution incident.
11.5.7 Spill prevention and emergency management response measures are detailed in Chapter 4.
Storage of Materials
11.5.8 The CEMP would incorporate measures set out in the Environment Agency Pollution Prevention Guidelines documents listed in Technical Appendix G.
Discharge/ Disposal of Potentially Contaminated Site Runoff/ Material
11.5.9 Plans and measures for the discharge and/ or disposal of potentially contaminated water during phase 1 are detailed in Technical Appendix G.
11.5.10 The well cellar would be designed and constructed to prevent the creation of pathways for the migration of contaminants and should be constructed of materials that are suitable for the ground conditions and designed use.
Temporary Drainage and Settlement
11.5.11 Temporary drainage facilities would be provided during Phase 1, where necessary, to ensure controlled discharge of surface water runoff. It would be a contractual requirement of the contractor to ensure that runoff from the Site does not cause pollution.
Operation and Evaluation (Phases 2 and 3)
Well pad design and surface activities
11.5.12 The following environmental design and management is incorporated into the Proposed Development:
• the wellsite will be lined and incorporate a perimeter drainage system;
• Site drainage will be contained and will not be discharge to adjacent watercourses. Drainage water will be stored on-site and then tankered off-site for disposal at an approved waste water treatment works;
• the design of the bunding around the wellsite incorporates an on-site surface storage volume sufficient to retain a failure of the largest of the fluid storage containers to be used on-site (plus 10%); and
• materials including drilling fluid, cuttings, fuel, and waste will be stored in containers in designated locations on the pad. These will be sized to accommodate the volume of material to be used or generated with best practice allowance for additional
October 2015 98
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
volumes (secondary containment). Drilling muds and cuttings will be transported to a suitably permitted disposal facility.
11.5.13 The measures above will prevent or reduce potential impacts on groundwater and associated receptors from spillages and the handling/management of drilling fluids and cuttings.
Drilling and well integrity
11.5.14 The following environmental design and management is incorporated into the Proposed Development:
• the loss of potentially polluting materials to groundwater during well drilling is minimised by well design that is in accordance with UK regulations, guidelines and industry standards:
o Borehole Sites and Operations Regulations (1995); o Offshore Installations and Wells Design & Construction etc.) Regulations 1996 (DCR); o Oil and Gas UK Well Life Cycle Integrity Guidelines (June 2014); o UKOOG UK Onshore Shale Gas Well Guidelines (2013); o API Standards; and o OGUK Guidelines for the Abandonment of Wells, Issue 5 (2015) • the well design programme has been prepared by IGas, in compliance with the above regulations and in accordance with industry good practice;
• the well design programme is approved by IGas Plc management, and submitted for review to an independent well examiner;
• during drilling the steel casing is cemented in the well in a series of stages to protect groundwater and maintain well integrity. The final design of the vertical and horizontal wells is likely to differ according to the size and direction of the well and the geology that is encountered;
• the cement is pumped in a slurry form down inside the well casing and this then rises up through the annular space between the outer face of the casing and the well bore side wall. Once in place the cement then sets hard and seals the annular space;
• all casing strings installed will be pressure tested and cemented in place to ensure integrity;
• no hazardous substances (as defined under the Groundwater Directive) will be used in the drilling fluid in all strata above the Zechstein Formation. The drilling mud will be a water based mud;
• below the deep conductor, and after the adequate isolation by casing and cement grout, a low toxicity oil based mud will be used. The LTOBM used will be subject to approval from the Environment Agency;
October 2015 99
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
• to provide control on pressure and retain potentially pollutant materials within containment the following is incorporated:
o an adequate pressure wellhead will be installed onto the surface casing and if possible onto the deep conductor; and o a Blow-Out Preventer (BOP) will be installed whilst drilling operations are undertaken on strata below the Sherwood Sandstone Group to provide secondary well control. • to ensure that the wells do not act as a pathway for future contaminants when the containment of the well is compromised:
o Abandonment/ Suspension will be undertaken in accordance with regulatory requirements that are in force at the time of abandonment; and o Abandonment/suspension will be undertaken using the industry best practice and as approved by regulators in advance of undertaking the works (DECC, EA and HSE, Oil & Gas UK Guidelines for the Abandonment of Wells). 11.5.15 The measures above will prevent or reduce the potential impacts of escape of drilling fluids, gas and formation fluids on groundwater and associated receptors.
11.6 Assessment of Impact
Construction (Phase 1)
11.6.1 There is the potential for spillages during Phase 1 (the construction phase) in the wellsite and parking area. The potential impacts and assessment of effects is discussed below.
Pollution (via spillages) of the River Terrace Deposits and Alluvium Secondary A Aquifer
11.6.2 There is the potential for spillages during Phase 1 (wellsite and parking area) that could infiltrate and pollute the superficial deposits, which is a low sensitivity receptor. Given the temporary nature of this phase (estimated to be 3 months), the footprint of the Proposed Development and the nature of the activities, the potential impact on this receptor is assessed as very low with a negligible adverse effect (not significant).
Pollution (via spillages) of the Mercia Mudstone Secondary B Aquifer
11.6.3 Where superficial deposits are not present or where there is potential for vertical migration of pollution through the superficial deposits, there is potential for spillages to pollute the Mercia Mudstone Group, which is a low sensitivity receptor. For the same reasons as above, the potential impact on this receptor is assessed as very low with a negligible adverse effect (not significant).
Pollution (via spillages) of the Sherwood Sandstone Group Principal Aquifer and supported public water supply abstractions
11.6.4 Where there is potential for vertical migration of pollution through the superficial deposits and Mercia Mudstone Group, there is potential for spillages to pollute the Sherwood Sandstone Group. The aquifer and supported abstractions are high sensitivity receptors. For the same
October 2015 100
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
reasons as above, the potential impact on these receptors is assessed as very low with a minor adverse effect (not significant).
Pollution of the Misson Training Area SSSI
11.6.5 The inclusion of this low sensitivity receptor is conservative because it is unlikely to be particularly dependent on groundwater conditions. Based on BGS mapping the groundwater pathway from the Proposed Development to the SSSI is considered to be low. Nonetheless, given the temporary nature of this phase, the footprint of the Proposed Development and the nature of the activities, the potential impact on this receptor is assessed as very low with a negligible adverse effect (not significant).
Operation and Evaluation (Phases 2 and 3)
11.6.6 The drilling of two exploratory wells is estimated to take approximately 9 months. There is the potential for spillages during this phase owing to surface activities on the wellsite. There is also potential for the escape of drilling fluids, gas and formation fluids into groundwater (Sherwood Sandstone Group) via the drilling of the well.
Pollution (via spillages) of the River Terrace Deposits and Alluvium Secondary A Aquifer, Mercia Mudstone Group Secondary B Aquifer and Misson Training Area SSSI
11.6.7 Spillages may occur on the wellsite during this longer phase and pollute superficial deposits (low sensitivity) and Mercia Mudstone Group (very low sensitivity). Where horizontal flow pathways exist in shallow aquifer horizons, there is also potential for pollution to migrate towards the Misson Training Area SSSI. However the potential impacts are prevented or reduced by the environmental design and management outlined in Chapter 4 (including well pad and drainage design). Therefore the potential impact on these receptors is assessed as very low with a negligible adverse effect (not significant).
Pollution (via spillages) of the Sherwood Sandstone Group Principal Aquifer and supported public water supply abstractions
11.6.8 Where there is potential for vertical migration of pollution through the superficial deposits and Mercia Mudstone Group, there is potential for spillages to pollute the Sherwood Sandstone Group. The aquifer and supported abstractions are high sensitivity receptors. For the same reasons as above, the potential impact on these receptors is assessed as very low with a minor adverse effect (not significant).
Pollution (via escape of drilling fluids, gas and formation fluids) of the Sherwood Sandstone Group Principal Aquifer and supported public water supply abstractions
11.6.9 Drilling activities and well integrity issues have the potential to introduce pollution into the high sensitivity Sherwood Sandstone Group and supported high sensitivity groundwater abstractions to the west. The potential impacts are prevented or reduced by the environmental design and management outlined in Chapter 4 (including well design, on- going groundwater monitoring and statutory reporting). Therefore the potential impact on these receptors is assessed as very low with a minor adverse effect (not significant).
October 2015 101
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Suspension of wells and assessment of drilling results
11.6.10 Activity on-site during this 3 to 6 month phase will be reduced compared to the Phase 2 and there are no additional activities that have the potential to pollute groundwater and groundwater dependent receptors. Therefore the assessment of effects is the same as the drilling phase i.e. not significant.
Decommissioning, Abandonment and Restoration (Phase 4)
11.6.11 The site decommissioning and site restoration phase has the potential to introduce pollution to the groundwater and groundwater dependent receptors via spillages. There is also potential for well abandonment to introduce new pathways for contamination.
Pollution (via spillages) of the River Terrace Deposits and Alluvium Secondary A Aquifer, Mercia Mudstone Group Secondary B Aquifer and Misson Training Area SSSI
11.6.12 Spillages may occur on the wellsite during decommissioning and restoration of the Site, polluting superficial deposits (low sensitivity) and Mercia Mudstone Group (very low sensitivity). Where horizontal flow pathways exist in shallow aquifer horizons, there is also potential for pollution to migrate towards the Misson Training Area SSSI. Given the temporary nature of this phase, the footprint of the Proposed Development, the nature of the activities and the environmental management measures, the potential impact on these receptors is assessed to be very low with a negligible adverse effect (not significant).
Pollution (via spillages) of the Sherwood Sandstone Group Principal Aquifer and supported public water supply abstractions
11.6.13 Where there is potential for vertical migration of pollution through the superficial deposits and Mercia Mudstone Group, there is potential for spillages to pollute the Sherwood Sandstone Group. The aquifer and supported abstractions are high sensitivity receptors. For the same reasons as above, the potential impact on these receptors is assessed as very low with a minor adverse effect (not significant).
Pollution (via escape of drilling fluids, gas and formation fluids) of the Sherwood Sandstone Group Principal Aquifer and supported public water supply abstractions
11.6.14 Abandonment of the wells has the potential to introduce pollution into the high sensitivity Sherwood Sandstone Group and supported high sensitivity groundwater abstractions to the west. The potential impacts are prevented or reduced by the environmental design and management measures detailed in Chapter 4. Therefore the potential impact on these receptors is assessed as very low with a minor adverse effect (not significant).
11.7 Mitigation Proposals and Residual Effects
11.7.1 The assessment of effects has identified that no mitigation measures are required over-and- above the environmental design and management measures covered previously i.e. the effects are not significant.
11.8 Residual Effects October 2015 102
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
11.8.1 Residual effects will be the same as the effects summarised in Section 11.5.
11.9 Cumulative and Combined Effects
11.9.1 Cumulative effects are those that could arise as a result of impacts from several different development schemes. Applications in the study area that are relevant to groundwater are as follows:
• Newington Sand Quarry - Planning application for additional sand and gravel extraction with restoration to nature conservation at Newington Quarry (around 3.8 km southwest of the Proposed Development); and
• Finningley Quarry – Extension and re-phasing of existing sand and gravel extraction (around 2.8 km west of the Proposed Development).
11.9.2 Given the distance of these other schemes from the Proposed Development, the presence of existing sand and gravel extraction at these locations and the conceptual model for the study area, they are assessed as being unlikely to give rise to significant cumulative effects.
11.10 Statement of Significance and Summary
11.10.1 This assessment has considered the potential impacts on groundwater resources and groundwater quality associated with the Proposed Development.
11.10.2 The key potential impacts to be assessed were:
• the possible pollution to groundwater from spillages and the handling/management of drilling fluids and cuttings; and
• the adequacy of the well design and integrity to control the possible escape of drilling fluids, gas and formation fluids into the groundwater.
11.10.3 The key potential receptors of any pollution have been identified as the high sensitivity Sherwood Sandstone Group and the supported groundwater abstractions for public water supply. Other potential receptors include superficial deposits, Mercia Mudstone Group and the Misson Training Ground SSSI.
11.10.4 The assessment of effects has identified that when taking into account the embedded mitigation measures of the Proposed Development, there are no significant effects on groundwater and groundwater dependent receptors. No additional mitigation measures are included and therefore an assessment of residual effects is not required. It has also been assessed that there are no other schemes in the study area that will result in significant cumulative effects.
October 2015 103
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Drawing 28: Conceptual Site Model
October 2015 104
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
12 Hydrology and Flood Risk
12.1 Introduction
12.1.1 This Chapter provides a summary of the findings of the hydrology and flood risk assessment included at Technical Appendix G (in Volume 4).
12.2 Policy Context
12.2.1 A review of the relevant policy and legislation is included in Technical Appendix G.
12.3 Assessment Methodology
12.3.1 In order to identify and characterise the surface water receptors considered as part of this assessment, available data on surface water quality and quantity within the vicinity of the Proposed Development Site have been obtained.
12.3.2 There is no standard methodology for assessing the magnitude of impacts and significance of effects of developments on the water environment. Each project is evaluated according to its individual characteristics. A methodology for assessing the significance of any effect has therefore been developed for projects throughout the UK, based on relevant legislation.
12.3.3 The assessment criteria used in this Chapter are based on the methodology given in the Department for Transport’s document ‘The Water Environment Sub-Objective’ Transport Analysis Guidance (TAG) UNIT 3.3.11 (DETR, 2003), which brings together the ‘New Approach to Transport Appraisal (NATA)’ document (DETR. 1998) and the ‘Guidance on the Methodology for Multi-Modal Studies (GOMMMS)’ document (DETR. 2000). Whilst this guidance was produced to facilitate the comparison of transport schemes, the definitions provided take into account the sensitivity and vulnerability of the water resource and are therefore applicable and acceptable with regards to the activities associated with the proposed development.
12.3.4 Mustow, Burgess and Walker expanded the GOMMMS methodology in their ‘Practical Methodology for Determining the Significance of Impacts on the Water Environment’ publication in 2006 to make the application of the method more standardised and less open to the subjective-ness of the assessor, and it is this specific method that has been used in this assessment.
12.4 Baseline Conditions
12.4.1 This assessment considers surface water bodies that are hydrologically connected with the Site, based on available data. The watercourses in the vicinity of the Proposed Development Site included in this assessment are therefore:
October 2015 105
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
• the boundary drainage ditches, immediately adjacent to the Site (comprising drainage ditches along the east, north and west boundaries);
• the local Internal Drainage Board (IDB) drainage system (comprising the following drains – Levels Lane, Levels Farm, Chapel Baulk, Owl, Cow Pasture and North Carr);
• the Snow Sewer (or Ferry Drain); and
• the River Idle.
12.4.2 The assessment will consider these watercourses within an area spanning from immediately upstream of the Site, to as far downstream as a potential impact may influence the quality or quantity of the watercourse.
12.4.3 In addition, a small pond located within the military surplus site may be hydrologically linked to the Proposed Development Site as it may be fed by the drainage ditch immediately adjacent to the Site; therefore this water feature is taken forward as part of the assessment.
12.4.4 There are no international conservation designations within the study area.
12.4.5 There are three national statutory nature conservation designations in the search area (within 2 km of the Site), as detailed below:
• Misson Training Area SSSI, located approximately 125 m to the east of the Site;
• Misson Line Bank SSSI, located approximately 1.7 km to the south east of the site on the northern bank of the River Idle; and
• River Idle Washlands SSSI located approximately 1.9 km south east of the Site on the southern bank of the River Idle.
12.4.6 There are ten Local Wildlife Sites (LWS) within 2 km of the Site, four of which are located in close proximity to the Site. Further details of the LWS’ are summarised in Technical Appendix I (Ecology).
12.4.7 The only surface watercourses in close proximity (hydraulic conductivity) to the Site and with the significant potential to be affected by the Proposed Development have been considered further within this impact assessment. Consequently only the River Idle, the Snow Sewer, the local IDB watercourses, the boundary ditches and the small pond, due to their proximity to the Site are considered further herein.
12.5 Environmental Design and Management
12.5.1 A detailed description of the Proposed Development is provided in Chapter 4. The Proposed Development has the potential to impact on the surface water resources in the vicinity of the Site through both quality and quantity changes (though quantitative changes are only considered here in relation to any general changes to the quantity of a water body as a resource).
October 2015 106
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
12.5.2 The surface waterbodies as described above have been assessed for the likelihood of actual effects occurring as a result of the Proposed Development.
12.5.3 The following embedded mitigation measures have either been incorporated into the design or are standard construction or operational practices. These measures have, therefore, been taken into account as part of the impact assessment.
Construction (Phase 1)
12.5.4 For the purposes of this assessment, it is assumed that the measures set out below would be required of any contractors undertaking construction work in relation to the Proposed Development.
12.5.5 As a general measure to protect surface water from a range of potentially dangerous activities associated with construction of this type, best practice would be implemented through a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP), whilst the contractors undertaking works on the Proposed Development would comply with relevant guidance during construction, including the Environment Agency Pollution Prevention Guidance.
12.5.6 IGas’ Integrated Management System Manual, revision 03 dated 9 February 2015 (see Annex F1 of Technical Appendix F), sets out the standards and procedures to which IGas is committed to uphold at all sites.
Staff Awareness/Training
12.5.7 The contractor(s) will ensure that site personnel are fully aware of the potential impact to water resources associated with the proposed construction works and procedures to be followed in the event of an accidental pollution event occurring. This will be included in the site induction and training, with an emphasis on procedures and guidance to reduce the risk of water pollution.
Pollution Plans
12.5.8 Plans to deal with accidental pollution will be drawn up and agreed with the Environment Agency prior to construction commencing and also be included within the CEMP. Any necessary equipment (e.g. spillage kits) will be held on site and site personnel would be trained in their use. The Environment Agency would be informed immediately in the unlikely event of a suspected pollution incident.
12.5.9 Spill prevention and emergency management response measures are detailed in Chapter 4.
Storage of Materials
12.5.10 The CEMP would incorporate measures set out in the Environment Agency Pollution Prevention Guidelines. Examples of such measures include:
• placing arisings and temporary stockpiles away from watercourses and drainage systems, and directing surface water away from stockpiles to prevent erosion;
October 2015 107
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
• containment measures would be implemented, including drip trays, bunding or double-skinned tanks of fuels and oils; all chemicals would be stored in accordance with their Control of Substances Hazardous to Health (COSHH) guidelines whilst spill kits would be provided in areas of fuel/ oil storage;
• an Emergency Spillage Plan would be produced, which site staff would have read and understood;
• the mixing and handling of materials would be undertaken in designated areas and away from surface water drains;
• plant and machinery would be kept away from surface water bodies wherever possible and would have drip trays installed beneath oil tanks/ engines/ gearboxes and hydraulics, which would be checked and emptied regularly. Refuelling and delivery areas would be located away from surface water drains; and
• exposed ground and stockpiles would be protected as appropriate and practicable to prevent windblown migration of potential contaminants. Water suppression would be used if there is a risk of fugitive dust emissions (see also Technical Appendix C: Air Quality).
Discharge/ Disposal of Potentially Contaminated Site Runoff/ Material
12.5.11 Plans for the discharge and/ or disposal of potentially contaminated water during site construction would be agreed in advance with the Environment Agency and BDC Drainage department where appropriate and permits obtained as required.
12.5.12 All foul water from the Site (including temporary toilets) will be disposed of to the on-site foul drainage system. Any potentially contaminated water would be tested, and if it is not of a suitable quality, agreed disposal procedures would be followed. Construction drainage details would be approved by the Environment Agency.
12.5.13 If any suspected contaminated material is discovered during the works, it would be tested and dealt with appropriately. If material is considered to be contaminated it would be disposed of to a permitted facility (see also Technical Appendix H: Contaminated Land).
12.5.14 Any waters removed from excavations by dewatering would be discharged appropriately, subject to the relevant permits being obtained.
12.5.15 The well cellar would be designed and constructed to prevent the creation of pathways for the migration of contaminants and should be constructed of materials that are suitable for the ground conditions and designed use.
Temporary Drainage and Settlement
12.5.16 Temporary drainage facilities would be provided during Phase 1, where necessary, to ensure controlled discharge of surface water runoff. It would be a contractual requirement of the contractor to ensure that runoff from the Site does not cause pollution or flooding.
October 2015 108
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
12.5.17 Other measures that would be considered for implementation for temporary drainage through the construction design and / or CEMP include:
• Site access points would be regularly cleaned to prevent build-up of dust and mud: and
• the use of the holding tank to reduce the potential risk for contamination of surface water.
Flood Risk
12.5.18 During construction the opportunity would be taken to adopt flood resilient design techniques for the Proposed Development. The following resilient construction measures have been identified as possible options for inclusion at this site, subject to final design:
• adoption of flood proofing and resilience measures to minimise damage to structures and the timescales for the resulting clean-up operation. Examples of such measures include wet-proofing by raising electrical wiring above flood levels;
• adequate containment of storage areas to minimise risk of pollution;
• provision of a Flood Warning and Evacuation Plan; and
• implementation of a Surface Water Management Strategy.
12.5.19 Further details are included within the flood risk assessment summarised in Section 12.7.
Operation and Evaluation (Phase 2)
12.5.20 The following environmental design and management measures will be incorporated during Phase 2:
• the wellsite will be lined and incorporate a perimeter drainage system;
• site drainage will be contained and will not be discharged to adjacent watercourses, drainage water will be stored on-site and then tankered off-site for disposal at an approved treatment works;
• the design of the bunding around the wellsite incorporates an on-site surface storage volume sufficient to retain a failure of the largest of the fluid storage containers to be used on-site (plus 10%);
• materials including drilling fluid, cuttings, fuel, and extractive waste will be stored in containers in designated locations on the pad. These will be sized to accommodate the volume of material to be used or generated with best practice allowance for additional volumes. Drilling muds and cuttings will be transported to a suitably permitted disposal facility.
October 2015 109
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
12.5.21 A number of the embedded mitigation measures employed during Phase 1 would remain for the Phases 2 and 3:
• plans to deal with accidental pollution and any necessary equipment (e.g. spillage kits) would be held on site and all site personnel would be trained in their use. For example the plan would incorporate details on how to appropriately deal with accidental spillages to ensure they are not drained to any surface water system;
• containment measures would be implemented, including bunding or double-skinned tanks for fuels and oils; all chemicals would be stored in accordance with their COSHH guidelines;
• temporary drainage facilities environmental design and management would be retained during the operation phase to ensure control of site surface water runoff, and
• in relation to flood risk, all measures used during the construction phase will continue to be applied throughout the operational phase.
12.6 Assessment of Impact
12.6.1 The surface watercourses described above (River Idle, the Snow Sewer, local IDB watercourses, boundary ditches and the small surface water pond (to the south of the Site)) have been assessed for the likelihood of actual effects occurring as a result of the Proposed Development with the embedded mitigation measures outlined in Section 12.5 incorporated.
Construction (Phase 1)
Contaminated Surface Water Runoff Entering Watercourses and Spillage of Pollutants
12.6.2 During Phase 1, there is an elevated risk of leakage or accidental spillage of building materials and potential pollutants used on-site, migrating to nearby surface watercourses. Washout facilities (washing of tools, plant and equipment), storage and use of various liquids and soluble solids, unstable exposed soils, excavated materials, stored aggregates, contaminated road surfaces, and fuel storage and handling all have the potential to result in pollution of water resources. Inappropriate disposal of waste materials associated with phase 1 also have the potential for waste material to enter surface water.
12.6.3 Some construction activities could have the potential to create pathways through the subsurface strata and lead to contamination. A significant discharge of fuel, for example, or cement and/or concrete would be detrimental to surface water receptors and attributes.
12.6.4 As described in Technical Appendix H, there is not a significant risk of impact from contaminated material on surface water and groundwater receptors currently or under the Proposed Development.
October 2015 110
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Surface Water – Suspended Sediments in Site Runoff
12.6.5 The movement and storage of construction and waste materials to and from the Site, and from other construction activities has the potential to give rise to suspended solids that could become entrained in surface water runoff from the Site following rainfall. This creates a potential risk of increased sediment loads being discharged into the nearby surface water.
Operation and Evaluation (Phases 2 and 3)
Contaminated Surface Water Runoff Entering Watercourses and Spillage of Pollutants
12.6.6 Given the nature of the Proposed Development the magnitude of impact and significance of effects associated with contaminated surface water runoff entering watercourses and spillage of pollutants are considered to be the same as those assessed for the Phase 1 for the identified surface water receptors. Implementation of the measures as described previously above will ensure the risk of occurrence is very low.
Surface Water – Suspended Sediments in Site Runoff
12.6.7 Given the nature of the Proposed Development the magnitude of impact and significance of effects associated with suspended sediments in site runoff are considered to be the same as those assessed for the construction phase for the identified surface water receptors. Implementation of the measures as described previously above will ensure the risk of occurrence is low
Surface Water – Leakage from Drainage System
12.6.8 A sealed drainage system comprising a perimeter drain surrounding the wellsite will be used to prevent runoff from the wellsite area entering the surrounding drainage ditches and wider local IDB watercourses. The perimeter drain will be fitted with an impermeable liner to collect surface water run-off and will drain to a holding tank as described in Chapter 4. The drain and tank will be designed to have sufficient capacity to accommodate site run-off in the event of a 1 in 100 year storm event plus 110% of the largest storage tank on-site. The capacity of the drain and tank system will be maintained by using a vacuum tanker to remove run-off water as necessary. Water removed in this way will be taken off-site to an authorised waste water treatment works (WWTW) for treatment / disposal. Also, in an emergency, one of the eight water and mud tanks will be available for the containment of surface water.
Changes in Drainage and Flow to Surface Water
12.6.9 Any changes to drainage have the potential to alter the discharge rates from the Site and thus flow dynamics within adjacent watercourses (e.g. increase in spate flows, scouring of the stream bed, decrease in dilution impacting water quality etc.). The inclusion of the wellsite perimeter drainage system to control surface water runoff and prevent contaminated runoff from the wellsite entering the surrounding watercourses results in an overall decrease
October 2015 111
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
in both rate and volume of surface water runoff leaving the Site compared to the existing situation.
Decommissioning, Abandonment and Restoration (Phase 4)
12.6.10 Environmental impacts during Phase 4 are anticipated to be the same as during Phase 1.
Flood Risk
12.6.11 The NPPF and associated PPG stipulate that development shall not be permitted if it increases flood risk elsewhere. Although flood risk is not a receptor, flood risk can be impacted by development and is therefore reported in this Chapter.
12.6.12 A flood risk assessment (FRA) has therefore been undertaken to determine whether the Proposed Development Site is at risk of flooding or if the development of the Site would cause an increase in the off-site flood risk (see Annex G1 to Technical Appendix G). The FRA has been prepared in accordance with the NPPF and PPG and the conclusions are summarised below:
• Environment Agency flood extent maps show the Site is located in Flood Zone 3a and is therefore deemed at high risk of flooding from fluvial sources, however; these flood maps do not take into account the presence of flood defences along this stretch of the River Idle;
• modelled flood extents based on the outputs of the River Idle Flood Risk Mapping Study and taking into account the presence of the flood defences were provided by the Environment Agency. This data shows that the Site is afforded protection from flooding from the River Idle up to and including the 0.5% Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) flood event;
• the River Idle Flood Risk Mapping Study contains no information for the 0.1% AEP (1 in 1000) flood event. Additional modelling for the 0.1% AEP (1 in 1000) flood event was undertaken as part of the Bassetlaw District Council Strategic Flood Risk Assessment (BDC SFRA) (JBA, 2009) and mapping within the BDC SFRA shows the Site is located within the defended flood extents for the 0.1% AEP (1 in 1000) flood event, therefore it is considered that the Site is at medium risk of fluvial flooding from the River Idle;
• as a mineral development, the Proposed Development is classed as ‘Less Vulnerable’, which is considered to be appropriate within Flood Zone 3a in line with the NPPF and PPG;
• the account of the alternative sites included in Chapter 5 explains the factors which limit the choice of potential site locations and shows that the “areas of search” lie within Flood Zones 2 and 3a (see Drawing 25 of the ES). A sequential test is provided in the FRA (Appendix G2) and shows that on the basis of the relevant information contained in the ES NCC is invited to conclude that there are no
October 2015 112
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
reasonably available alternative sites appropriate for the Proposed Development in areas with a lower probability of flooding (which are consistent with wider sustainability objectives) when it applies the Sequential Test. As ‘Less Vulnerable’ development in Flood Zone 3a no Exception Test is required;
• breach analysis of the flood defences of the River Idle shows that the residual risk of flooding at the Site as a result of a breach in the River Idle flood defences is low;
• the Site is considered to be at medium risk of flooding from the surrounding smaller watercourses/drainage ditches;
• the Site is not considered to be at risk of flooding from tidal sources;
• the risk of flooding from other sources, including groundwater, artificial sources and sewers is assessed to be low;
• areas of the site, one to the north west of the proposed wellsite area and the second to the south east, are shown to be at medium to high risk of surface water flooding.
• it is proposed that surface water from the redeveloped Site will be contained within the sealed drainage system before being collected and disposed of;
• to prevent the possible contamination/ pollution of the surrounding watercourses and groundwater the existing impermeable area where the proposed wellsite will be located (covering an area of approximately 7,992 m2) will be underlain with an impermeable membrane designed to drain to lined perimeter ditches which in turn will drain into a tank (from which water will be removed by suction tanker to a waste water treatment works for disposal for as necessary) for the duration of the development. As the perimeter drainage system will be designed to provide surface water attenuation storage up to and including the 1% AEP storm event (approximately 1,541m3) betterment in surface water runoff compared to the current Site is achieved for phases 2 and 3 of the development;
• a residual risk of flooding is associated with blockage of the perimeter drain and/ or exceedance of the drain capacity. In order to reduce the risks of blockage regular and proactive maintenance will be undertaken. In addition, the Site manager will watch predicted weather conditions each day and the water removal company will be on call out if required.
12.6.13 A Conceptual Drainage Strategy has been developed for the Proposed Development and presented within the FRA. This includes discharging surface water from the wellsite to the perimeter drainage system and surface water being disposed of off-site resulting in a decrease in surface water runoff rate (of approximately 281.5 l/s for a 100 year return period 15 minute storm event) when compared to existing site run-off rates. Surface water generated on-site will be collected and channelled to the perimeter drain with an approximate storage volume of 1,541m3 (to be confirmed at the detailed design stage). This
October 2015 113
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
storage volume will accommodate runoff generated by the 1 in 100 year storm event. This will have a beneficial residual impact of low magnitude and therefore an effect of minor beneficial significance for general flood risk in the local area.
Potential Impacts on Water Framework Directive Status
12.6.14 The Water Framework Directive (WFD) status has been considered for each of the potential impacts described as part of this assessment.
12.6.15 Given the nature of the impacts (notably that they are largely of temporary nature and/or unlikely to affect the WFD elements), and assuming the embedded mitigation measures are effectively implemented, there will be no effect on WFD status and objectives.
12.6.16 WFD mitigation measures as included within the Humber River Basin Management Plan include the preservation of marginal aquatic habitat, banks and the riparian zone, sediment management strategies, appropriate vegetation control techniques and timings, and appropriate techniques to align and attenuate flow to limit detrimental effects .
12.6.17 The Proposed Development is unlikely to significantly impact upon the ability of these mitigation measures to be implemented and for the current mitigation measures to remain. The effect on the WFD status is therefore likely to be negligible (not significant).
12.7 Mitigation Proposals and Residual Effects
12.7.1 Mitigation and pollution control measures which will be followed during phases 1-4 of the Proposed Development are detailed in section 12.5. The embedded mitigation measures have been taken into account in the assessment and no requirement for additional mitigation requirements has been identified. As no mitigation measures additional to those described within the design and impact avoidance section have been identified, the residual effects remain as described in Section 12.6 above.
12.8 Cumulative Effects
12.8.1 This section of the Chapter assesses the effects of the Proposed Development in combination with the potential effects of other developments, as listed within Chapter 17. The developments considered comprise predominantly of quarry related developments, i.e. proposed extension etc.
Phases 1 and 4
12.8.2 Cumulative effects to surface water resources during construction processes are associated with the generation of sediments; spillage and leakage of oils and fuels; leakage of wet concrete; cement and disturbance of contaminated land; and drainage.
12.8.3 As outlined in previous sections of this Chapter, measures exist to manage and control these effects and reduce the magnitude and significance of effects to a minimum. These measures should also be adopted at other local construction sites as a matter of standard practice. Therefore, as a result of these control measures, and the fact that development sites in the
October 2015 114
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
area will not be discharging into receiving surface waters, the cumulative effect of the Proposed Development is considered to be negligible.
Phases 2 and 3
12.8.4 The Proposed Development will have a beneficial effect on the surface water runoff generated at the Site. Generation of surface water runoff from the other developments considered must, in line with the NPPF provide betterment compared with existing rates and should meet the requirements of local policy. If this can be achieved on the surrounding development sites then a cumulative effect will be observed and this could be an effect of minor beneficial significance to the local flood risk associated with the surface watercourse network.
12.9 Statement of Significance and Summary
12.9.1 With the implementation of embedded mitigation measures, there is very limited potential for residual risk to the water environment associated with the construction, operation, decommissioning and restoration of the Proposed Development, and none of the effects are considered to be significant.
October 2015 115
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
October 2015 116
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
13 Contaminated Land
13.1 Introduction
13.1.1 This Chapter is an assessment of impacts on land of the Proposed Development, in particular those associated with land contamination, based on the following reports included as Technical Appendix H (in Volume 4):
• Phase 1 Geoenvironmental Report; and
• Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA).
13.2 Policy Context
13.2.1 A review of the relevant policy and legislation is included in Technical Appendix H.
13.3 Baseline Conditions
Phase 1 Geoenvironmental Report
13.3.1 The AECOM Environmental Site Assessment (Technical Appendix H) provides a detailed appraisal of the environmental setting of the Site. The baseline conditions defined on the results of these investigations are summarised below.
Summary of Site History
13.3.2 As detailed in the Cultural Heritage Assessment (see Technical Appendix J) the Site was originally agricultural land which was developed as a World War II bombing range and later developed as a Surface to Air Guided Weapon site before being sold for its current use as a commercial premises.
Geology
13.3.3 The geology of the Site is interpreted from a review of published geological mapping supplemented with actual ground condition data from a ground investigation undertaken in May 2015 and historical borehole records as being a thin veneer of Made Ground underlain by between 0.7 and 2.7 m thick sandy gravelly clay (river terrace deposits) immediately overlying Weathered Mercia Mudstone. The solid geology at the Site comprises Mercia Mudstone, overlying Sherwood Sandstone.
Groundwater
13.3.4 Groundwater was encountered as perched isolated occurrences at the base of the Made Ground at locations inside the network of concrete slabs for the former missile launch pads,
October 2015 117
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
and as slow seepages at, or close to, the boundary between the superficial deposits and the Mercia Mudstone bedrock.
Contamination
13.3.5 With the exception of ashy Made Ground encountered in one location, no visual or olfactory evidence of contamination was recorded during the trial pit investigation.
Mining
13.3.6 A Coal Authority report obtained for the Phase 1 report (Technical Appendix H) indicates that the Proposed Development Site is not located within an area which has been influenced by past or present underground mine working, nor is the Site located within an area for which a licence to remove coal has been granted or is in the process of determination or where opencast coal extraction is proposed.
Preliminary Unexploded Ordnance Assessment
13.3.7 Due to the Site’s historical use as part of RAF Misson, a preliminary Unexploded Ordnance (UXO) survey has been conducted at the Site (see Annex H4 of Technical Appendix H) in accordance with CIRIA C681 “Unexploded Ordnance (UXO) – A guide for the Construction Industry” Risk Management Framework. The Preliminary Unexploded Ordnance Risk Assessment report, prepared by BACTEC International Limited, is provided at Annex H4.
The key findings of the assessment are as follows:
• 7 no. military airfield sites, 4 no. bombing decoy sites, 2 no. World War II defence- related positions, 2 no. heavy anti-aircraft batteries and one abandoned bomb are recorded within 10 km of the Site;
• of most significance is RAF Misson, the centre of which reported in the BACTEC assessment as being 0.1 km from the Site; and
• the location of the Site close to a bombing range increases the risk of UXO to be present. Following the sale of land formerly used by the RAF for weapons training, explosive ordnance clearance tasks are routinely undertaken by the RAF as standard procedure. Consequently RAF personnel are highly likely to have carried out such clearance in the vicinity of the Site. The UXO risk assessment conservatively concluded that there is a medium risk of unexploded ordnance to be present at the Site.
Conceptual Site Model
13.3.8 Current legislation relating to contaminated land in the UK is contained within Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990, which was inserted by Section 57 of the Environment Act 1995, and by Section 86 of the Water Act 2003.
October 2015 118
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
13.3.9 The “suitable for use” approach is adopted for the assessment of contaminated land where remedial measures are only undertaken where unacceptable risks to human health or the environment are realised taking into account the use (or proposed use) of the land in question and the environmental setting. Current best practice recommends that the determination of health hazards due to contaminated land is based on the principle of risk assessment, as outlined in Part IIA of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.
13.3.10 The risk assessment process for the environmental contaminants is based on a source- pathway-receptor analysis. These terms can be defined as follows:
• Source: hazardous substance that has the potential to cause adverse impacts.
• Pathway: route whereby a hazardous substance may come into contact with the receptor: examples include ingestion of contaminated soil and leaching of contaminants from soil into watercourses.
• Receptor: target that may be affected by contamination: examples include human occupants/users of site, water resources (surface waters or groundwater), or structures.
13.3.11 For a risk to be present, there must be a viable pollutant linkage; i.e. a mechanism whereby a source impacts on a sensitive receptor via a pathway.
13.3.12 This section details the conceptual site model which has been developed for the Site following additional site investigation and risk assessment with the view to assessing the potential risks during construction and during the operation of the Proposed Development. The potential sources of contamination, potential receptors and potential pollutant pathways are identified for the Site and are pictorially represented on Drawing 28 of the ES.
Pollutant Linkages
13.3.13 Table 13.1 lists sources of potential contamination at the Site of the Proposed Development identified during previous investigations and monitoring.
13.4 Assessment of Impacts
Results of Ground Investigation
13.4.1 Fifteen soil samples were collected and scheduled for a range of analyses. Only phosphorus was reported to exceed the Stage 2 General Assessment Criterion (GAC) for Human Health, assuming a commercial/industrial land use. However, the reported concentrations are considered to be naturally-occurring and are therefore not considered to present a risk to future Site users;
13.4.2 Asbestos was identified in the Made Ground in a single location as bundles of chrysotile (white asbestos) fibres. No asbestos was identified in samples analysed from other locations where similar Made Ground was encountered, suggesting that the distribution of asbestos is unlikely to be widespread.
October 2015 119
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Table 13.1: Sources of Potential Contamination
Source Pathway Receptor
Human Health
On-site workers (during construction Asbestos Inhalation of fibres works) and off-site workers on neighbouring sites.
Controlled Waters
Leaching of contaminants from soil in the unsaturated zone into the superficial aquifer. Groundwater (including superficial aquifer, mudstone bedrock aquifer Made Ground Vertical migration of impacted and sandstone bedrock aquifer) groundwater within the superficial (PAH, TPH, aquifer into the bedrock aquifers. metals) Surface run off (into drains and migration into the pond and River Idle) Surface waters (including field drains, the pond and River Idle) Lateral migration of impacted groundwater into surface water.
13.4.3 Exceedances of Stage 2 GAC Controlled Waters for PAH, TPH and metals were reported in many of the soil samples. However, exceedances were minor, with the exception of the Made Ground in a single location where a number of PAH species and metals exceed the Stage 2 GAC for Controlled Waters by up to more than two orders of magnitude.
Pollutant Linkages
13.4.4 The revised Conceptual Site Model, has been developed for the Site from information during the Phase 1 and Phase 2 ESAs for the Proposed Development Site. Table 13.2, below, presents an assessment of the significance of the identified potential pollutant linkages taking into account the results of the Phase 2 ESA.
Risks to Human Health
13.4.5 Based on the presence of asbestos fibre bundles in the Made Ground at TP-E5 in the eastern portion of the Site, the risk to Human Health (including construction workers) from on-site sources of contamination is considered to be ‘moderate/low’. The presence of asbestos is considered unlikely to impact significantly upon the Proposed Development as only limited subsurface works are proposed. However, there should be further investigation for the presence of asbestos in areas where excavation works are proposed (i.e. the well cellar and holding tank). Excavation works should be undertaken in accordance with current Health and Safety guidance and legislation. There is no significant potential for off-site workers to be impacted (e.g. by generation of dust and migration downwind of the Site)
October 2015 120
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
provided standard dust control measures are employed during excavation works (see Technical Appendix C).
Table 13.2: Risk Evaluation of Potential Pollutant Linkages
Risk Evaluation Source Pathway Receptor Severity Probability Risk
Human Health
Future on-site workers, including Asbestos in construction workers Moderate/ Made Inhalation of fibres Medium Low and Low Ground Off-site workers on neighbouring sites
Controlled Waters
Leaching of contaminants from Superficial Low soil in the Medium Moderate/Low Secondary A Aquifer Likelihood unsaturated zone into the superficial aquifer
Bedrock Secondary B Low Vertical migration of Aquifer (Mercia Minor Very Low Likelihood impacted Mudstone) Made groundwater within Ground the superficial aquifer (PAH, TPH, into the bedrock Bedrock Principal metals) aquifers Aquifer (Nottingham Medium Unlikely Low Castle Sandstone)
Surface run off Field drains Minor Likely Low
Lateral migration of impacted Pond & River Idle Mild Unlikely Very Low groundwater into surface water.
Risks to Controlled Waters
13.4.6 The risk to Controlled Waters is considered to be ‘moderate/low’ to ‘very low’.
13.4.7 The most significant risk to Controlled Waters is considered to be the potential for adverse impact on the superficial aquifer as a result of leaching of contaminants from the unsaturated zone, particularly from Made Ground in one location. Due to the nature of the superficial deposits encountered at the Site (relatively low permeability clays with sand bands of limited lateral persistence) the likelihood of the pathway being present is low, however the relative
October 2015 121
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
sensitivity of the Superficial deposits receptor (a Secondary A Aquifer), results in the ‘moderate/low’ risk rating.
13.4.8 Risk to Controlled Waters via other potential pathways is considered to be low to very low, based on the conservative nature of the screening assessment of soil results, the unlikely probability of complete pollutant linkages being present and/or the low sensitivity of the receptor. However, it is noted that a Principal Aquifer underlies the Site at relatively shallow depth. Any risk of creation of a potential pathway between shallow Made Ground and the deeper sand/sandstone during operations will be mitigated by installation and cementing a shallow conductor in place prior to drilling to prevent any risk to Controlled Waters.
13.5 Mitigation
13.5.1 Mitigation measures for risks to human health include the identification and control of localised asbestos fibres present in Made Ground prior to Phase 1 excavation works.
13.5.2 Mitigation measures for risks to controlled waters include the installation and cementing of a shallow conductor to prevent any potential risk to controlled waters associated with Site development.
13.6 Residual Effects
13.6.1 The mitigation measures outlined in the previous section would ensure that adverse effects resulting from land contamination identified by this assessment are appropriately managed and reduced thereby reducing the significance of impacts to negligible.
13.6.2 No additional mitigation measures are proposed for long-term impacts site following reclamation and development. The residual effects, therefore, remain negligible as outlined above.
13.7 Conclusions
13.7.1 Phase 1 and Phase 2 ESAs have been prepared. The latter based on a ground investigation undertaken in May 2015. These have allowed a comprehensive assessment of:
• ground conditions;
• contamination of shallow soil and groundwater associated with historic site uses; and
• have been used to produce a detailed conceptual site model.
13.7.2 These data have been used as the basis of assessments of risk to human health, controlled waters and from ground gases. Based on these assessments remedial treatment options have been evaluated which will minimise risks both during Site remediation works and in the long-term post development.
October 2015 122
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
13.7.3 Based on the conclusions above, the following recommendations are made:
• the presence of asbestos is considered unlikely to impact significantly upon the Proposed Development. However, there should be further investigation for the presence of asbestos in areas where excavation works are proposed (i.e. the well cellar and holding tank). Excavation works should be undertaken in accordance current Health and Safety guidance and legislation; and
• the site of the well cellar should be cleared for the presence of UXO both prior to and during excavation works by a UXO specialist.
October 2015 123
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
October 2015 124
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
14 Ecology
14.1 Introduction
14.1.1 This Chapter provides a summary of the findings of the ecological impact assessment included at Technical Appendix I (in Volume 4). The assessment determines the baseline conditions of the Site and assesses the impact of the Proposed Development upon the identified baseline.
14.2 Policy Context
14.2.1 A review of the relevant policy and legislation is included in Technical Appendix I.
14.3 Assessment Methodology
Objectives
14.3.1 The objective of this assessment is to identify, and where possible quantify, the likely significant effects of the construction, operation and decommissioning of the Proposed Development on ecology and nature conservation. With reference to the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (IEEM, now the Chartered IEEM) Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment (IEEM, 2006), the aims of this ecological assessment are to:
• identify any features, habitats or species which would constitute potential constraints to the type of development proposed;
• provide an objective and transparent assessment of the ecological impacts of the Proposed Development;
• facilitate objective and transparent determination of the consequences of the Proposed Development in terms of national, regional and local policies relevant to nature conservation and biodiversity; and
• set out what steps would be taken to adhere to legal requirements relating to designated sites and legally protected or controlled species.
Desk Study
14.3.2 A desk study was undertaken to determine what habitats and species are known to occur in the study area. The area covered by the desk study extended beyond the boundary of the Proposed Development, depending upon the likely zone of influence of the ecological receptor under consideration.
October 2015 125
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Scoping Survey
th 14.3.3 A scoping survey was undertaken concurrent with the Phase 1 Habitat survey on 9 April 2015 to appraise the general Site conditions and by so doing determine, with reference to desk study data also, the final survey requirements for the Proposed Development.
14.3.4 Based on the findings of the scoping survey and desk study, it was identified that the presence/absence of the following additional species should be investigated further through species-specific survey:
• badger (Meles meles);
• great crested newt (Triturus cristatus): further scoping and risk assessment required; and
• reptiles.
Phase 1 Habitat Survey
th 14.3.5 An Extended Phase 1 Habitat survey was undertaken on 9 April 2015 in accordance with the standard Joint Nature Conservation Committee (2010) methodology. The survey covered all land associated with the Proposed Development as well as immediately adjacent land, where accessible/visible from within the Site or other land with public right of access. The surveyor had no right of access onto third party land except where this was crossed by public byways or otherwise within the same ownership.
14.3.6 The survey identified and mapped all of the Phase 1 Habitat types present. Target notes were made as appropriate, recording details of any areas or features of particular ecological interest and are shown on Drawing I2 at Technical Appendix I.
Surveys
14.3.7 The following species surveys were undertaken during Spring 2015:
• breeding birds;
• badgers;
• great crested newts (scoping survey); and
• reptiles.
14.3.8 All of the field surveys were undertaken during their specified optimal survey seasons. All parts of the Site were accessible and Nottinghamshire Wildlife Trust permitted access to the Misson Training Area SSSI to allow a search to be made for water bodies with potential to support breeding great crested newt. As such, there are no limitations to the survey work undertaken.
October 2015 126
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
14.4 Baseline Conditions
Habitats
14.4.1 None of the habitats present within or immediately adjacent to the Site meet published criteria for the recognition of habitats of county or higher ecology and nature conservation value. Accordingly all of the habitats present are considered to be of local ecology and nature conservation value. While hedgerows are addressed in NERC Act S41 and the Local Biodiversity Action Plan, the hedgerow resource associated with the Proposed Development is of limited extent. While they contribute to the wider hedgerow network, they are unlikely to be functionally important beyond the scale of the immediate local environment because hedgerows are not a rare habitat. Notwithstanding this assessment, it should be noted that the Proposed Development does not require any loss of existing hedgerow.
Species
Flora
14.4.2 The desk study returned no records of notable or protected flora for the search area. Flora were recorded during the Phase 1 Habitat survey and a representative list is provided in Technical Appendix I. No protected or notable flora were recorded and none would be expected based on the habitat types present. No non-native controlled weed species listed on Schedule 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) were recorded during the Phase 1 Habitat survey.
Breeding Birds
14.4.3 The survey recorded a breeding season bird fauna comprised of relatively low numbers of a few bird species that nest within woodland habitats. No large or regular aggregations of bird species were recorded. Four species of conservation concern were recorded, but these species occurred in low numbers and these species are not sufficiently rare that the recorded populations would be considered to be of district or higher nature conservation value. These findings are undoubtedly a reflection of the habitat context which is dominated by hard-standing and periodically mown poor semi-improved grassland. Habitats of comparable or higher potential value to birds occur in the wider landscape reducing the relative value of the survey area for birds.
14.4.4 All of the bird species recorded (as detailed in Technical Appendix I) and the bird fauna as a whole, with the exception of barn owl, are assessed as being of no more than local ecology and nature conservation value.
14.4.5 A value is placed on barn owl based on the likelihood that it breeds nearby, most likely at Levels Farm around 179 m to the north-west of the Site boundary. Based on the most recent count data (2005) there are 150 breeding pairs of barn owl in Nottinghamshire (Rare Breeding Birds Panel, 2015), accordingly the breeding pair occurring in the vicinity of the Proposed Development represents less than 1% of the county population and on this basis
October 2015 127
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
is of less than county ecology and nature conservation value (the 1% threshold is widely established for the purposes of ecological impact assessment as the basis for the determination of geographic value and/or significance of impact). Accordingly, the barn owl pair is assigned district ecology and nature conservation value.
Badger
14.4.6 The desk study returned no records of badger for the search area. No badger setts or other evidence to support the presence of badger was found during the Phase 1 Habitat survey. Based on the available evidence, badger is not relevant to the Proposed Development and requires no further consideration in this assessment.
Reptiles
14.4.7 During the Phase 1 Habitat survey a single grass snake was heard in vegetation at Target Note 7 and a second individual was observed on the red line boundary at Target Note 5.
14.4.8 Two species of reptile were recorded during the survey, grass snake and common lizard. The full results of the reptile survey are detailed in Technical Appendix I.
Other species
14.4.9 No other relevant species were identified as a result of the desk study and field surveys. Based on the Proposed Development being almost entirely restricted to hard-standing and compacted stone, no additional relevant species would reasonably be expected to occur.
14.4.10 Access permission to Misson Training Area SSSI was granted by NWT and the survey was undertaken on the 16th April 2015. Evidence of great crested newt (eggs) was detected in a suitable drain just outside the 500 m zone, validating the previous desk study records. After thorough searching, no suitable ponds or drains were found within 500 m of the Proposed Development. It is also considered unlikely that great crested newt would attempt to migrate towards the Proposed Development given the large extent of optimal terrestrial habitat within the boundary of the SSSI. Based on consideration of distance alone (English Nature, 2001; Natural England, 2015), and the lack of suitable ponds between the SSSI and the Proposed Development, there was no requirement to undertake further great crested newt surveys in Misson Training Area SSSI as an impact would not reasonably be expected.
14.5 Assessment of Impact
14.5.1 Likely significant ecological effects have been assessed with reference to the Proposed Development as designed, and as described in Chapter 4.
14.5.2 Most of the effects described below would be permanent for the life of the Proposed Development (up to three years in duration) but, particularly given the construction (phase 1), operational (phase 2), evaluation (phase 3) and decommissioning (phase 4) requirements of the Proposed Development and the associated baseline habitat context, effects would be reversible over the short term following phase 4.
October 2015 128
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
14.5.3 Ecological receptors would experience no direct impacts as a result of the Proposed Development, as all land take is restricted to the existing area of hard-standing and compacted stone, with no requirement for permanent or temporary land take from areas of semi-natural vegetation except during installation of the proposed security fencing.
Construction Effects (Phase 1)
Designated Sites
14.5.4 There would be no direct impacts on nature conservation designations as a result of Phase 1, as none of the identified designations have direct habitat connectivity to the Proposed Development and there is no pathway by which direct impacts could occur.
Habitats
14.5.5 The footprint of the Proposed Development is almost entirely restricted to an existing area of hard-standing and compacted stone and makes use of existing access infrastructure. As such, there will be no large-scale permanent loss of semi-natural vegetation during construction of the Proposed Development.
14.5.6 There will be localised disturbance to semi-improved grassland during installation of the security fences, along with very limited land take to the fences. Such a minor impact would not reasonably be expected to have any adverse consequences for ecology and nature conservation, given the relative quality and composition of the grassland to be affected. The effect could be readily reversed following Phase 4.
14.5.7 The magnitude of the predicted small scale effect on grassland habitat of local ecology and nature conservation value is assessed as low and not significant (certain).
Species
14.5.8 The potential effects of Phase 1 are likely to relate primarily to the potential for temporary disturbance to protected species. Disturbance might result from noise, physical site disturbance, vibration and light intrusion. The relevant species requiring assessment are breeding birds and reptiles. The lighting assessment (see Technical Appendix E) has confirmed that there are no pathways for potential impacts on bats (further confirming that specific surveys are unnecessary) as there would be no significant light spill or glare onto habitats of potential value to bats.
14.5.9 The following more detailed assessment confirms that the Proposed Development complies with relevant planning policy.
Birds
14.5.10 The results of the breeding bird survey confirm that there would be no loss of bird nesting habitat, as no bird territories were recorded in association with the construction footprint and the habitat in this area (hard-standing and compacted stone, and a small area of grassland associated with the proposed security fencing) is unsuitable.
October 2015 129
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
14.5.11 There is no risk of disturbance of the barn owl roost at Misson Springs Cottage, as this will not be affected by the Proposed Development.
14.5.12 Disturbance of birds in the wider landscape is considered unlikely and can be scoped out, as the Proposed Development is concealed behind mature boundary plantations that screen and buffer the Site from adjacent land.
14.5.13 The magnitude of effect on breeding birds is assessed as negligible and not significant (certain).
Reptiles
14.5.14 There would be no loss of reptile hibernation habitat, as there is no such habitat in the construction footprint. As such, there is no risk to reptiles outside the active season (typically March to the end of October, depending on temperature).
14.5.15 There may be a minor loss of reptile foraging habitat during construction as a result of installation of the security fencing, but this is unlikely to be adverse as the survey results indicate that reptiles are not making substantive use of the grassland areas closest to the Proposed Development. The survey results show that all but one of the reptile records are located outside the footprint of the proposed inner security fence, and most records are on the northern edge of the Site. Mammal gaps would be installed in security fencing, to prevent reptiles and other wildlife from getting trapped inside the fence line.
14.5.16 There would be a low risk of reptiles being injured during fence installation. If this occurred, it would result in offences under the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended). The Proposed Development would be undertaken in accordance with all relevant legal requirements. Given that relevant legislation would be complied with, it is considered unlikely that the injuries would occur. Mitigation measures are detailed later in this assessment to provide transparency on how the Proposed Development would protect reptiles in accordance with legal requirements.
14.5.17 The magnitude of effect on reptiles is assessed as low and not significant (certain).
Operational Effects (Phases 2 and 3)
Designated Sites
14.5.18 There would be no direct impacts on nature conservation designations, as none of the identified designations have direct habitat connectivity to the Proposed Development and there is no pathway by which direct impacts could occur. Possible pathways for indirect impacts might arise from changes in air quality, hydrological regimes and ground water quality.
14.5.19 The hydrogeological assessment (see Technical Appendix F) has considered the hydrogeological connectivity between the Site and Misson Training Area SSSI and concludes that the effect of the Proposed Development on the SSSI will be negligible (i.e.
October 2015 130
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
not significant). The hydrology assessment (see Technical Appendix G) has considered the hydrological connectivity between the Site and ecological receptors surrounding the Site and concludes that the effect of the Proposed Development on ecological receptors will be negligible or minor adverse (i.e. not significant).
14.5.20 The air quality assessment (Technical Appendix C) has considered all of the nature conservation designations addressed in this assessment. Care is required in the interpretation of the air quality assessment. The air quality modelling indicated that emissions occurring during drilling at the Proposed Development would potentially represent more than 1% of the published critical acidification loads for woodland habitats at Misson Training Area SSSI. This meant that acid deposition could not be scoped out immediately as having no significant effect and needed further assessment. This does not mean the effects are significant, just that they need further consideration which is given in this Technical Appendix. With regard to potential impacts on vegetation the most important parameters are
atmospheric NOx, nutrient nitrogen deposition and acid deposition and these are assessed further below.
14.5.21 The only nature conservation designation requiring detailed consideration is Misson Training
Area SSSI. For all other sites modelling confirms that the effect of atmospheric NOx, nutrient nitrogen deposition and acid deposition as a result of the Proposed Development would be negligible and therefore ecological effects would not reasonably be anticipated. This includes consideration of Hatfield Moor SAC and Thorne & Hatfield Moor SPA, for which there would be no potentially significant effects, so there is no requirement for Habitat Regulations Assessment (HRA) of potential air quality effects on these designations.
14.5.22 The effect of annual mean NOx concentrations on Misson Training Area SSSI is assessed as insignificant in accordance with the H1 guidance (see Technical Appendix C). Similarly it is considered unlikely that there would be any effect from emissions of nutrient nitrogen and this has been scoped out. The existing background nutrient nitrogen deposition experienced by Misson Training Area SSSI is 29.4 kgN/ha/year; which exceeds the published critical load for the most sensitive habitats present in the SSSI i.e. 10 to 20 kgN/ha/year. Nutrient nitrogen deposition acts as a fertilizer on vegetation, which enables some of the most tolerant and competitive plant species to predominate at the expense of other flora more characteristic of semi-natural habitats with a high value for biodiversity.
14.5.23 Because they can absorb nutrients directly through their surfaces, lichens are considered to have the greatest sensitivity to air pollution. At least some species of mosses and liverworts are also sensitive, especially to acid deposition. The assessment focuses on these groups because if there were any effects of the Proposed Development, it is these groups that would be most likely to show a response.
14.5.24 The lichen flora shows the existing influence of nitrogen deposition on the site, although the greater abundance of nitrogen-tolerant species around the woodland on all sides indicates that the dominant influence is local agriculture. The site as a whole is exposed to the general regional background deposition of nitrogen and associated acidification, so although this is
October 2015 131
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
still relatively high, it has not prevented the colonisation of some of the more sensitive species in the core of the woodland. By contrast, the nitrogen-tolerant Xanthoria is locally abundant and readily visible due to its bright yellow cover on twigs, trunks and the wooden gates and fence-posts around the margins of the site. The species with potential sensitivity to increases in acid deposition are very sparsely distributed within the central area of wet woodland. The recolonization of Mission Training Area SSSI by lichen species is in accord with a regional and national trend of recovering lichen flora in areas formerly adversely affected by high deposition of sulphur dioxide.
14.5.25 Misson Training Area SSSI shows a degree of zonation in the lichen flora and this zonation is related to nitrogen deposition. The bryophyte flora also shows zonation to some extent related to nitrogen deposition and/or acid deposition. If a significant increase in nitrogen deposition occurred, this would tend to extend the zone affected by agriculture further into the middle of the site. If it occurred it would have the potential to reduce the distribution of the more sensitive species in the site and lead to loss of some species.
14.5.26 Available baseline data indicates that the existing total acid deposition at the SSSI is estimated to be 1.39 keqN/ha/year. The actual rates of deposition in the margins and the centre of the site respectively are not known. The critical load is the level of deposition the relevant habitats can sustain below which there is confidence that there is no significant effect. Above the critical threshold progressive increase in deposition will start to bring about the onset of detectable effects, although whether these can be considered to be significant depends on details of the vegetation and the environmental factors in operation at the site. There are uncertainties as to the critical load for the habitats in the SSSI, because lower and upper ranges are published, such that the threshold is somewhere between 0.29 and 4.47 keqN/ha/year (i.e. the threshold below which there is confidence that effects are negligible). The increase in acid deposition due to the Proposed Development is only relevant if there is sensitive flora present in the areas where an increase in deposition will occur and if the magnitude of change is great enough to produce a response in the vegetation. The air quality assessment predicts acid deposition contributions from the Proposed Development would contribute up to 0.18 keqN/ha/year in the western-most part of the SSSI, reducing to a contribution of less than 0.03 keqN/ha/year over more than half the SSSI (representing 12% to less than 1% of the existing baseline conditions). The small contribution from the emissions from the Proposed Development would not cause the critical load to be exceeded, because the lower range is already exceeded and the total deposition would also still be within the upper range for critical load. This means that any change in air quality would either be below the threshold for any effect on vegetation, or only just beyond the onset of effect. This gradation of change from west to east means that the increase in deposition would be lower in the central part of the site compared to the western and northern edges
14.5.27 On alluvial soils in the western part of the site, ground flora is characterised by an abundance of nettle cleavers, great willowherb (Epilobium hirsutum) and bramble all of which are highly tolerant of the existing nitrogen deposition and the mosses present are all common and tolerant species. The area does not have the less tolerant lichen species that
October 2015 132
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
are sparsely scattered in the central core of humid, wet woodland. The westward extension of the site also has an indented boundary, which increases the edge to area ratio and the zone of agricultural influence. Hence the part of the SSSI closest to the Proposed Development that would receive the greatest contribution of nitrogen from its emissions is also an area where the flora is most tolerant of nutrient nitrogen deposition. The effects would be minimal in the area with the most sensitive vegetation.
14.5.28 The air quality assessment should (because of the technical requirements of the modelling process) be considered worst case and actual impacts arising from the Proposed Development would reasonably be expected to be lower than this because:
• the actual period of operation would be only 9 months, rather than a full year;
• the assessment has assumed continuity of mass, and no plume depletion effects have been assumed to occur between the source and receptor. Specifically, the modelling takes no account of possible barriers to plume dispersion. It should be noted that the Proposed Development is screened by plantation woodland and does not occur in an open landscape so there is potential for deposition of nitrogen oxides due to interception by the canopy in this woodland before it reaches the SSSI;
• the predicted annual mean is the maximum reported from the modelling of five years of hourly sequential meteorological data, and the operation of the drilling rig and generators would need to coincide with such periods of the most adverse meteorological conditions for such impacts to occur; and
• the proximity of agricultural land appears to have a significant influence on the lichen flora of the site, but this is not incorporated in the air quality model, except through the general contribution of agricultural sources to air quality with the 10 x 10km square. Yet the existing zonation in the lichen flora appears to indicate that these land use factors have more influence than the background air quality and these are immediately adjacent to Misson Training Area SSSI, unlike the Proposed Development. Nitrogen emissions from agricultural land will vary seasonally and according to cropping pattern.
14.5.29 The above modelling limitations together suggest that the worst case assessment is unduly precautionary and such a combination of parameters is unrealistic and would not reasonably be expected i.e. the Site is not a flat landscape with no barriers to plume dispersal, emissions would not occur continuously, meteorological conditions would not be worst case throughout the operational period and local land management is likely to be a significant additional factor. That said, the precautionary principle requires that the available data be used for impact assessment as it is the only data that is currently available. It is also acknowledged that it is not practicable to refine the model further to feed in additional site- specific parameters.
October 2015 133
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
14.5.30 The impact of the Proposed Development on air quality is assessed as being unlikely to have any effect on the conservation status of the site.
Habitats
14.5.31 All habitat loss for the Proposed Development will occur during Phase 1. There would be additional direct impacts as a result of the subsequent phases of the Proposed Development.
14.5.32 Possible pathways for indirect impacts on habitats might arise from changes in air quality, hydrological regimes and ground water quality. Relevant sensitive habitats are identified in these assessments; no adverse significant effects on sensitive habitats are predicted. The Proposed Development therefore complies with relevant planning policy.
14.5.33 The magnitude of the predicted temporary and permanent effects on grassland habitat of local ecology and nature conservation value is assessed as negligible and not significant (certain).
Species
14.5.34 The potential effects of Phase 2 on species relate solely to the potential for disturbance. Disturbance might result from noise, physical site disturbance, vibration and light intrusion. The relevant species requiring assessment are breeding birds and reptiles. The following more detailed assessment confirms that the Proposed Development complies with relevant planning policy. The lighting assessment has confirmed that there are no pathways for potential impacts on bats (further confirming that specific surveys are unnecessary) as there would be no significant light spill or glare onto habitats of potential value to bats.
Birds
14.5.35 Disturbance of birds in the wider landscape beyond the Site boundary is considered unlikely and can be scoped out, as the Proposed Development is concealed behind mature boundary plantations that screen and buffer the site from adjacent land. Mitigation to prevent adverse noise impacts on nearby residential properties will also benefit birds and other fauna of the wider landscape.
14.5.36 For the reason given above, there is no risk of disturbance of the barn owl roost at Misson Springs Cottage, as this will not be affected by the Proposed Development and it is located over 200 m from the wellsite and screened from it by warehouses and established mature plantations. Similarly, the likely breeding site is more than 200m away and similarly screened. In addition, barn owls are known to be tolerant to disturbance and this is not a specific concern particularly at the distances relevant to the Proposed Development.
14.5.37 All of the other bird territories recorded are associated with the boundary plantations and other areas of woody vegetation, all of which are offset from the Proposed Development and beyond the distance at which significant disturbance effects would reasonably be expected. Regardless, these birds occur in small numbers, none of the bird species recorded are of
October 2015 134
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
sufficient nature conservation concern for disturbance to be a relevant consideration, and none are species that are considered specifically sensitive to disturbance. The magnitude of effect on breeding birds is assessed as negligible and not significant (certain).
Reptiles
14.5.38 It is considered unlikely that reptiles (grass snake and common lizard) would be deterred from using retained habitats as a result of disturbance from the operation of the Proposed Development. The survey results show that all but one of the reptile records are located outside the footprint of the proposed security fence, and most records are on the northern edge of the Application Site approximately 30m north of the proposed security fence. The design of the surface water drainage for the Proposed Development is such that there would be no risk of reptiles becoming trapped in the drainage system.
14.5.39 The magnitude of effect on reptiles is assessed as negligible and not significant (certain).
Decommissioning Effects
The impacts of Phase 4 would be temporary in nature and no greater than those during construction. There would be no permanent effects other than those resulting from the removal of infrastructure and the reinstatement of the Site to its current condition. The overall magnitude of effect on all ecological receptors is assessed as negligible and the potential effect is assessed as not significant.
14.6 Mitigation Proposals
Approach
14.6.1 During the development of the design that now forms the Proposed Development, there were inputs from specialists in the construction, engineering design and the environmental topics addressed in the ES. Design options were reviewed and where there was potential for environmental impacts mitigation measures were considered and, where feasible, included in the design of the Proposed Development. Where avoidance through design has not been possible, methods to minimise / reduce / ameliorate the scale of impact have been considered.
Species and Habitat Mitigation
Construction
14.6.2 Throughout Phase 1, best working practices would be adopted and measures to protect the environment would be provided in a Construction Method Statement. These good working practices, along with careful planning, would significantly reduce the potential for adverse effects on ecology and nature conservation.
14.6.3 An ecologist would undertake a Site walkover in advance of the start of Phase 1 to confirm that there had been no change in the baseline conditions that would necessitate additional mitigation. This would include a check for badger setts, as there would be a risk that badgers
October 2015 135
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
may colonise the Site over the intervening period. If a badger sett was found within the zone of influence of the Proposed Development then appropriate mitigation will be advised by the ecologist and implemented to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Protection of Badgers Act 1992.
14.6.4 Mitigation for reptiles (grass snake and common lizard) would be required during installation of the security fencing only, although the reptile survey results indicate that the risk is low as reptile usage of the habitats that would be affected is low. Mitigation would be a displacement approach, which is suitable for situations where only minimal land take is required and there is sufficient adjacent habitat remaining to absorb any reptiles displaced from working areas.
14.6.5 Where possible, the fencing would be installed during the winter when reptiles are hibernating as there is no hibernation habitat in the construction footprint. If this is not possible the following mitigation would be applied:
• a working corridor would be incrementally strimmed under the supervision and instruction of an appropriately qualified ecologist. All arisings would be removed from the working corridor, these would be retained and heaped in an appropriate area within the Site boundary to provide egg laying habitat for grass snake;
• fencing works would progress once the habitat is sub-optimal for reptiles and works would be restricted to the cleared working corridor;
• construction and other materials that might be attractive to reptiles as a place of refuge would be appropriately stored to minimise the risk of occupation. This should be on an existing area of hard-standing and may require the use of temporary exclusion fencing to further manage risks; and
• a record would be kept of the displacement works undertaken, including details of any reptiles observed.
Operation
14.6.6 Based on the results of the assessment of likely significant effects there is no requirement for mitigation during Phases 2 and 3 of the Proposed Development.
Decommissioning
14.6.7 Phase 4 would be planned with care so as to minimise the potential for ecological effects. The applicant would provide NCC with a Decommissioning Method Statement prior to the commencement of decommissioning works. Ecological walkover surveys and watching briefs would be undertaken as appropriate based on the specification given in the Decommissioning Method Statement.
October 2015 136
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Enhancement and Monitoring Proposals
14.6.8 The Proposed Development is limited in scale and duration and land would be returned to its current use following restoration. In this context, the provision of long-term ecological enhancement is not considered necessary or proportionate and following decommissioning there would be no mechanism to secure the ongoing favourable management of any enhancement measures implemented. Accordingly, no ecological enhancement is proposed.
14.6.9 There is no requirement for ecological monitoring, as the Proposed Development would be unlikely to impact sensitive ecological receptors and no significant adverse effects are predicted.
14.7 Residual Effects
14.7.1 No likely significant direct or indirect adverse residual effects on ecological receptors are predicted as a result of the construction, operation and decommissioning of the Proposed Development.
14.8 Cumulative Effects
14.8.1 None of the identified ecology and nature conservation receptors require cumulative assessment. This includes consideration of potential cumulative air quality impacts on Misson Training Area SSSI, as no pathways are identified by which cumulative effects could occur.
14.9 Statement of Significance and Summary
14.9.1 No likely significant direct or indirect adverse effects on ecological receptors are predicted as a result of the construction, operation and decommissioning of the Proposed Development.
October 2015 137
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
October 2015 138
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
15 Cultural Heritage
15.1 Introduction
15.1.1 This Chapter provides a summary of the findings of the cultural heritage assessment included at Technical Appendix J (in Volume 4) which considers heritage issues associated with the Proposed Development.
15.2 Policy Context
15.2.1 A review of the relevant policy and legislation is included in Technical Appendix J.
15.3 Assessment Methodology
Study Area
15.3.1 For the designated assets (listed buildings, scheduled monuments, world heritage sites, conservation areas, registered parks and gardens, registered battlefields), a search area of 5 km was used . For non-designated assets (archaeological sites, findspots, locally listed buildings), an initial search area of 1 km was used to obtain data from the Nottinghamshire Historic Environment Record (HER) and the Historic England Archive (HEA) sources.
15.3.2 The designated heritage assets within this assessment are identified with their National Heritage List number. The non-designated heritage assets are identified with their Nottinghamshire HER number. All heritage assets are referenced in bold and tabulated in Annex J1.
Consultation
15.3.3 AECOM has consulted with both Historic England and Nottinghamshire County Council’s archaeologist in preparing this assessment.
Assessment Criteria
15.3.4 The significance (heritage value) of a heritage asset is derived from its heritage interest which may be archaeological, architectural, artistic or historic (NPPF Annex 2, Glossary). The significance of a place is defined by the sum of its heritage values. Historic England identify these as being evidential, historical, aesthetic and communal (Conservation principles, English Heritage 2008, 27-32). The setting of an asset can also contribute to significance.
15.3.5 Taking these criteria into account, each identified heritage asset can be assigned a level of significance (heritage value) in accordance with a four-point scale
15.3.6 Having identified the significance of the heritage asset, the next stage in the assessment is to identify the level and degree of impact to an asset arising from the development. Impacts
October 2015 139
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
may arise during construction or operation and can be temporary or permanent. Impacts can occur to the physical fabric of the asset or affect its setting.
15.3.7 In respect of cultural heritage an assessment of the level and degree of impact is made in consideration of any scheme design mitigation (embedded mitigation) or additional mitigation proposed during design development, for example landscaping, which themselves can be a source of impact.
15.3.8 An assessment of the level of significant residual effects, having taken into consideration mitigation, is determined by cross-referencing between the significance (heritage value) of the asset and the impact rating. The resultant level of significant effect of the scheme on each heritage asset can be negligible, adverse or beneficial.
15.3.9 Within the NPPF, impacts affecting the significance of heritage assets are considered in terms of harm and there is a requirement to determine whether the level of harm amounts to ‘substantial harm’ or ‘less than substantial harm’ [Paragraph 132 -135 NPPF, 2012]. The on- line Planning Practice Guidance assists in determining whether works constitute substantial harm, and the guidance is that for harm to be substantial the impact needs to go ‘to the heart of why the place is worthy of designation’.
15.3.10 The ES reports on the significance of effect and there is no direct correlation between the significance of effect and the level of harm caused to heritage significance. A major significant effect on a heritage asset would, however, more often be the basis by which to determine that the level of harm to the significance of the asset would be substantial. A moderate significant effect is unlikely to meet the test of substantial harm and would therefore more often be the basis by which to determine that the level of harm to the significance of the asset would be less than substantial. In all cases determining the level of harm to the significance of the asset arising from development impact is one of professional judgement.
15.4 Baseline Conditions
The Site
15.4.1 The Site lies within former RAF Misson (M18176/1309681, M18175), which consisted of a bombing range, training area and Surface Air Guided Weapon Site (SAGW). RAF Misson was originally established as a bombing range during WWII but soon after that this use ceased and part of the site was used as a SAGW or for military training.
15.4.2 The overall RAF Misson was kept in control of the MOD until 1969. Then 242.8 ha of land peripheral to the former bombing range was sold off – which included the SAGW land, which was sold to the business which has operated it since as a surplus military vehicle and equipment sale site. The remainder of the land was returned to agricultural use.
15.4.3 The former RAF Misson as a whole, including the Site, is considered to be of medium significance as a non-designated asset of evident historic interest as an in the understanding of an important period of Britain’s military past.
October 2015 140
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
The Study Area
Scheduled Monuments
15.4.4 One scheduled monument has been identified within the 5 km search area. This is the asset of a medieval moat and fishpond located immediately south-east of Misson village. As a scheduled monument, the asset is of high value.
Listed Buildings
15.4.5 There are 25 listed buildings located within the search area. These consist of two Grade I, one Grade II* and 22 Grade II assets. A significant proportion of the listed buildings are located within settlements and are grouped accordingly for the purposes of this report.
15.4.6 Newlands Farm - Grade II is situated on Springs Road approximately 0.5 km to the north of the Site and is of medium significance.
15.4.7 Finningley lies 2.8 km to the north west of the Site. The historic core is designated as a conservation area, centred on the village green and church and contains four listed properties including the Grade I Church of Holy Trinity and St Oswald of high significance.
15.4.8 The village of Misson lies 2.9 km to the south west of the Site. The historic interest of the village is reflected in its 15 listed buildings, alongside the Scheduled Medieval Moated site. The village is characterised by detached dwellings dating from the 17th to 19th centuries, with limited modern infill. The listed buildings comprise cottages and former farmhouses which add interest to the streetscape. The use of brick creates a uniformity of materials with buildings fronting the street to create a unified architectural composition. Many of these are focussed around the Grade I listed Church of St John the Baptist. As a Grade I listed building, the church is of high value.
15.4.9 The village of Haxey lies 6 km to the north east of the Site. While outside the study area, the raised position of the village makes it visible from a large area, therefore, any significant views towards and encompassing the Proposed Development have been considered. The village developed as an agricultural settlement with the built form characterised by late 18th and 19th century buildings. The historic core is situated to the west; following a linear arrangement along Church Street and terminating at the Grade I listed Church of St Nicholas. As a Grade I listed building, the church is of high significance.
15.4.10 Westwoodside, located 3.8 km to the north east of the Site, is predominantly a mid- to late 20th century extension of Haxey, consuming the earlier farmsteads which historically defined the character of this area. Two such farmstead are Park Farmhouse and Hilltop Farmhouse, both Grade II listed.
15.4.11 Austerfield is a small settlement around 5.2 km to the south west of the Site. The settlement follows a linear arrangement with detached buildings fronting the main road. The buildings are a mixture of 19th and 20th century dwellings with the Grade II* listed Church of St Helena situated towards the centre. The church retains fabric from the 12th century, restored and extended in the late 19th century. The prominence of the building is diminished by its
October 2015 141
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
position set back from the road, and its architectural form with a bellcote rather than landmark tower. As a Grade II* listed building, the church is of high significance.
Non-designated Assets
15.4.12 A small number of non-designated assets were identified within the study area from the Nottinghamshire HER and the Historic England Archive.
15.4.13 There is negligible archaeological potential within the Proposed Development Site. This is due to the history of the area as being extremely marshy and poorly drained until the 17th century and therefore unsuitable for any construction or habitation. Even after the area was drained, there is no indication of any development in the site, being used most likely as agricultural land and later a bombing range. The choice of this area for a bombing range reinforces this as the location chosen for such a military site would necessarily be isolated and largely free of buildings, or at least with few enough buildings to allow them to be requisitioned by the military.
15.4.14 A number of non-designated historic structures were identified during the site visit dating to the early modern period. Many have undergone significant modernisation which had removed any architectural or historic value, or removed any understanding of their historic relationship with the surrounding landscape. Their interest, therefore, now lies in their evidential value as evidence for the 19th century agricultural development of the area. Included within this group are Levels Farm, April Cottage and Red House, Springs Road. These are considered to be of low significance.
15.4.15 Misson Springs Cottage lies to the south of the Site access. Aligned east-west, the cottage is a simple two storey, three bay structure with outshot to the east. The building dates to the 19th century, but has been rendered and modernised with new roof and replacement uPVC fittings. The building is no longer in use and in a poor state of repair. The construction of the missile site also removed much of its historic agricultural setting. Due to the extent of modern alteration and loss of historic fabric, the cottage is considered to be of low significance.
15.4.16 Middle Wood Farm located approximately 0.7 km to the south of the Site is identified on the Nottingham Historic Environment Record as a structure of historic interest. The building previously formed part of a 19th century farmstead; however, the structure, including the associated outbuildings, has recently undergone extensive modernisation removing much of its historic interest. As a result, the building is considered to be of low significance.
th 15.4.17 Until the early 20 century, the field pattern of small, rectangular fields divided with drains that can still be seen to the south of the study area was still legible and this 17th and 18th century landscape was visible. However the use of the proposed development site and the area to the east as a World War II bombing range, subsequent development of the site, reversion part of the range to woodland (now Misson Training Area SSSI) and agricultural improvements in the surrounding area has modified this field boundary pattern, reducing its legibility. Similarly, the land to the west of Springs Road within the study area was subject to
October 2015 142
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
sand and gravel extraction in the latter half of the 20th century, therefore also removing the distinctive field boundaries. Therefore the landscape is of negligible heritage significance and will not be impacted by the Proposed Development.
15.5 Assessment of Impact
Construction (Phase 1)
15.5.1 The wellsite will be constructed over the missile hardstandings. While the hardstandings will remain in situ, there is the potential for accidental damage during phases 1 and 4. The impact on the asset as a whole is minimal.
15.5.2 Located at the northern entrance to the military surplus site is an air-raid shelter. This represents the only extant building from the World War II bombing range. The air-raid shelter is situated to the north of the former entrance to the bombing range which is to be used as the access for the proposed development. This is set back 5 – 10 m from the access road and is protected by a substantial metal security fence. The potential for this to be accidentally damaged by construction traffic is therefore minimal. The potential impact on the significance of RAF Misson as a whole, an asset of medium value, is considered to be minimal.
15.5.3 There will be no impact during construction on any of the identified non-designated heritage assets. All the archaeological assets are located outside of the Proposed Development footprint.
15.5.4 There is no potential for the construction of the Proposed Development to impact upon the setting of the scheduled moated site and fishpond east of Misson village an asset of high value. The Proposed Development is located within the general agricultural landscape which forms part of the setting, however this was altered considerably, first during the17th century when the large land drains were inserted, subdividing the fields into their regular, uniform appearance, and again during the 20th century. Therefore the setting does not contribute greatly to the significance or understanding of the asset.
Operation and Evaluation (Phases 2 and 3)
15.5.5 Both physical impacts and impacts on the setting of the heritage assets during phases 2 and 3 have been considered. Any impacts identified during drilling will be limited to 9 months duration; therefore, they are considered to be temporary.
15.5.6 The potential for vibration damage to the missile pads is considered to be negligible. The drills are rotary bored only and therefore impacts relatively small amounts of energy into the ground.
15.5.7 There will be no impact during operation on any potential archaeology which could remain beneath the missile bases. The drill rig may have the potential to damage cable runs connecting the missile hardstandings. However, this damage will be limited to the area of the drill itself. The impact of this on the asset as a whole is minimal.
October 2015 143
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
15.5.8 There will be no impact upon the scheduled moated site and fishpond east of Misson village. The drill rig will be visible from this asset, however it has been demonstrated that it is views towards the asset which contribute to the significance, not views from it. In addition, there are no views where the asset and the borehole rig would appear in the same view, or block or impede a view which contributes to the significance of the asset. The Proposed Development is located within the general agricultural landscape which forms part of the setting, however this was altered considerably, first during the 17th century when the large land drains were inserted, subdividing the fields into their regular, uniform appearance, and again during the 20th century when it was used as a bombing range. Therefore the setting does not contribute greatly to the significance or understanding of the asset.
15.5.9 There will be no impact upon the remainder of non-designated archaeological assets because they are no longer extant, and therefore cannot experience an impact.
15.5.10 There will be an impact on the evidential value of RAF Misson during the operation of the Site. The introduction of the drill rig and compounds will obscure part of the former missile pads, thus affecting the ability to understand the relationship between the two firing units. The remaining impacts are considered to affect the setting of the identified heritage assets. Alongside a consideration of the limited visibility of the drill rig, the assessment of impacts to setting also takes into account the effect of RAF Misson on the historic landscape. The missile site was superimposed on an existing rural landscape. While, in itself a symbol of the evolving landscape, the introduction of an industrial element interrupted the historic setting of many of the surrounding buildings and settlements. As such, while it may be visible from a number of assets, the impact of the drilling rig on the significance of the setting of those assets is limited.
15.5.11 Misson Springs Cottage lies to the south of the Site access. While the drill rig will be seen within the context of existing structures associated with the military surplus site the impact on the significance of the asset is minimal as much of its historic context has already been removed.
15.5.12 The significance of Levels Farm, April Cottage and Red House lies in the evidential value of their fabric. This will not be impacted by the Proposed Development.
15.5.13 Due to the proximity of the Grade II listed Newlands Farm; the drill rig will introduce a new feature within the skyline, visible from the house, while the proposed lighting will increase the visibility of the site. This is considered to be an addition to existing impacts on the rural setting of the buildings as a former farmstead. A number of phot viewpoints have been produced as part of the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (see Technical Appendix D). It is considered that although the rig will be a visible element within this landscape, it will not change the cultural significance of the building. The level of this impact is considered to be minimal resulting in a minor adverse effect.
15.5.14 The Zone of Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) produced as part of the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (see Figure D1 at Technical Appendix D) that the drill rig will be visible from a wide area. However, the visibility of the rig will not affect the ability to understand and
October 2015 144
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
appreciate the historic significance of the remaining assets identified; therefore, there will be no impact during Phase 2.
15.6 Mitigation Proposals
15.6.1 A minimal impact has been identified on the former missile pads due to the potential for damage during construction by the drill rig. The drill rig will be positioned to avoid any of the extant cable runs which connect the missile pads. This will remove the impact.
15.6.2 A minimal impact on RAF Misson has been identified as a result of the potential for damage to the bomb shelter due to HGVs accessing the Site – but the location of this structure means that any potential for damage is negligible.
15.6.3 A minimal impact has been identified on the missile hardstandings due to the potential for damage during construction by the drilling rig. The drilling rig will be positioned to avoid any of the extant cable runs which connect the missile hardstandings. This will remove the impact.
15.6.4 As the hardstandings will be retained in situ, no archaeological recording is recommended.
15.7 Residual Effects
15.7.1 After mitigation, there remains a minor adverse effect on RAF Misson during operation which is not significant.
15.7.2 No mitigation is proposed for Misson Springs Cottage due to the temporary nature of the impact; therefore, there remains a negligible effect which is not significant.
15.7.3 No mitigation is proposed for the Grade II listed Newlands Farm (NHLE 1045073); therefore, there remains a minor adverse effect which is not significant.
15.8 Statement of Significance and Summary
15.8.1 No likely significant direct or indirect adverse effects on cultural heritage receptors are predicted as a result of the construction, operation and decommissioning of the Proposed Development.
October 2015 145
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
October 2015 146
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
16 Other Issues
16.1 Public Health
16.1.1 Impacts on public health associated with all phases of the proposed development have been assessed in the following assessments and found to be acceptable:
• highway safety – Technical Appendix A;
• noise and vibration – Technical Appendix B;
• air quality (including dust) – Technical Appendix C;
• potable groundwater quality – Technical Appendix F;
• surface water quality and flood risk – Technical Appendix G; and
• land contamination – Technical Appendix H.
16.1.2 The salient points of each of the assessments are discussed below.
Highway Safety
16.1.3 A Transport Assessment has been undertaken and is summarised in Chapter 6 and included in full at Technical Appendix A.
16.1.4 The public health concerns with regards to highway safety are related to the potential of the Proposed Development (whether be it during construction or operation) to bring about a change in road safety risks. An overall change in road safety risk and therefore to human health is related to traffic volume.
16.1.5 The Proposed Development would generate both HGV and staff trips. The most intense period of activity would be during the ‘construction’ and ‘restoration’ phases (phases 1 and 4); however, even during these periods the numbers of vehicles would not be at a level to create material highway capacity issues or road safety risks. The increase in HGV numbers through Blaxton may create environmental impacts associated with traffic, and this has been considered elsewhere in the ES (see Technical Appendix B: Noise). The Site would be subject to a Traffic Management Plan, which would be agreed with the local highway authority and which would include details of how IGas intend to manage vehicles and drivers – particularly in relation to speed of vehicles.
16.1.6 In conclusion, the changes in traffic volume as a result of the Proposed Development would not be sufficient to materially alter such road safety risk. However, improvements to the B1396 / Springs Road junction could be undertaken to further decrease any potential for risks to human health as outlined in Chapter 6.
October 2015 147
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Noise and vibration
16.1.7 The noise assessment in Technical Appendix B assesses the baseline ambient noise levels and residual noise levels with mitigation in place. Once mitigation measures are in place, it is expected that noise levels will be below the WHO guideline limit for onset of sleep
disturbance as well as the PPG 42 dB LAeq (free-field) noise limit for night. Daytime noise
levels during drilling will also be well below the PPG absolute noise limit of 55 dB LAeq. This, together with the temporary nature of the development means that there will be no impacts on public health associated with noise. Adverse impacts from vibration of drilling are considered to be negligible.
Air Quality (including Dust)
16.1.8 An Air Quality assessment has been undertaken and is summarised in Chapter 8 and included in full at Technical Appendix C.
16.1.9 There is the potential for construction activities to generate fugitive emissions of particulate
matter (dust and PM10). These emissions can give rise to significant adverse effects on amenity or health at receptors located within 350 m of the source of emissions (IAQM, 2014) unless appropriate mitigation measures are adopted. As there are receptors located within 350 m of the Site boundary, an assessment of the significance of effects from fugitive
emissions of dust and PM10 from the Site has been undertaken. The assessment includes consideration of the risk of adverse effects associated with the potential track-out of material at receptors located within 50 m of roads extending up to 500 m from the Site access. Besides fugitive emissions, air quality can be affected by road traffic emissions, combustion plant emissions and odour.
16.1.10 Twenty two sensitive human receptors (selected to be representative of residential dwellings in the area) were assessed. All relevant receptors that have been selected to represent locations where people are likely to be present are based on impacts on human health. The air quality objective values have been set at concentrations that provide protection to all members of society, including more vulnerable groups such as the very young, elderly or unwell. As such the sensitivity of receptors was considered in the definition of the air quality objective values and therefore no additional subdivision of human health receptors on the basis of building or location type is necessary.
16.1.11 The assessment identified that there will be occasions when potentially dust generating activity is undertaken within close proximity to sensitive receptors. However, dust control measures, as described in Annex C2 (to Technical Appendix C) would be sufficient to minimise emissions so that any impact beyond the Site boundary would not be a significant impact. The additional traffic generated by the Proposed Development would not raise the concentration of these pollutants at any receptor location during any phase of the works. Therefore, the effect of construction and operational phase road traffic emissions would be not significant. In addition to this the nature of these emissions is that they will occur for less than a year and therefore predicted changes to annual mean concentrations of oxides of
October 2015 148
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
nitrogen, nitrogen dioxide, particulate matter and VOCs would be very small or imperceptible in magnitude.
16.1.12 It is therefore considered that the Proposed Development will not have any significant effect on human health as a result of effects on air quality.
Potable Groundwater Quality
16.1.13 A Hydrogeology assessment was undertaken and is summarised in Chapter 11 and included in full at Technical Appendix F.
16.1.14 Potable groundwater is water which is safe enough to drink and as such the quality of groundwater is important for human health. Any impact on potable groundwater as a result of the Proposed Development must be considered.
16.1.15 The Environment Agency classifies the Sherwood Sandstone Group, which underlies the Proposed Development, as a Principal aquifer, defined as “layers of rock or drift deposits that have high intergranular and/or fracture permeability - meaning they usually provide a high level of water storage. They may support water supply and / or river base flow on a strategic scale”. It has also defined this aquifer as a water body under the Water Framework Directive; GB40401G301500 (Idle Torne – PT Sandstone Nottinghamshire & Doncaster). The Proposed Development is not mapped as being within a SPZ but abstractions for public water supply (i.e. potable water), are located to the west and down gradient of the Proposed Development.
16.1.16 The Proposed Development could potentially pose a risk to potable water via:
• the possible pollution of groundwater from spillages and the handling/management of drilling fluids and cutting and
• the adequacy of the well design and integrity to control the possible escape of drilling fluids, gas and formation fluids into the groundwater.
16.1.17 However, the assessment of effects has identified that when taking into account the environmental design and management of the Proposed Development (embedded mitigation), there will be no significant effects on groundwater and groundwater dependent receptors and therefore there will be no significant effects on human health.
Surface Water Quality and Flood Risk
16.1.18 A Hydrology and flood risk assessment has been undertaken and is summarised in Chapter 12 and included in full at Technical Appendix G (and Annex G1 to Technical Appendix G).
16.1.19 Surface Water Quality in terms of human health is important with regards to its usage for recreational/other uses. An assessment has been made to examine the potential risk that the Proposed Development might have on surface water flows or quality.
16.1.20 During both construction and operation, there is an elevated risk of leakage or accidental spillage of building materials and potential pollutants used on site, migrating to nearby
October 2015 149
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
surface watercourses. As described in Technical Appendix H, there is not a significant risk of impact from contaminated material on surface water and groundwater receptors currently or under the Proposed Development. The movement and storage of construction and waste materials to and from the Site, and from other construction activities has the potential to give rise to suspended solids that could become entrained in surface water runoff from the Site following rainfall. This creates a potential risk of increased sediment loads being discharged into the nearby surface water.
16.1.21 The standard embedded mitigation measures proposed would reduce the risk of many impacts occurring during the construction, operational, decommissioning and restoration phases. These include implementation of Environment Agency PPGs, construction staff awareness and training, implementation of pollution plans and the appropriate discharge/disposal of Site runoff.
16.1.22 Flooding can be detrimental to human health in terms of both physical safety and the risk of property damage but also from the risk of polluted floodwaters. A flood risk assessment was undertaken for the site (Annex G1 to Technical Appendix G). Within the assessment, it is highlighted that the Environment Agency flood extent maps show the Proposed Development to be located in Flood Zone 3a and would therefore be deemed at high risk of flooding from fluvial sources, however it is noted that these flood maps do not take into account the presence of flood defences along this stretch of the River Idle. Modelled flood extents based on the outputs of the River Idle Flood Risk Mapping Study and taking into account the presence of the flood defences were provided by the Environment Agency. This data shows that the Site is afforded protection from flooding from the River Idle up to and including the 0.5% AEP flood event. It is considered that the Proposed Development is at medium risk of fluvial flooding from the River Idle.
16.1.23 In addition the Proposed Development is not considered to be at risk of flooding from tidal sources and the risk of flooding from other sources, including groundwater, artificial sources and sewers is assessed to be low. It is considered the Site is at medium risk of pluvial flooding. A residual risk of flooding is associated with blockage of the perimeter drainage ditch and/ or exceedance of the ditch capacity. In order to reduce the risks of blockage regular and proactive maintenance will be undertaken.
16.1.24 It is therefore considered that the Proposed Development will not have any significant effect on human health as a result of effects on hydrology or as a result of flood risk to the Site.
Land Contamination
16.1.25 A Contaminated Land assessment was undertaken and is summarised in Chapter 13 and included in full at Technical Appendix H.
16.1.26 Contaminated soils, provided that a viable pathway is present (i.e. dermal contact or inhalation), can pose a risk to human health. As part of the Ground Investigation for the Site, 15 soil samples were submitted for analytical testing for a range of parameters. With the exception of ashy Made Ground encountered at TP-E2, no visual or olfactory evidence of
October 2015 150
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
contamination was recorded during the trial pit investigation. No elevated VOC readings were identified on the Photo Ionization Detection (PID) (a maximum of 0.5 ppm was recorded in the potential former topsoil in TP-E5).
16.1.27 The soil testing concluded that phosphorus concentrations exceeded the Stage 2 GAC for Human Health, assuming a commercial / industrial land use, in all samples analysed. However, the reported concentrations are considered to be naturally-occurring and are therefore not considered to present a risk to future Site users.
16.1.28 Asbestos was identified in the Made Ground at TP-E5 as bundles of chrysotile (white asbestos) fibres. The concentration of asbestos in soil at this location is unknown. No asbestos was identified in samples from TP-E6 and TP-E7 where similar Made Ground was encountered, suggesting that the distribution of asbestos is unlikely to be widespread.
16.1.29 Based on the findings of the soil testing, the risk to human health (including construction workers) from on-site sources of contamination is considered to be ‘moderate / low’. The presence of asbestos is considered unlikely to impact significantly upon the Proposed Development as only limited subsurface works are proposed. However, there should be further investigation for the presence of asbestos in areas where excavation works are proposed (i.e. the well cellar and holding tank). Excavation works should be undertaken in accordance with current Health and Safety guidance and legislation. There is no significant potential for off-site workers to be impacted (e.g. by generation of dust and migration downwind of the Site) provided standard dust control measures are employed during excavation works (see Technical Appendix C).
16.1.30 It is therefore considered that the Proposed Development will not have any significant effect on human health as a result of contaminated land at the Site.
16.2 Socio-economic Impacts
16.2.1 The following socio – economic issues have been assessed elsewhere in this Environmental Statement:
• residential amenity and disruption has been assessed in the noise & vibration, air quality and traffic chapters of the ES as they deal, in part, with residential amenity and disruption issues.
• effects on housing have been assessed in the noise & vibration, air quality and traffic chapters of the ES as they deal, in part, with indirect effects on housing; and
• effects on lifestyle, amenity & recreation - the landscape and visual impact assessment would consider any visual effects from rights of way in the vicinity.
16.3 Risks of Accidents and Hazardous Development
16.3.1 The Town and Country Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011 states that the characteristics of development must be considered in EIAs having regard to,
October 2015 151
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
inter alia, the risk of accidents, having regard in particular to substances or technologies used.
16.3.2 Guidance published by ODPM in February 2001 “EIA Guide to Procedures” also states that environmental statements should include an indication of the preventative measures that will be adopted so that such an occurrence is not likely to have a significant effect – where the Scheme involves materials that could be harmful to the environment (including people) in the event of an accident.
Environmental Permitting
16.3.3 The operators of petroleum exploration sites are required to apply for an Environmental Permit in accordance with the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations (2010) (as amended). Applications for Environmental Permits by the Applicant include a copy of their Integrated Management System which, inter alia, sets out the process for the management and mitigation of risks during operations (see Annex F1 of Technical Appendix F).
Emergency Management and Response
16.3.4 Even with the implementation of an effective management system there is the potential for incidents to occur. Emergency planning and response procedures have therefore been developed by the applicant, in accordance with EMS Emergency Preparedness and Response Procedure, to identify risk scenarios, assess environmental consequences and implement appropriate controls. Emergency procedures and contingency plans are regularly updated and exercises carried out in order to maximise their effectiveness and to comply with appropriate legislation. Separate emergency plans are prepared for major operations that involve a significant change to normal site operations.
16.3.5 Emergency response information is provided to all employees and contractors during induction. Specific training is given relating to the employee’s/contractor’s place of work or when new emergency response plans are issued or amended.
16.3.6 Site specific emergency response procedures designed, as necessary to ensure environmental integrity, will be put into place for the Proposed Development following consultation with the emergency services and a site specific Emergency Response Plan (ERP) will be adopted based on the overarching Emergency Preparedness and Response Procedure and advice received from the local emergency services. The adoption of normal emergency procedures applicable to oilfield operations will ensure compliance with the U.K. onshore environmental safety control regime.
16.3.7 The purpose of the ERP will be to set out a working methodology to safely and effectively manage the operations necessary to regain control of a situation under local conditions and will contain details regarding:
October 2015 152
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
• emergency warning and evacuation outside of a pre-defined exclusion zone (this may include businesses and homes in the vicinity depending on the nature of the emergency and the advice provided by the emergency services);
• contact with emergency services e.g. fire services;
• management of traffic / access to ensure access is retained and is not impeded for emergency services;
• continued liaison with emergency services throughout the incident – established point of contact;
• provision of first aid and medical assistance; and
• management of environmental risk e.g. control of fire water.
Fire Water Management
16.3.8 As detailed in section 4.6.3, the wellsite and sealed drainage system have been designed to accommodate surface water run-off in the event of a 1 in 100 year storm event as well as 110% volume of the largest storage tank on the wellsite through the provision of a perimeter containment bund, perimeter french drain and underground storage tank. The drainage tank will be emptied on a regular basis or as required by inspection. It is acknowledged however that in the event of an emergency such as an on-site fire it would be difficult to predict the volume of attenuation that would be required to accommodate fire water run-off to ensure that it would not come into contact with off-site receptors.
16.3.9 It is considered that the sealed nature of the wellsite and the surface water attenuation tank provide enough surface water attenuation to allow sufficient time for a secondary containment measure (i.e. pumping of fire water to portable flexi-tank or use of one of the water and mud tanks on-site during phase 2) to be implemented should it be required as advised by the fire service.
16.3.10 Preliminary consultation with Nottinghamshire Fire and Rescue Service has been undertaken and their advice on the most appropriate form of secondary containment for this development will be incorporated into the EPR.
Spill Management
16.3.11 The use of secondary containment for all tanks on-site in addition to the sealed and bunded wellsite will ensure that any spillages are contained within the wellsite area. All site personnel will be trained to use spill kits which will be available at all times in all areas where materials are stored. An Emergency Spillage Plan will be prepared for the construction phase (phase 1) as part of the CEMP and for phases 2 -4.
16.3.12 Equipment on-site will be inspected on a regular basis for leaks and damage. Where leaks or damage are identified the equipment will be repaired or taken out of service and any spills cleaned up and recorded.
October 2015 153
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
16.3.13 In addition to the aforementioned procedures:
• As stated above the Applicant has an Integrated Management System Manual, revision 03 dated 9 February 2015 (see Annex F1 of Technical Appendix F), that sets out the standards and procedures to which it is committed to uphold at all sites;
• A site specific Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan will be prepared for the Proposed Development at Springs Lane, Misson. The document will record the monitoring locations, analytical suites, sampling frequency and sampling methods, set warning and trigger concentrations for selected determinands and incorporate an action plan to be followed should warnings and triggers be exceeded; and
• the Applicant will undertake all statutory reporting obligations for the Proposed Development, including data collection and reporting to DECC, EA, HSE and the BGS.
16.4 Broadband Signal
th 16.4.1 One of the comments included in NCC’s Scoping Opinion (issued 25 June 2015) was a concern raised by Misson Parish Council regarding the potential for the Proposed Development to impact on broadband signal.
16.4.2 The broadband signal transmitted from the church in Misson and used by local residents is referred to as N3. N3 is a scheme set up in by Bassetlaw District Council and wireless provider Sharpe Systems Group and is targeted at rural areas experiencing low connection speeds. The fixed antennae technology can be attached to high points in a community – such as a church tower as at Misson, and works on a ‘line of sight’ basis to transmit signals to properties with receiver boxes. Signal can depend on factors such as topography and tree coverage.
16.4.3 The Regeneration & Investment Projects Manager at Bassetlaw District Council (named N3 contact on Bassetlaw District Council’s website for the N3 project) was consulted with details of the Proposed Development to ascertain whether or not the drill rig and its operation would likely interfere with the broadband signal.
16.4.4 The N3 Project Manager at Bassetlaw District Council responded stating that they had assessed the drill rig at a height of 53.3 m at the proposed location and confirming that the Proposed Development would not cause any issues for any existing N3 users. They did state, however, that they could not say for certain that it won't cause issues for potential future N3 users as we do not know if the rig will be in the line of sight between the identified distribution point at the church in Misson and a future user.
16.4.5 In the event of this scenario arising during Phase 2 of the Proposed Development, N3 would be able to advise the Applicant in order to provide a solution. This would most likely be by locating a piece of equipment on the side of the drill rig to maintain the signal. This could be installed quickly to ensure no long term loss of signal
October 2015 154
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
16.5 Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield (Aerodrome Safeguarding)
16.5.1 Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield (RHADS) has provided advice regarding the proposed drill rig as follows
16.5.2 The drill rig would require a steady medium intensity red light at the top of the mast. The airport would also need to file Notice to Airmen (NOTAM) for the rig as it penetrates the airport’s Obstacle limitation Surface (OLS) by 5.4m. The airport would treat this as a temporary obstacle but as it will be in situ 24hrs a day for 9 months they would also have to add this to the aeronautical information publication.
16.5.3 The requirements for the light provided by RHADS are included in Technical Appendix E and are as follows:
• Medium intensity red steady obstacle lights should be used on obstacles between 45 m and less than 150 m in height.
• Steady red medium intensity obstacle lights should be lit, on and adjacent to an aerodrome from 30 minutes before sunset to 30 minutes after sunrise during the hours of availability.
Table 16.1 Obstacle Lighting Requirements
Beam Minimum Elevation Lighting system coverage setting projection (purpose of the Colour (degrees) Remarks intensity angle light fitting) average (candelas) (degrees) Horizontal
14. Medium intensity Omni- Red 2000 ±20% - Steady obstacle directional ±4º
October 2015 155
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
October 2015 156
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
17 Cumulative and Combined Effects
17.1 Cumulative Effects
17.1.1 Cumulative effects are those that could arise as a result of impacts from several different schemes/developments. The Scoping Opinion adopted by NCC 25th July 2015 requested that the ES consider the cumulative impacts of the developments identified in the submitted ESR which included the following:
• proposed extension of Newington Sand Quarry;
• proposed erection of a solar photovoltaic development on approximately 15.84 ha off land of Bawtry Road;
• quarrying of sand and gravel at three sites - two off Bawtry Road to the south of Misson Village and one from a site in Finningley;
• the existing production of mushroom substrate at Tunnel Tech North factory off Bawtry Road; and
• a possible major residential development in Misson village.
Quarrying Developments
17.1.2 A planning application submitted to NCC for additional sand and gravel extraction with restoration to nature conservation at Newington Quarry is pending consideration by NCC at the time of writing (application ref: ES/3264). Newington Quarry is approximately 3.8 km from the Site and is located around 1.5 km to the south west of Misson.
17.1.3 In summary:
• the operator has identified 360,000 tonnes of additional mineral to the west of Newington North Quarry;
• the application covers an area of 16.9 ha includes proposed new access off Bawtry Road;
• There is also another application pending consideration for an additional working area within the existing Newington South Quarry (application ref: ES/3265). Combined, the two applications (if approved) would provide a further 3 – 4 years aggregate production at equivalent rates to those produced at present and so would extend the life of Newington Quarry until 2021. All vehicles currently exiting the existing Newington Quarry access and those which will use the proposed new access will turn left out of the site onto Bawtry Road and travel west. The proposed
October 2015 157
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
scheme at Newington Quarry will not result in an increase in HGV movements originating from the quarry.
17.1.4 Finningley Quarry is located approximately 2.3 km to the north east of the Site boundary. Finningley Quarry is an existing development, however in 2014 an application for an extension to an existing sand and gravel quarry was submitted to DMBC which is yet to be approved (application ref: 14/01910/WCCC). A previous planning application for a 56 hectare extension to the quarry (application ref: 14/00672/MINA) was approved by DMBC in 2015.
Transport
17.1.5 Traffic movements generated by the other identified developments are considered at section 7 in Technical Appendix A (Transport). The above developments relate to the highway south of Misson village and would therefore not impact on the preferred transport route for the Proposed Development. On this basis the potential traffic and highways impacts as a result of the Proposed Development and the other developments do not result in any cumulative effects.
Air Quality
17.1.6 The effects of the traffic movements generated by the Proposed Development on air quality are considered in Technical Appendix C (Air Quality). On the basis that the other identified developments relate to the highway south of Misson village and would therefore not impact on the preferred transport route for the Proposed Development the assessment of air quality effects of additional traffic movements from the Proposed Development and the other developments as a result of exhaust emissions along the preferred route is not required. No cumulative effects in terms of air quality are identified.
17.1.7 The dust management proposals / measures for Newington Quarry have been reviewed and are considered to be fit for purpose. The quarry has a dust monitoring and management scheme and submits dust monitoring reports to NCC periodically. The ES submitted in March 2015 for the proposed Newington development did not identify any issues with dust as a result of the ongoing monitoring undertaken and concluded that existing best practice management techniques to control fugitive dust emissions as far as is practicable from the site would be retained.
17.1.8 The Air Quality assessment undertaken for the approved extension to Finningley Quarry summarised the existing and proposed dust management measures on-site and concluded that any dust occurrence event will be limited and of short duration and would be minimised by the implementation of the dust control recommendations. The results of the assessment state that air quality will not be significantly affected by the development.
17.1.9 On the basis that the activities associated with the Proposed Development most likely to generate dust would be limited in duration and that the proposed dust management measures proposed in this assessment (see DMP at Annex C2) are adhered to, it is not
October 2015 158
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
considered that there would be any cumulative effects as a result of dust emissions from the Proposed Development and other potential dust generating activities identified.
Novus Solar Developments Solar Photovoltaic Development
17.1.10 A planning application submitted to BDC for the development of a solar photovoltaic (PV) array at land north of Bawtry Road and south of Bryans Close Lane, Misson is pending consideration by BDC at the time of writing (application ref: B/15/00215/FUL). The proposed solar PV array is approximately 3.5 km from the Site and is located 1.3 km to the east of Misson.
17.1.11 In summary:
• the proposed solar PV array will cover an area of approximately 6.47 ha;
• the total area of the site is 15.84 ha;
• the overall lifespan of the scheme is 35 years; and
• the array would comprise 39,214 solar panels, 0.7 m off the ground with the top of each panel a maximum height of 2.5 m above ground level.
Transport
17.1.12 Traffic movements generated by the other identified developments are considered at section 7 in Technical Appendix A (Transport). It is proposed that the construction traffic generated by the development is routed from junction 34 of the A1(M) and then through Bawtry via the A614. The generation of traffic associated with the construction period is predicted to be over a temporary period of 12 weeks.
17.1.13 Traffic generated by this development would therefore not impact on the preferred transport route for the Proposed Development. On this basis the potential traffic and highways impacts as a result of the Proposed Development and the other developments do not result in any cumulative effects.
Air Quality
17.1.14 The effects of the traffic movements generated by the Proposed Development on air quality are considered in Technical Appendix C (Air Quality). On the basis that the other identified developments relate to the highway south of Misson village and would therefore not impact on the preferred transport route for the Proposed Development the assessment of air quality effects of additional traffic movements from the Proposed Development and the other developments as a result of exhaust emissions along the preferred route is not required. No cumulative effects in terms of air quality are identified.
Tunnel Tech North Limited
17.1.15 Tunnel Tech North is an existing facility which produces compost substrate used for mushroom growth. The process is prescribed for local authority pollution prevention and
October 2015 159
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
control (LAPPC). The facility is located at Newington Farm, Newington, approximately 4.5 km to the south west of the Site and around 2.2 km to the south west of Misson.
17.1.16 The permit for the facility (ref: PPC 39/12) provides a description of the process and states that the principle sources of air emissions from the process are odour emanating from:
• the delivery, storage and mixing of raw materials;
• anaerobic conditions from pre-mixing;
• anaerobic conditions during the phase 1 stage (composting);
• odorous emissions during the loading and re-loading operations when material is transferred to another bunker; and
• storage and irrigation of process water.
17.1.17 Misson Parish Council has commented on the odorous nature of this facility in their scoping response and Bassetlaw District Council has a dedicated page on its website to allow local residents and other interested parties access to information relating to Bassetlaw District Council's current involvement with Tunnel Tech North.
Air Quality
17.1.18 Odour is considered at section 3.5 of Technical Appendix C (Air Quality). During the drilling process there is the potential for odorous gases, included hydrogen sulphide to be release to atmosphere as a fugitive emission. However during drilling the mass of gas emitted is unlikely to be large enough to be detectable as an odour at any location beyond the Site boundary and therefore has not been considered further in this assessment. On this basis it is considered that there will be no cumulative effects as a result of odour emissions from the Proposed Development and those reportedly experienced from Tunnel Tech North.
Possible major residential development in Misson
17.1.19 Misson Parish Council has commented that there is a major housing development proposed in Misson to expand the village by a third and that it is anticipated that this would have an impact on residents due to an increase in HGVs on local roads. The site was identified in the now defunct Bassetlaw Site Allocations Preferred Options Consultation Paper as a ‘mixed use site’.
17.1.20 As no planning application for such a development could be found, Bassetlaw District Council was contacted directly. The Planning Officer that had dealt with the site stated that although some pre-application advice had been provided some time ago, no formal application has been submitted to the council. On this basis it is not considered that this development constitutes a development that is reasonably foreseeable and therefore does not need to be assessed in terms of potential cumulative effects.
October 2015 160
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Flight path of aircraft travelling to/from Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield
17.1.21 Misson Parish Council also commented on ‘daily noise disturbance’ experienced from the flight circuit of Robin Hood Airport Doncaster Sheffield (RHADS). Noise from aircraft was noted during the noise monitoring undertaken in March and is therefore included as part of the baseline conditions against which the Proposed Development has been assessed. Once mitigation measures are in place, it is expected that noise levels will be below the WHO guideline limit for onset of sleep disturbance as well as the PPG 42 dB LAeq (free-field) noise limit for night. Daytime noise levels during drilling will also be well below the PPG absolute noise limit of 55 dB LAeq.
17.2 Combined Effects
17.2.1 Combined effects are those that could arise as a result of different impacts associated with the Proposed Development interacting.
17.2.2 The EIA Regulations require that interactions between various aspects of impact (combined effects) should be considered in the assessment. This is accomplished by assessing how a particular type of effect (for example, an increase in noise related to traffic movements) may become a source of impact that results in an effect to a different category of receptor.
17.2.3 This ES addresses the potential impacts of the Proposed Development by considering discrete environmental topic areas however it is acknowledged that many of the topic areas addressed cannot be considered in isolation as changes occurring as a result of the Proposed Development that affect one topic area may have ‘knock-on’ implications or effects on other topic areas. For example Technical Appendix I considers the combined effects of different elements of the Proposed Development that are assessed in their own right i.e. lighting, air quality and noise, all of which individually have the potential to have an effect on ecological receptors. The ES has therefore identified any key interrelationships between the various topic areas wherever possible within the individual ES Chapters.
17.2.4 Interactions between more than one type of impact experienced at a particular receptor (e.g. a receptor of noise and air quality impacts) are managed in the context of effects following mitigation. In the case of interactions between noise and air quality, potential impacts could be experienced simultaneously or intermittently. There is no direct connection between the effects, other than that both could cause annoyance or disturbance, whether experienced separately or together.
17.2.5 Mitigation of combined effects is best achieved through the embedded mitigation measures specified (environmental management and design measures) and any further mitigation measures identified as a result of the assessments undertaken to prevent the individual impacts themselves and reduce the likelihood of such interactions occurring.
17.2.6 The individual assessments undertaken demonstrate that there will not be any significant effects on receptors as a result of the Proposed Development.
October 2015 161
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
October 2015 162
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
18 Conclusions
18.1.1 The Environmental Impact Assessment contained within this ES has involved a comprehensive assessment of the environmental implications of the Proposed Development at Springs Road, Misson, Nottinghamshire. If the mitigation measures defined therein are implemented, the residual effects should be minimised to an acceptable degree.
October 2015 163
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
October 2015 164
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Appendix A. NCC Scoping Opinion
October 2015 165
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
October 2015 166
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Appendix A: NCC Scoping Opinion
A request for an EIA Scoping Opinion was submitted to NCC on 21st May 2015. The Scoping Opinion adopted on 25th June 2015 confirmed that NCC considered the main topics requiring assessment to be as follows:
• transport • air quality; • noise; • landscape and visual (including lighting); • ecology; • historic environment; • water environment; • contaminated land; • public health; • community and social; • alternatives; and • cumulative and combined effects. The ES which accompanies the application has been prepared in general accord with the EIA Scoping Opinion adopted by NCC; The Table below provides a summary of the adopted Scoping Opinion and provides cross- references to the relevant parts of the application where the comments have been addressed. Comments within the Scoping Opinion that are generic to assessment methodology are not included in the table below.
October 2015 167
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
October 2015 168
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Topic NCC Comment Cross-reference / Comments Planning Policy It is noted that planning policy is not one of the matters detailed as A review and analysis of the relevant planning policy is included at Appendix information to be included in an ES, as set out in Schedule 4 of the EIA A of the Supporting Statement. Regulations 2011. The scoping request indicates that the main assessment of the degree to which the proposed development complies with the Where policies relate specifically to specific topic areas (in terms of development plan (and relevant material considerations) will be presented in assessment requirements and methodology) these are discussed within a supporting statement. This approach is considered acceptable. each technical Appendix (see Technical Appendices A – J).
Landscape and As set out in the scoping request a Landscape and Visual Impact A LVIA has been undertaken and is summarised at Chapter 9 and included Visual Assessment should support the application. The consideration of landscape in full at Technical Appendix D. impacts should reflect the approach set out in the ‘Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment’ (Landscape Institute and the Institute of The LVIA has been undertaken in accordance with: rd Environmental Assessment and Management, 2013, 3 Edition), the • Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, Third Edition ‘Landscape Character Assessment Guidance for England and Scotland (2013) Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management an (Scottish Natural Heritage and The Countryside Agency, 2002) and good Assessment (referred to as GLVIA3 in this assessment); and practice. • An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment (2014) Natural England.
Landscape resource should quantify any physical removal of vegetation, No vegetation removal is proposed as part of the Proposed Development as including vegetation removed to create the access route to the site, so that the access to the site is an existing access and is suitable for use – therefore any mitigation proposed can be assessed against this. the LVIA does not take into account removal of vegetation.
Landscape character should make reference to the relevant national, The LVIA summarised at Chapter 9 and included in full at Technical regional and local character assessment documents. Appendix D makes reference to the relevant national, regional and local character assessment documents.
Visual amenity should be assessed from a series of representative The Landscape Officer at NCC was consulted and agreed with the viewpoints. As set out in the scoping report the viewpoints should be agreed viewpoints proposed stating ‘I have no comments or amendments of the in advance with the County Council. In this regard it is recommended that the viewpoints proposed as these include close residential receptors, adjacent applicant contacts Helen Jones of the NCC Landscape and Reclamation Public Rights of Way and the edges, or high viewpoints within, adjacent Team. settlements.’
It is also suggested that you check the proposed viewpoints with Tim The proposed viewpoints were sent to the relevant person at BDC but a Dawson, Planning Officer at Bassetlaw, so that he could comment from a response was not received. more local perspective. The choice of potential viewpoints should include listed buildings. Listed Buildings are considered in the LVIA (see section 3.7 of Technical Appendix D) to ascertain key landscape features and their sensitivity only. However, the assessment of effect on listed buildings is included in Appendix J (Cultural Heritage) with reference to the Zone of Theoretical Visibility prepared for the LVIA (see Figure D1 of Technical Appendix D).
October 2015 169
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Topic NCC Comment Cross-reference / Comments The assessment should also include the cumulative effects of the Cumulative effects are discussed at Chapter 17 of the ES Main Text and are development with other relevant existing or proposed development in the considered in the LVIA at section 9 of Technical Appendix D. area; this should include proposals at the scoping stage.
The methodology and structure proposed by the applicant for the landscape A Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) has been undertaken and visual assessment is in accordance with the Guidelines for Landscape and is summarised at Chapter 9 and included in full at Technical Appendix D. and Visual Impact Assessment, Third Edition to which the applicant refers, and is therefore considered acceptable. The LVIA has been undertaken in accordance with: • Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment, Third Edition (2013) Landscape Institute and Institute of Environmental Management an Assessment (referred to as GLVIA3 in this assessment); and • An Approach to Landscape Character Assessment (2014) Natural England.
Doncaster MBC has previously requested that consideration is given to any The Landscape Officer at DMBC was consulted and provided comments on key viewpoints from within Doncaster MBC’s boundary, and the nearest main the proposed viewpoints. In response, a second site visit was undertaken by settlement is Finningley. AECOM in May 2015, and viewpoints 17 and 18 were added to the assessment (see section 2.2 of Technical Appendix D).
Lighting The ES should include an assessment of lighting and the impact that this will A lighting assessment has been undertaken and is summarised at Chapter have at the nearest sensitive receptors. 10 and included in full at Technical Appendix E.
Artificial lighting at the development should conform to the requirements to In accordance with the Scoping Opinion, the obtrusive lighting criteria meet Obtrusive Light Limitations for Exterior Lighting Installations for associated with Environmental Zone E2 have been adopted for the lighting Environmental Zone – E2 contained within Table 1 of the Institute of Light assessment. Engineers Guidance Notes for the Reduction of Obtrusive Lighting, GN01, dated 2005. Transport The ES should include a Transport Assessment (TA). A Transport Assessment (TA) has been undertaken and is summarised at Chapter 6 and included in full at Technical Appendix A. It is proposed that a Transport Assessment (TA) would be prepared to conform to best practice and current guidelines as set out in the ‘Guidance The TA has been prepared in accordance with, or with specific reference to on Transport Assessment’ Guidelines (DfT March 2007). It would contain a the: baseline assessment; details of the traffic generation associated with the • Guidance on Transport Assessment (GTA, Department for Transport proposed development; and a high impact assessment. The preparation of (DfT), 2007); the TA to consider highways impacts is acceptable to the County Council. • National Planning Policy Framework (NNPF, March 2012); and It is recommended that the Transport Assessment is also prepared in • Planning Practice Guidance (PPG). accordance with Planning Practice Guidelines.
The Transport Assessment should concentrate on the suitability of the route The TA undertaken considers the suitability of a number of routes and and access for lorries, particularly oversized vehicles. assesses each of the potential routes in terms of their suitability for oversized vehicles (see summary table 2.4 of Technical Appendix A).
October 2015 170
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Topic NCC Comment Cross-reference / Comments Routeing should be from the north to avoid Misson. The preferred route for all HGV traffic associated with the Proposed Development identified in the TA avoids Misson village.
It is noted that this proposed lorry route crosses a railway line that could be a Network Rail and Nottinghamshire Police are both consultees and will target for protesters wishing to disrupt the operations and consideration therefore be consulted on the planning application. The potential for should be given to any impact the proposed vehicle movements may have protesters to target sections of the proposed route to the Site is not on the railway level crossing on Springs Road to the north. something that can be mitigated.
Historically there has been a small accident population at the site. As such, Section 2.3.7 of Technical Appendix A considers the accident records for the the ES should review the advance warning signs and consider their junction of Springs Road / B1396. adequacy and conditions.
A new link road from M18 to Doncaster Airport is being constructed. This The new link road is considered at section 7 of Technical Appendix A and the should be taken into account and any impact that it may have should be assessment concludes that the Finningley and Rossington Regeneration considered. Route Scheme (FARRS) route would not have any impact on the Proposed Development.
Ecology The following information should be provided as part of the ES in accordance An Ecological Impact Assessment has been undertaken and is summarised with 'Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment in the United Kingdom' at Chapter 14 and included in full at Technical Appendix I. (2006) produced by the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (IEEM), now the CIEEM. The Ecological Impact Assessment has been undertaken with reference to the Institute of Ecology and Environmental Management (IEEM, now the Chartered IEEM) Guidelines for Ecological Impact Assessment (IEEM, 2006). Consultation and desktop study - This should consider existing data, Section 2.2 of Technical Appendix I details the methodology adopted for the covering the site and the surrounding area within a 2km radius (European desk study undertaken as part of the assessment. designated sites within a 10km radius should be considered). This should identify the presence of nationally and internationally designated sites, locally designated sites, protected species and other notable species. This should be undertaken in consultation with Nottinghamshire Biological and Geological Records Centre and other records centres as necessary; County Mammal Recorder; other recorders/recording schemes as appropriate; on- line sources (e.g. National Biodiversity Network); and other site specific reports, surveys or records if available.
October 2015 171
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Topic NCC Comment Cross-reference / Comments Survey(s) - An extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey should be undertaken of Section 2.3 of Technical Appendix I details with methodologies adopted for the proposed site by a suitably qualified ecologist, following standard the Phase 1 Habitat survey and for the targeted species surveys undertaken methodologies. This should map habitats present on the site and indicate the as a result of the findings of the Phase 1 survey. locations of notable features and signs of (or potential for) protected species. Records should also be made of species of principal importance for conservation in England (as listed under Section 41 of the Natural Environment and Rural Communities Act 2006) and species listed in the Local Biodiversity Action Plan (LBAP) for Nottinghamshire. A Phase II survey should be undertaken for any areas identified as being of botanical interest in the Phase I survey. Targeted surveys (undertaken at the appropriate time of the year, following Section 2.3 of Technical Appendix I details the methodologies adopted for standard methodologies and covering a survey area appropriate to the the Phase 1 Habitat survey and for the targeted species surveys undertaken species/group in question) should be carried out for breeding birds and bat as a result of the findings of the Phase 1 survey. activity. In addition, depending on the results of the Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey, surveys may also be required for (although not necessarily limited to) badgers, reptiles, amphibians, roosting bats and water voles. Description, Evaluation and Impact Assessment - A description should be The Ecological Impact Assessment summarised at Chapter 14 and included made of the site, with an evaluation of the receptors likely to be affected by in full at Technical Appendix I refers to the Proposed Development the scheme made with reference to legislation, policy and other relevant description in Chapter 4 and evaluates the receptors likely to be affected by documents . the development with reference to legislation, policy and other relevant documents.
An assessment should be made of the likely impacts of the scheme on Section 2 of Technical Appendix I sets out the methodology adopted for the features of ecological value at the site or in the surrounding area. This should assessment. consider the magnitude and direction of impacts; whether impacts are direct or indirect; impacts arising during construction and operational phases; and Section 3 of Technical Appendix I sets out the baseline conditions including cumulative impacts with other developments, scheme or projects in the area. the identification of sensitive receptors (species and designations) to be Particular regard should be had to the following: included in the assessment. • The presence of nationally and internationally designated wildlife sites The ecological assessment considers the potential impacts of noise and within the vicinity of the development including, but not necessarily limited disturbance, artificial lighting, deposition of airborne emissions and the to, Misson Carr (former Training Area) SSSI, and Hatfield Moor SAC; potential for impacts on aquatic habitats and surface waters as a result of the • The presence of a number of drains designated as Local Wildlife Sites Proposed Development. (LWSs); • The potential impacts of noise and disturbance on sensitive wildlife, during the drilling and site operations, and as a result of increased road traffic; • The potential impacts of artificial lighting on sensitive wildlife; • The potential impact of the deposition of airborne emissions on sensitive habitats; • The potential for impacts on aquatic habitats and surface waters.
October 2015 172
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Topic NCC Comment Cross-reference / Comments In relation to noise, a noise contour plan should be produced, to illustrate Noise contour plans are presented in Technical Appendix B. modelled noise levels around the application site during different phases of development (and different times of day, if relevant). Furthermore, given the Assessment of noise impacts on sensitive wildlife is considered in Appendix proximity of the site to the Misson Training Area SSSI, and the lack of I. significant attenuation features between the site and the SSSI, a thorough assessment of noise impacts on breeding birds (and any other sensitive wildlife) should be carried out. In addition, attention is drawn to Misson Carr SSSI, which has had Section 4 of Technical Appendix I considers the potential effects of the intervention work to raise and manage water levels to restore the fen habitat. Proposed Development on ecological receptors including the potential As such, consideration should be given to any impacts that might arise from effects of phase 1 and phase 2 on hydrological regimes and ground water the effects of drilling on the hydrology and hydrogeology within the SSSI and quality. Cross-references are provided in this section with other relevant the Idle Washlands SSSI. technical Appendices including Technical Appendix F (Hydrogeology) and Technical Appendix G (Hydrology and FRA).
Mitigation, compensation and restoration proposals - details should be Section 5 of Technical Appendix I includes recommended mitigation provided of how any negative impacts from the development would be measures to address any potential adverse effects identified by the avoided, mitigated against or compensated for (in that order), with an assessment at section 4. assessment of residual impacts (positive or negative) remaining after the measures have been implemented. Chapter 4 of the ES Main Text provides the relevant detail regarding the restoration of the Site. Details should be provided showing how the site would be restored once the proposed activities have ceased. Where possible the wildlife value of the site should be enhanced. The response from Natural England incorporates an Annex providing advice The Natural England scoping Annex provided has been taken into account in concerning EIA scoping requirements and additional guidance concerning the preparation of Technical Appendix I. the scope of ecological information that should be incorporated with the ES. Please have regard to this advice when you prepare your ES. Noise Monitoring locations should be agreed with the NCC Noise Engineer. A noise and vibration assessment has been undertaken and is summarised at Chapter 7 and included in full at Technical Appendix B.
Consultation with the Environmental Health Department of Bassetlaw District Council was undertaken to agree the locations of the noise monitoring equipment for the baseline assessment.
Given that drilling operations would be continuous throughout the day and See Noise Assessment in Technical Appendix B night, it is recommended that noise levels do not exceed 42d B LAeq,t at nearby receptors to ensure compliance with the night time levels in the PPG. Acknowledging that drilling may be considered as a construction activity, an See Noise Assessment in Technical Appendix B alternative noise limit may be considered when determining the significant of effects in accordance with the ABC method in BS5228:1 with any limits in excess of 45dB LAeq,t needing to be justified by a correspondingly higher level of ambient noise during the night time period.
October 2015 173
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Topic NCC Comment Cross-reference / Comments The scoping request seeks to scope out ground borne vibration; however it is An assessment of operational vibration is included in section 4.2.3 of recommended that a brief qualitative statement of vibration resulting from Technical Appendix B. operations should be included in the ES. The assessment should confirm whether or not vibration would be perceptible taking into account the depth of drilling and proximity of nearest sensitive receptors, and whether it could be considered a nuisance or cause damage. Cultural Heritage The choice of potential viewpoints used in Zone of Theoretical Visibility A Cultural Heritage assessment has been undertaken and is summarised at should include listed buildings to assess and demonstrate the visual impacts Chapter 15 and included in full at Technical Appendix J. on the setting of designated heritage assets. To this end, it is suggested that a NCC Building Conservation Officer is also consulted in relation to The viewpoints selected for the LVIA were done so in agreement with the identifying viewpoints for the LVIA. Heritage consultant who prepared the assessment, the ZTV shown on Figure D1 of Technical Appendix D shows that the locations of a number of viewpoints are in close proximity to the settlements where the cultural heritage assessment has identified groupings of Listed Buildings. The viewpoints and the photomontages prepared in support of the LVIA have been considered in the preparation of the Cultural Heritage assessment.
Historic England identify that the development would impact upon the Technical Appendix J includes an assessment of the impact of the Proposed significance of the Cold War Bloodhound missile installation. This is Development on the Cold War Bloodhound missile installation. something that should be considered. Heritage assets referenced by consultees include 17 Listed Buildings within The potential effect of the Proposed Development on Listed Buildings, and Misson Parish, the nationally important scheduled 'Moated site and fishpond ‘Moated site and fishpond east of Misson village’ is assessed in section 6 of east of Misson Village' (National Heritage List of England ref 1008629), and Technical Appendix J. other non-designated heritage assets. The ES should incorporate a method statement to demonstrate that any Technical Appendix J assesses the archaeological potential of the Site with archaeological asset of the site is investigated and the scheme of working reference to available data. ensures appropriate recording of any architectural features. As the hardstandings will be retained in situ, no archaeological recording is recommended as part of this development. Public Rights of The development site does not affect any public rights of way and therefore Noted and agreed. Way impacts on the rights of way system can be scoped out of the ES.
October 2015 174
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Topic NCC Comment Cross-reference / Comments Air Quality The ES should undertake an assessment of dust associated with the An Air Quality assessment has been undertaken and is summarised at proposed operations issues: Chapter 7 and included in full at Technical Appendix C.
• Potential sources of dust emissions - this is expected to include plant, The Air Quality assessment includes consideration of the potential sources of machinery, vehicles and fugitive dust emissions from soil stripping, dust emissions, identifies the prevailing wind patterns at the Site and the transportation, storage and replacement; nearest sensitive receptors and assesses the potential impacts on sensitive • Identification of the prevailing wind patterns and the nearest sensitive receptors. receptors; • Measures for preventing and mitigating dust impacts; A dust risk assessment is included in Technical Appendix C and whilst the • Quantification and assessment of the potential impacts with and without assessment concludes that any impact from dust beyond the Site boundary mitigation measures on residential properties and nearby statutory and would not be significant, in accordance with the Scoping Opinion a Dust non-statutory ecological sites; Management Plan is included at Annex C2 to Technical Appendix C. • A dust management plan, to include a monitoring scheme and procedure for the management of unforeseen incidents.
The proposed assessment of AQ using ADMS 5 is supported. Assessment An assessment has been undertaken to determine the likely effect of any should also assess any increase in road traffic (particularly HGVs) and the increase in road traffic (using the same data set out in the Transport resulting impact on annual average and/or hourly mean air quality objectives Assessment at Technical Appendix A).
An assessment of the impacts of dust and nitrogen deposition arising from Section 4.3 of Technical Appendix C addresses the potential impacts of the plant machinery and vehicle movements on nearby SSSIs should be Proposed Development on designated wildlife sites. The results of the undertaken. modelling undertaken with regards to Air Quality are also considered in detail in the ecological impact assessment at Technical Appendix I.
Water Environment A high level surface water drainage strategy should also be included in the A hydrogeological assessment has been undertaken and is summarised at FRA. At the time of writing a consultation response has not been received Chapter 11 and included in full at Technical Appendix F. from the Environment Agency, however they previously recommended on a nearby site that the site is suitably designed so that it remains safe and A hydrology assessment and Flood Risk assessment has been undertaken operational in the time of a flood in accordance with requirement set out in and are summarised at Chapter 12 and included in full at Technical Appendix the NPPF and PPG. G.
The site is located on the boundary of a Source Protection Zone 3 of a The proposed site drainage design is described in Chapter 4 and is shown number of water supply boreholes which take water from the Sherwood on Drawing 10. Sandstone Group. As stated in the scoping report, an assessment of the hydrogeological effects should be undertaken.
October 2015 175
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Topic NCC Comment Cross-reference / Comments Contaminated Land The report should include a conceptual site model with a view to identifying A contaminated land assessment has been undertaken and is summarised any significant source-pathway-receptor linkages followed by a qualitative at Chapter 13 and included in full at Technical Appendix H. risk assessment , followed by a Phase II - ground investigation involving: Technical Appendix H includes the details of the conceptual site model used • Excavation and geo-environmental logging of trial pits (including use of in the assessment. A schematic conceptual site model is also shown on photoionisation detector to detect volatile organic compounds); Drawing 28. • Soil and Water samples (if water present); • Laboratory analysis of the samples The contaminated land assessment also includes the details of the intrusive site investigations undertaken and the results of the corresponding laboratory analysis.
The report based on the findings of the investigations should provide an The contaminated land assessment reports the findings of the investigations assessment of the risks of impact to human health or the wider environment undertaken and provides an assessment of the risks of impact to human (e.g. controlled waters, off-site receptors) from any potential near surface health and the wider environment. contamination and will be prepared in accordance with current UK guidance on the assessment of contaminated land (principally DEFRA I EA report Model Procedures for the Management of Contaminated Land, CLR 11).
In addition the applicant should undertake an assessment for unexploded The contaminated land assessment details the measures undertaken to ordnance in accordance with 'Unexploded ordnance' (UXO) - a guide for the assess the potential for UXO presence on-site and makes recommendations construction industry (C681D)' published by CIRIA in July 2009. for future works on-site. A copy of the initial UXO risk assessment undertaken is included at Annex H4 to Technical Appendix H.
Land Since the site is currently of a brownfield character and not in agricultural use Noted and agreed. an assessment of soils and agricultural land quality is not necessary to complete the ES.
Public Health To ensure that health is fully and comprehensively considered, the ES Section 16.1 of the ES Main Text brings together all of the relevant elements should provide sufficient evidence to allow the potential impact of the of the individual technical assessments to provide a comprehensive development on public health to be fully assessed. It is recommended that assessment of impact on Public Health. the EIA should contain a dedicated section considering health. The section should summarise key information, risk assessments, proposed mitigation measures, conclusions and residual impacts relating to human health.
The comments made in the consultation response from Public Health England should be carefully considered. Alternatives The ES must include an outline of the main alternatives studied by the Chapter 5 of the ES Main Text provides a comprehensive summary of the applicant and an indication of the main reasons for the choices being made, main alternative studied by the applicant and discusses the choices made taking into account the environmental effects. which fully take into account environmental effects.
October 2015 176
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Topic NCC Comment Cross-reference / Comments The consideration of alternatives should be addressed in the applicant's flood The account of the alternatives considered by IGas included in Chapter 5 risk sequential test, and the consideration of alternative routes should be explains the factors which limit the choice of potential site locations and assessed. shows that the “areas of search” lie within Flood Zones 2 and 3a (see Drawing 25). On the basis of the relevant information contained in the ES NCC is invited to conclude that there are no reasonably available alternative sites appropriate for the Proposed Development in areas with a lower probability of flooding (which are consistent with wider sustainability objectives) when it applies the Sequential Test.
A sequential test is included at Appendix C to the Supporting Statement.
The Transport Assessment (TA), undertaken and summarised at Chapter 6 and included in full at Technical Appendix A, includes the consideration of alternative routes to the Site, this is also summarised in Chapter 5 of the ES Main Text. General A full consideration of the implications of the whole scheme should be Chapter 4 of the ES Main Text provides a comprehensive description of the included in the ES. All supporting infrastructure should be included within the Proposed Development on the basis of which the technical assessments assessment. have been undertaken. Cumulative and The ES should include an impact assessment to identify, describe and Chapter 17 of the ES Main Text summarises the findings of the cumulative combined effects evaluate the effects that are likely to result from the project in combination assessments undertaken with regards to each topic area and considers the with other projects and activities identified by the applicant that are being, likely combined effects of the Proposed Development. have been or will be carried out. Projects that should be included in such an assessment (subject to available information) include existing completed projects; approved but incomplete projects; ongoing activities; plans or projects for which an application has been made and are under consideration by the consenting authorities; plans and projects which are reasonably foreseeable (i.e. projects for which an application has not yet been submitted, but which are likely to progress before completion of the development and for which sufficient information is available to assess the likelihood of cumulative and in-combination effects). The potential cumulative effects identified in the scoping request report are Chapter 17 of the ES Main Text summarises the findings of the cumulative those that the County Council is aware of. assessments undertaken with regards to each topic area.
October 2015 177
Island Gas Ltd – Springs Road Exploratory Wellsite Environmental Statement
Topic NCC Comment Cross-reference / Comments General The previous scoping consultation for the development of an exploratory Chapter 4 provides detail of the set-up at the Site with regards to power, borehole on a nearby site at Springs Road identified a number of utilities and waste disposal. recommendations from consultees. These recommendations are set out below. It is recommended that the ES incorporates information to addresses The existing and proposed fencing at the site entrance is shown on Drawing these matters the as far as practical: 9..
• It is recommended that the ES includes details of how plant on site would RHADS has been consulted on the requirements for the lighting of the rig be powered and whether any connection to the grid would be necessary. and has also provided a summary of the actions that will be undertaken once • The application should include details of any water supply needs and how the planning application has been submitted – see Chapter 16 (section 16.5). these will be provided for, and waste disposal including the removal of any drill cuttings and fluids. Use of level crossings will comply with the published Network Rail standards • Nottinghamshire Police have suggested that the development has no road and Network Rail will be consulted through the planning process. restrictions in place at the entry point of the site, to allow easy access and egress in the event of a protest situation. The ecological impact assessment summarised at Chapter 14 and included • Robin Hood Airport highlighted that for any equipment over 10m in height in full at Technical Appendix I assesses the likely effects of the proposed a formal application will be required to the airport duty manager (rha- temporary development on ecological receptors. [email protected]). • Network Rail requested that Island Gas cover transport with regard to the use of level crossings and the potential effect on railway infrastructure. Any use of level crossings must comply with the published Network Rail standards. • Natural England highlights the England Biodiversity Strategy published by DEFRA which establishes principles for the consideration of biodiversity and the effects of climate change. The ES should reflect these principles and identify how the development's effects on the natural environment will be influenced by climate change, and how the ecological networks will be maintained.
General There are a number of questions raised by Misson Parish Council that The issue of broadband signal is addressed in Chapter 16 (at Section 16.4) it is requested are addressed within the ES including: through consultation with the broadband provider.
• The responsibility for any longer term impacts that might occur, or become Pollution control measures are discussed in Chapter 4 and are assessed in apparent, after the aftercare period; the relevant technical Chapters (and Appendices). • Whether the drill rig would have an impact on broadband signal; • Assessment of risks and action plan to manage risks associated with pollution control on site and during transportation.
AECOM
AECOM (NYSE: ACM) is a global provider of professional technical and management support services to a broad range of markets, including transportation, facilities, environmental, energy,
October 2015 178