keadby developments limited keadby ii section application...

Date: 25 July 2017 Ref: 2941E

21 Garlick Hill, London, EC4V 2AU

T: 020 7489 0213 F: 020 7248 4743 E: [email protected] W: dwdllp.com

KEADBY DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED KEADBY II ‐ SECTION 36C APPLICATION LAND AT KEADBY, NORTH LINCOLNSHIRE SUPPORTING STATEMENT

Keadby II ‐ Section 36C Application

Supporting Statement

25 July 2017 Ref: 2941E

Disclaimer

This report has been produced by Dalton Warner Davis LLP (DWD) and is intended for the sole and exclusive use of the instructing client. The report shall not be distributed or made available to any third party or published, reproduced or referred to in any way without the prior knowledge and written consent of DWD. The report does not constitute advice to any third party and should not be relied upon as such. DWD accepts no liability or responsibility for any loss or damage to any third party arising from that party having relied upon the contents of the report in whole or in part.



25 July 2017 Ref: 2941E

CONTENTS

1.0 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................. 1

2.0 BACKGROUND TO THE VARIATION APPLICATION............................................................ 4

3.0 THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ...................................................................................... 6

4.0 PRE‐APPLICATION CONSULTATION ................................................................................. 8

5.0 PLANNING POLICY ASSESSMENT ................................................................................... 11

6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT ......................................................... 15

7.0 OTHER MATTERS ........................................................................................................... 18

8.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION ...................................................................................... 19

TABLES

Table 4.1 ‐ Consultee Reponses ............................................................................................................ 9

APPENDICES

APPENDIX 1 ‐ SCHEDULE OF CONSULTEES

APPENDIX 2 ‐ LETTER SENT TO CONSULTEES

APPENDIX 3 ‐ RESPONSES FROM CONSULTEES

APPENDIX 4 ‐ COMMUNITY NEWSLETTER

Revision Description Originated Checked Reviewed Authorised Date

1.0 FINAL GB GB GB GB 25.07.17

DWD Job Number: 2941E



25 July 2017 1 Ref: 2941E

1.0 INTRODUCTION

This Supporting Statement has been prepared on behalf of Keadby Developments Limited (‘KDL’) 1.1

(the ‘Company’ or the ‘Applicant’) in respect of an application (the ‘Variation Application’) that

has been submitted to the Secretary of State (‘SoS’) for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy

(‘BEIS’) under Section 36C ‘Variation of consents under Section 36 ‘consent required for the

construction etc. of generating stations’ of ‘The Electricity Act 1989’ (the ‘1989 Act’).

The Variation Application seeks to vary the Section 36 consent that was granted on 3 November 1.2

2016 (the ‘2016 Consent’) for the construction and operation of a 820 megawatt (‘MW’)

combined cycle gas turbine (‘CCGT’) generating station (the ‘Consented Development’), known as

Keadby II Power Station (‘Keadby II’), on land at the existing Keadby I Power Station Site, Trent

Side, Keadby, near Scunthorpe, North Lincolnshire.

The Variation Application has been prepared in accordance with ‘The Electricity Generating 1.3

Stations (Variation of Consents) (England and Wales) Regulations 2013’ (the ‘2013 Variation

Regulations’) and the guidance issued by the Government in respect of variation applications

(‘Varying consents granted under section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 for generating stations in

England and Wales, July 2013’).

The Variation Application includes an Environmental Impact Assessment (‘EIA’) Report that has 1.4

been prepared in accordance with ‘The Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment)

(England and Wales) Regulations 2017 (the ‘2017 EIA Regulations’), which came into effect on 16

May 2017.

The Variation Application comprises the following documents: 1.5

Application Cover Letter dated 25 July 2017. 1.

Schedule 1 ‐ ‘Compliance with Regulation 3 ‘Content of variation applications’ of the 2013 2.

Variation Regulations ‐ demonstrating compliance with Regulation 3 of the 2013 Variation

Regulations.

Schedule 2 ‐ ‘Consultees’ ‐ listing those bodies and organisations consulted prior to the 3.

submission of the Variation Application.

The Section 36 consent and deemed planning permission dated 10 September 1993 (the 4.

‘Original Consent’)



25 July 2017 2 Ref: 2941E

The Section 36 consent and deemed planning permission dated 3 November 2016 (the 5.

‘2016 Consent’).

A ‘track change’ version of the 2016 Consent showing the proposed changes (the ‘Variation 6.

Consent).

Site Location Plan Ref: Keadby2_DWD_002. 7.

Application Site (red line) Plan Ref: Keadby2_DWD_001. 8.

Ownership Plan Ref: Keadby2_DWD_003. 9.

Consolidated Parameter Layout Plan Ref: 105_0805_0040_00_03. 10.

Condenser (Cooling Tower) Layout In‐Line (1 x 12) Plan Ref: 105_0805_0016_00_06. 11.

Single‐Shaft Layout Plans ‐ showing a single‐shaft plant configuration. 12.

Multi‐Shaft Layout Plans ‐ showing a multi‐shaft plant configuration. 13.

Keadby II Supporting Statement (this Statement). 14.

Keadby II Environmental Impact Assessment (‘EIA’) Report and Non‐Technical Summary. 15.

Information to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment (EIA Report ‐ Annex C). 16.

Keadby II Combined Heat and Power Report (EIA Report ‐ Annex F). 17.

Keadby II Carbon Capture Readiness Report (EIA Report ‐ Annex G). 18.

In addition, the Variation Application includes copies of the documents submitted for the 1.6

previous variation application (that resulted in the 2016 Consent), including the Planning

Statement and Environmental Statement that were produced.

This Supporting Statement provides further information on the Variation Application and is 1.7

structured as follows:

Section 2 ‐ briefly explains the background to the Variation Application.

Section 3 ‐ outlines the proposed changes (referred to collectively as the ‘Proposed

Development’) that are being sought through the Variation Application.

Section 4 ‐ provides a summary of the pre‐application consultation that has been

undertaken in respect of the Proposed Development.

Section 5 ‐ considers relevant planning policy.



25 July 2017 3 Ref: 2941E

Section 6 ‐ describes the scope of the EIA Report that has been prepared and forms part of

the Variation Application and provides a summary of its findings, notably the likely

significant effects of the Proposed Development to the extent that these differ from those

reported in the Environmental Statement for the Consented Development.

Section 7 ‐ deals with other matters such as the Habitats Regulations, combined heat and

power and carbon capture readiness.

Section 8 – provides a summary of the Statement and sets out its conclusions.



25 July 2017 4 Ref: 2941E

2.0 BACKGROUND TO THE VARIATION APPLICATION

The Original Consent for Keadby II was granted by the SoS for Trade and Industry on 10 2.1

September 1993. The consent provided for the construction and operation of a 710 MW

generating station on land within the existing Keadby I Power Station Site (the ‘Site’).

On 3 November 2016, the SoS for BEIS varied the Original Consent under Section 36C of the 1989 2.2

Act to provide for the construction and operation of a 820 MW combined cycle gas turbine

(‘CCGT’) generating station at the Site (the ‘2016 Consent’).

The 2016 Consent provided for the generating station to be constructed in either single‐shaft or 2.3

multi‐shaft configuration, with either a single bank of 12 no. cooling towers or a ‘back to back’

bank of 16 no. cooling towers. In addition, the 2016 Consent provided for an increase in the

application site area (the red line area) to accommodate ancillary plant and equipment, buildings

and civil engineering works, any future carbon capture equipment and a temporary contractors’

work area (together the ‘Consented Development’).

Paragraph (2) of the 2016 Consent states that: 2.4

“2. The Development shall comprise:

(a) One combined cycle gas turbine generating station of up to 820MW consisting of:

(i) One industrial gas turbine with associated boilers and single exhaust stack; and

(ii) One steam turbine

(b) An Access road;

(c) Ancillary plant and equipment; and

(d) The necessary buildings (including administration offices) and civil engineering works.”

Section 2 of the Planning Statement (February 2016) that formed part of the previous variation 2.5

application (which resulted in the 2016 Consent) is included as part of the Variation Application

and provides further detail on the reasons for the submission of the previous variation application

and the planning history of the Site.

In response to further detailed design work on Keadby II, including discussions with potential 2.6

technology suppliers, the Company is now seeking to vary the 2016 Consent and make a number

of design and other changes to the Consented Development. These changes require the



25 July 2017 5 Ref: 2941E

submission of a further variation application (the ‘Variation Application’) to the SoS for BEIS under

Section 36C of the 1989 Act.

The proposed changes (referred to collectively as the ‘Proposed Development’) are outlined in 2.7

Section 3 of this Statement.



25 July 2017 6 Ref: 2941E

3.0 THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

The principal reason for seeking to vary the 2016 Consent (and the Consented Development) 3.1

through the Variation Application is to increase the electrical output of Keadby II from 820 MW to

910 MW to deliver higher efficiency electricity generation at the Site.

Recent advances in the design of CCGTs have resulted in the availability on the market of larger, 3.2

more efficient CCGT units, which due to their improved efficiencies, offer both economic and

environmental benefits. The increase in electrical output is therefore required to allow for the

latest CCGT units to be deployed on Keadby II and to provide sufficient flexibility to accommodate

future improvements in CCGT technology.

In addition to the increase in electrical output, the Variation Application also seeks the following 3.3

key design changes to the Consented Development:

Stack location ‐ the location of the emissions stack has been altered as a result of plant

configuration optimisation.

Building dimensions ‐ largely due to the decision to deploy the new generation of CCGT

units, it has been necessary to alter and, in some cases, increase the dimensions (width,

length and height) of the main generating station buildings, including the Gas Turbine

Building, the Steam Turbine Building and the Heat Recovery Steam Generator Building. The

width of the cooling tower bank has also been increased.

Building appearance ‐ the elevations of the main buildings would consist entirely of steel

cladding rather than steel cladding with brick work at lower level.

Supplementary firing ‐ the Consented Development includes ‘supplementary firing’ (i.e. the

combustion of natural gas directly into the boiler inlet duct to provide additional steam).

The Proposed Development would not use supplementary firing.

It is anticipated that Keadby II would be constructed in a multi‐shaft plant configuration. 3.4

However, it is important to note that the Variation Application seeks to retain the flexibility

required for a single‐shaft configuration. This is consistent with the 2016 Consent, which provides

scope for both single‐shaft and multi‐shaft plant configurations.

The Variation Application includes both single‐shaft and multi‐shaft layout plans. The 3.5

Consolidated Parameter Layout Plan Ref: 105_0805_0040_00_03 is based upon the maximum

parameters of both possible plant configurations.



25 July 2017 7 Ref: 2941E

The Variation Application relates to the same site as the Consented Development (i.e. no 3.6

additional land is required for the Proposed Development and as such no change is sought to the

application site).

Other changes proposed include an increase in the number of Abnormal Indivisible Loads (‘AILs’) 3.7

accessing the Site during the construction phase for the Proposed Development (although the

number of AILs to be routed through Ealand Village will remain the same as for the Consented

Development) and a longer commissioning phase of 12 months.

The EIA Report that forms part of the Variation Application, at Chapter 1 ‘Introduction’, Table 1.1, 3.8

lists the key changes sought and provides a comparison of these against the Consented

Development. Chapter 2 ‘The Proposed Development’ of the EIA Report provides a detailed

comparison of the Proposed Development with the Consented Development.

The changes sought to the Consented Development through the Variation Application have not 3.9

necessitated any material amendments to the conditions contained within the 2016 Consent. It is

however proposed that the references to the ‘Enabling Works Phase’ are deleted in order to

simplify the discharge process for the planning conditions. The proposed changes are shown in

blue text on the track change version of the 2016 Consent that forms part of the Variation

Application (the changes made to the Original Consent in 2016 are shown in red).

The guidance issued by Government in respect of variation applications (‘Varying consents 3.10

granted under section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 for generating stations in England and Wales,

July 2013’) notes (paragraph 21) that the “…power conferred on the Secretary of State… by section

36C of the 1989 Act is a broad and discretionary one to make such variations… as appear to [the

Secretary of State…] to be appropriate…”. Notably, paragraph 26 of the guidance indicates that

“different boiler or turbine designs” and “Changes in the design of generating station which have

been consented but not constructed which would allow them to generate an amount of power

that would be inconsistent with the original consent” as being suitable for consideration under the

Section 36C variation procedure.

In view of the above, and the limited scale and nature of the changes sought through this 3.11

Variation Application, it is considered that they are suitable for consideration under the Section

36C variation procedure.



25 July 2017 8 Ref: 2941E

4.0 PRE‐APPLICATION CONSULTATION

The previous variation application (which resulted in the 2016 Consent) was subject to extensive 4.1

pre‐application consultation. This included consulting the local community living within the

vicinity of the Site by a range of means, including newsletters and public exhibitions (in November

2012 and September 2014) and consultation with a number of statutory consultees, including

North Lincolnshire Council, the Environment Agency, Natural England, Historic England and the

Highways Agency, amongst others.

In addition, the Company sought an EIA Scoping Opinion from the SoS for Energy and Climate 4.2

Change (now BEIS) in March 2015. The SoS issued a Scoping Opinion in July 2015.

The consultation and EIA scoping undertaken in respect of the Consented Development is 4.3

described in detail at Section 3 of the Planning Statement (dated February 2016) that formed part

of the previous variation application.

Given the limited scale and nature of the changes being sought through the Variation Application, 4.4

the Company has taken an accordingly proportionate approach to pre‐application consultation on

the Proposed Development.

The Company met with BEIS to introduce the proposed variation of the 2016 Consent on 5 May 4.5

2017 and the outline the reasons for the variation and the anticipated timescales for the

preparation and submission of the Variation Application. A similar meeting subsequently took

place between the Company and the local planning authority, North Lincolnshire Council, on 23

May 2017.

The Company issued a schedule of proposed consultees (statutory consultees and others) to BEIS 4.6

on 9 June 2017 for agreement. The schedule took account of those bodies who had been

consulted on the previous variation application. BEIS confirmed (also on the 9 June 2017 that it

was satisfied that the schedule included the relevant bodies who should be consulted on the

proposed variation of the 2016 Consent. The final schedule (Schedule 2) forms part of the

Variation Application and is contained at Appendix 1.

The Company issued a letter (accompanied by a plan) to the consultees listed on Schedule 2 on 30 4.7

June 2017. The letter explained the background to the proposed variation of the 2016 Consent

and outlined the main changes and explained that an Addendum would be produced to the

Environmental Statement (‘ES’) for the Consented Development. The letter stated that it was

anticipated that the Variation Application would be submitted to BEIS by the end of July 2017 and



25 July 2017 9 Ref: 2941E

requested that any comments be submitted by 14 July 2017. A copy of the letter (and plan) is

contained at Appendix 2.

The following responses have been received to the consultation to date. 4.8

Table 4.1 ‐ Consultee Reponses

No. Consultee Date of response

Comments Company response/action

1. The Environment Agency (‘EA’)

10.07.17 Need to consult specialists about proposed amendments and is unlikely that comments will be received in time for the deadline of 14 July 2017. Will forward any comments as soon as these are received.

The Company responded on 17 July 2017 and stated that its intention was to submit the application on 21 July 2017 and that if comments had not been received by that date it would send a copy of the application to the EA for review in advance of any decision by BEIS as to its suitability for publication.

2. Historic England

13.07.17 No comments to make n/a

3. Anglian Water 14.07.17 The Proposed Development does not appear to affect Anglian Water’s existing assets. No further comments but reserve the right to comment once the application is submitted.

n/a

4. NATS 21.07.17 NATS position remains unchanged and it anticipates no impact on its infrastructure and has no comments to make.

n/a

Copies of the consultation responses are contained at Appendix 3. 4.9

In addition to the above, on the same date (30 June 2017), the Company issued 3,766 copies of a 4.10

community newsletter to all the properties within Keadby and the North Axholme Ward area.

The newsletter outlined the main changes and requested that comments be submitted by 14 July

2017. A copy of the newsletter is contained at Appendix 4.

To date no comments have been received from the local community relating to the Proposed 4.11

Development.



25 July 2017 10 Ref: 2941E

Further to the above, the Company ‘informally’ consulted (a formal EIA scoping opinion was not 4.12

sought) BEIS on the structure and scope of the environmental information to accompany the

Variation Application on 3 July 2017. A response was received from BEIS on 11 July 2017. The key

points raised by BEIS in relation to the proposed ES Addendum included the need:

for a summary table for all environmental effects to set out:

whether those effects are the same/comparable/greater or less than for the −

Consented Development; and

whether a new assessment is presented in the Addendum for each effect or if it will −

be possible to rely on the ES for the Consented Development with cross references;

to focus on those effects that are greater or different to those for the Consented

Development and quantify the change as far as possible;

to consider if revised photomontages are required;

to take account of the new (2017) EIA Regulations; and

the provision of sufficient information to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment.

How the Company has had regard to the response received from BEIS is documented at Table A.3 4.13

‘Consultation with BEIS’ of Annex A of the EIA Report.



25 July 2017 11 Ref: 2941E

5.0 PLANNING POLICY ASSESSMENT

The Planning Statement (dated February 2016) that formed part of the previous variation 5.1

application considers relevant planning policy in detail and provides a planning assessment of the

Consented Development.

Since the previous variation application was submitted there has been no material change in 5.2

planning policy at national or local level. In view of this, combined with the limited scale and

nature of the changes sought through the Variation Application, it is considered that the planning

policy assessment set out in the Planning Statement remains relevant and that no further policy

assessment is required.

Notwithstanding the above, it is relevant to highlight that paragraph 24 of the guidance issued by 5.3

Government in respect of variation applications (‘Varying consents granted under section 36 of

the Electricity Act 1989 for generating stations in England and Wales, July 2013’) confirms that the

National Policy Statements (‘NPSs’) for energy are of relevance to the SoS’s consideration of

variation applications.

Part 3 of the ‘Overarching NPS for Energy’ (EN‐1) 'The need for new nationally significant energy 5.4

infrastructure’ defines and sets out the 'need' that exists for nationally significant energy

infrastructure. Paragraph 3.1.1 states that the UK needs all the types of energy infrastructure

covered by EN‐1 (this covers a range of electricity generating capacity, including gas) in order to

achieve energy security. Paragraph 3.1.2 goes on to state that it is for industry to propose new

energy infrastructure and that the Government does not consider it appropriate for planning

policy to set targets for or limits on different technologies.

Notably, paragraph 3.1.3 of EN‐1 stresses that the SoS should assess applications for the types of 5.5

infrastructure covered by the energy NPSs “…on the basis that the Government has demonstrated

that there is a need for those types of infrastructure and that the scale and urgency of that

need…” is as described for each of them. Paragraph 3.1.4 continues that the SoS should give

substantial weight to the contribution that all developments would make toward satisfying this

need when considering applications.

As such, the need that exists for new energy infrastructure is not open to debate or interpretation 5.6

and is clearly confirmed by EN‐1.

Section 3.3 of Part 3 of EN‐1 sets out why the Government believes that there is an urgent need 5.7

for new electricity infrastructure, including:



25 July 2017 12 Ref: 2941E

Meeting energy security and carbon reduction objectives ‐ the need to ensure there is

sufficient electricity generating capacity to meet maximum peak demand, with a safety

margin of spare capacity to accommodate unexpectedly high demand and to mitigate risks

such as unexpected plant closures and extreme weather events; and a diverse mix of power

generation to reduce reliance on any one type of generation or source of fuel or power.

The need to replace closing electricity generating capacity ‐ at least 22 GW of existing

electricity generating capacity will need to be replaced in the coming years, particularly by

the end of the decade, as a result of tightening environmental regulation and aging power

stations (in particular the closure of coal‐fired stations); in addition to this about 10 GW of

nuclear generating capacity is expected to close over the next 20 years.

The need for more electricity capacity to support the increased supply from renewables ‐

decarbonisation of electricity generation is reliant on a dramatic increase in the amount of

renewable energy; however, some renewable sources (such as wind, solar and tidal) are

intermittent and cannot be adjusted to meet demand. As a result, the more renewable

generating capacity the UK has, the more generation capacity it will require overall to

provide back up at times when the availability of renewable sources is low ‐ with regard to

this it is important to note that EN‐1 recognises that there will still be a role for fossil fuel

generation to provide a cost‐effective means of 'back up' electricity generation at short

notice to support renewable technologies.

Future increases in electricity demand ‐ even with major improvements in overall energy

efficiency, it is expected that demand for electricity will increase, as significant sectors of

energy demand (such as industry, heating and transport) switch from being powered by

fossil fuels to using electricity. As a result of this, total electricity consumption could double

by 2050 and, depending upon the choice of how electricity is supplied, total capacity may

need to more than double to be sufficiently robust to all weather conditions.

Section 3.3 (paragraph 3.3.4) of EN‐1 highlights the benefits of having a diverse mix of all types of 5.8

power generation:

“It means we are not dependent on any one type of generation or one source of fuel or power and

so helps to ensure security of supply… the different types of electricity generation have different

characteristics which can complement each other…”

With regard to fossil fuel generating stations, paragraph 3.3.4 states that these: 5.9



25 July 2017 13 Ref: 2941E

“…can be brought on line quickly when there is a high demand and shut down when demand is

low, thus complementing generation from nuclear and the intermittent generation for

renewables…”

EN‐1 therefore recognises the continuing role of fossil fuel generation in terms of complementing 5.10

other types of generation, notably renewables, providing resilience in the UK’s energy system and

ensuring the security of electricity supplies.

Section 3.6 of EN‐1 deals specifically with the role of fossil fuel electricity generation. Paragraph 5.113.6.1 states:

“Fossil fuel power stations play a vital role in providing reliable electricity supplies: they can be

operated flexibly in response to changes in supply and demand, and provide diversity in our energy

mix. They will continue to play an important role in our energy mix as the UK makes the transition

to a low carbon economy, and Government policy is that they must be constructed, and operate,

in line with increasingly demanding climate change goals.”

Paragraph 3.6.2 recognises that gas will continue to play an important role in the electricity 5.12

sector, providing vital flexibility to support the increasing amount of low carbon generation and to

maintain security of supply. It goes on to highlight that the UK gas market has diversified its

sources of supply of gas in recent years, so that as it becomes more import dependent, companies

supplying the market are not reliant on one source of supply. This protects the UK market from

disruptions to supply.

The continuing need for fossil fuel generation is confirmed at paragraph 3.3.8 of EN‐1: 5.13

“… a number of fossil fuel generating stations will have to close by the end of 2015. Although this

capacity may be replaced by new nuclear and renewable generating capacity in due course, it is

clear that there must be some fossil fuel generating capacity to provide back‐up for when

generation from intermittent renewable generating capacity is low and to help with the transition

to low carbon electricity generation. It is important that such fossil fuel generating capacity

should become low carbon, through development of CCS, in line with carbon reduction targets.

Therefore there is a need for CCR [carbon capture ready] fossil fuel generating stations…”

The Proposed Development would make an important contribution to the security and resilience 5.14

of UK electricity supplies in accordance with EN‐1. It would provide a flexible form of generating

capacity, able to respond in a timely manner to increases in demand on the electricity network or

fluctuations in supply from renewable technologies (thereby supporting the increased

deployment of renewables). Furthermore, being a modern CCGT plant, it would result in much



25 July 2017 14 Ref: 2941E

lower carbon emissions than other forms of fossil fuel generation (supporting the transition to a

low carbon economy) while it would also be ‘carbon capture ready’ with sufficient land set aside

for future carbon capture plant.



25 July 2017 15 Ref: 2941E

6.0 ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT REPORT

The previous variation application that resulted in the 2016 Consent included an Environmental 6.1

Statement (‘ES’) that was prepared in accordance with ‘The Electricity Works (Environmental

Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2000 (the ‘2000 EIA Regulations’).

The Variation Application includes an EIA Report that has been prepared in accordance with ‘The 6.2

Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2017 (the

‘2017 EIA Regulations’), which came into effect on 16 May 2017 and replaced the 2000 EIA

Regulations (it was initially proposed to produce an ES Addendum but following the introduction

of the 2017 EIA Regulations an EIA Report was produced).

Regulation 17 ‘EIA report: requirements’ of the 2017 EIA Regulations sets out the requirements 6.3

for EIA Reports prepared in relation to variation application and confirms that these should cover:

“(1)…

(e)… the main respects in which the developer thinks that the likely significant effects on the

environment of the development, as varied, will differ from those set out in‐

(i) any EIA report or environmental statement prepared in connection with the application for the

section 36 consent that it is proposed be varied; and

(ii) if the section 36 consent has previously been varied by a section 36 variation, any EIA report or

environmental statement prepared regarding the application for that variation;”

In accordance with Regulation 17, the Variation Application includes an EIA Report that has been 6.4

prepared to determine the likely significant effects of the Proposed Development to the extent

that these differ from those reported in the ES for the Consented Development.

Chapter 1 ‘Introduction’ of the EIA Report confirms the scope of the Variation Application and at 6.5

Table 1.1 lists the key changes being sought. Chapter 1 also sets out how the EIA Report complies

with Schedule 4 ‘Information for EIA Reports’ of the 2017 EIA Regulations.

Chapter 2 ‘Proposed Development’ provides a detailed description of the Proposed Development 6.6

including a comparison of the key components of the Consented Development with the Proposed

Development.

Chapter 3 ‘Scope of the Environmental Impact Assessment’ sets out the scope of the EIA Report. 6.7

Table 3.1 ‘Scope of Assessment for Environmental Topics’ provides a summary of the significant

effects as assessed for the Consented Development, the design and other changes (comprised



25 July 2017 16 Ref: 2941E

within the Proposed Development) that may affect the topic assessment and whether the topic

requires reassessment. The topics where the project design is judged likely to have a material

effect on the outcome of the assessment have been afforded further consideration in the EIA

Report. For all other topics, the assessments presented in the ES for the Consented Development

remain valid for the Proposed Development.

The topics areas where the need for reassessment has been identified are air quality and ecology 6.8

and nature conservation relating to the potential changes in effects resulting from emissions to

air due to the increased electrical output (910 MW as opposed to 820 MW) and changes in layout

(including the location of the emissions stack) and building dimensions.

Further to the above, although landscape and visual impacts were not subject to a full 6.9

reassessment, photomontages of the Proposed Development from two representative viewpoints

are presented within the EIA Report to allow a comparison between the Consented Development

and the Proposed Development.

Chapter 8 ‘Summary of Comparison between Likely Significant Effects of the Consented 6.10

Development and Proposed Development’ provides a comparison of effects for the Consented

Development and Proposed Development, not only for air quality and ecology and nature

conservation, but all topics assessed in the ES for the Consented Development.

Table 8.1 ‘Comparison of the Significance of Effects of the Consented Development and the 6.11

Proposed Development’, as the title suggests, provides a comparison of the significance of effects

between the Consented Development and the Proposed Development for all topics and identifies

whether, as a result of the changes, there is a positive change, a negative change or the outcome

is neutral.

Table 8.1 confirms that in terms of their likely significant effects, the Consented Development and 6.12

the Proposed Development are broadly comparable. With regard to the effects of atmospheric

emissions on human health, the modelling undertaken shows small differences between the

Consented Development and the Proposed Development but the differences are ‘not significant’.

Furthermore, the predicted concentrations of pollutants are within the standards designed to

protect human health. Potential air quality impacts on some ecological receptors for the

Proposed Development were identified as being potentially significant but following further

ecological assessment the effects on such receptors remain ‘not significant’ (i.e. no change from

the Consented Development).



25 July 2017 17 Ref: 2941E

The EIA Report (Chapter 6 ‘Cumulative and Indirect Effects’) does not identify any significant 6.13

changes in cumulative or indirect effects between the Consented Development and the Proposed

Development.

In addition to the above, Chapter 7 ‘Mitigation Summary and Environmental Management’ of the 6.14

EIA Report confirms that no additional or greater impacts have been identified that would require

additional or substantially different mitigation from that for the Consented Development and

which is secured by the conditions within the 2016 Consent.



25 July 2017 18 Ref: 2941E

7.0 OTHER MATTERS

Information to inform a Habitats Regulations Assessment

Annex C of the EIA Report provides the required information to inform a Habitats Regulations 7.1

Assessment (‘HRA’) by the Competent Authority in respect of the Proposed Development. As for

the Consented Development, the information compiled indicates that a HRA is required.

Taking account of the HRA undertaken for the Consented Development, Annex C confirms that no 7.2

significant adverse effects on the integrity of European sites are predicted as a result of the

Proposed Development either alone, or in‐combination with other projects. The assessment also

shows that the Proposed Development would have no greater effect than the Consented

Development.

Combined Heat and Power

The Variation Application includes an updated ‘Keadby II Combined Heat and Power Report’, 7.3

which is contained at Annex F of the EIA Report.

The CHP Report sets out how the Company has explored the opportunities for CHP and 7.4

demonstrates that the Proposed Development would be ‘CHP ready’.

Carbon Capture Readiness

‘The Carbon Capture Readiness (Electricity Generating Stations) Regulations 2013’ introduced the 7.5

need for applicants for new fossil fuel generating stations of 300 MW electrical output and above

to consider carbon capture and demonstrate that their plants are ‘carbon capture ready’ and that

sufficient land has been set aside to accommodate carbon capture plant, should the deployment

of such technology become feasible in the future.

The Variation Application includes an updated ‘Keadby II Carbon Capture Readiness Report’, 7.6

which is contained at Annex G of the EIA Report. The CCR Report demonstrates that the

Proposed Development would be carbon capture ready and that sufficient land has been set aside

for future carbon capture plant.



25 July 2017 19 Ref: 2941E

8.0 SUMMARY AND CONCLUSION

KDL (the ‘Company’) has submitted a Variation Application to the SoS for BEIS to vary the 2016 8.1

Consent for Keadby II.

The Variation Application has been prepared in accordance with the 2013 Variation Regulations 8.2

and includes an EIA Report in accordance with the 2017 EIA Regulations.

The Variation Application seeks to increase the electrical output of Keadby II from 820 MW to 910 8.3

MW in order to accommodate advances in CCGT technology and deliver higher efficiency

electricity generation at the Site. The Variation Applications also seeks changes in relation to

matters such as the location of the emissions stack and building dimensions and appearance. No

additional land is required.

While it is anticipated that Keadby II would be constructed in a multi‐shaft plant configuration, 8.4

consistent with the 2016 Consent, the Variation Application seeks to retain the flexibility required

to accommodate both single‐shaft and multi‐shaft configurations.

In view of the limited scale and nature of the changes sought through the Variation Application, it 8.5

is considered that they are suitable for consideration under the Section 36C variation procedure.

The Company has undertaken pre‐application consultation on the Proposed Development. This 8.6

has included consulting a list of bodies (e.g. statutory consultees and others) agreed with BEIS in

addition to the local community living within the vicinity of the Site. The Company has also

informally consulted BEIS on the structure and scope of the environmental information to

accompany the Variation Application. The Company has had regard to the responses received to

the consultation where relevant.

Since the previous variation application (which resulted in the 2016 Consent) was submitted there 8.7

has been no material change in planning policy at national and local level. The planning policy

assessment set out in the February 2016 Planning Statement for the Consented Development

therefore remains relevant and no further policy assessment is required.

Notwithstanding the above, it is important to recognise that the Proposed Development would 8.8

make an important contribution to national energy policy objectives as set out in the NPSs for

energy, notably EN‐1. The Proposed Development would contribute to the security and resilience

of UK electricity supplies. It would provide a flexible form of generating capacity, able to respond

in a timely manner to increases in demand on the electricity network or fluctuations in supply

from renewable technologies (thereby supporting the increased deployment of renewables).



25 July 2017 20 Ref: 2941E

Furthermore, being a modern CCGT plant, it would result in much lower carbon emissions than

other forms of fossil fuel generation (supporting the transition to a low carbon economy).

The EIA Report provides a comparison of the significance of effects of the Consented 8.9

Development and the Proposed Development. The findings of the EIA Report can be summarised

as follows:

In terms of their likely significant effects, the Consented Development and the Proposed

Development are broadly comparable.

With regard to the effects of atmospheric emission on human health, the modelling

undertaken shows small differences between the Consented Development and the

Proposed Development but the differences are not significant. Furthermore, the predicted

concentrations of pollutants are within the standards designed to protect human health.

Potential air quality impacts on some ecological receptors were identified for the Proposed

Development but following further ecological assessment the effects on such receptors

were found to remain ‘not significant’ (i.e. no change from the Consented Development).

The EIA Report has not identified any significant changes in cumulative or indirect effects

between the Consented and the Proposed Development.

The EIA Report confirms that no additional or greater impacts have been identified for the

Proposed Development that would require additional or substantially different mitigation

from than for the Consented Development and which is secured by the conditions within

the 2016 Consent.

The Variation Application is accompanied by information to inform a HRA. Taking account of the 8.10

HRA undertaken for the Consented Development, Annex C of the EIA report confirms that no

significant adverse effects on the integrity of European sites are predicted as a result of the

Proposed Development either along, or in‐combination with other projects. The assessment also

shows that the Proposed Development would have no greater effect than that the Consented

Development.

The Variation Application includes an updated CHP Report that sets out how the Company has 8.11

explored opportunities for CHP and demonstrates that the Proposed Development would be ‘CHP

ready’. It also includes an updated CCR Report demonstrating that the Proposed Development

would be carbon capture ready and that sufficient land has been set aside for future carbon

capture plant.



25 July 2017 21 Ref: 2941E

In conclusion, the Variation Application complies with the 2013 Variation Regulations and the 8.12

2017 EIA Regulations. Furthermore, the Proposed Development is acceptable in planning policy

terms and would support national energy policy objectives, while the EIA Report demonstrates

that it would not result in materially different environmental effects from the Consented

Development.

The SoS for BEIS is therefore requested to vary the 2016 Consent to take account of the changes 8.13

set out in the Variation Application.

Keadby II - Section 36C Application


25 July 2017 Ref: 2941E

APPENDIX 1 - SCHEDULE OF CONSULTEES



Dalton Warner Davis LLP is a Limited Liability Partnership. Registered in England No. OC304838. Registered Office: 21 Garlick Hill, London, EC4V 2AU

Partners N M Fennell BSc MRICS R J Greeves BSc (Hons) MRICS A R Holden BSc (Hons) FRICS

G Bullock BA (Hons) BPI. MRTPI A Vickery BSc MRICS IRRV G Denning B.Eng (Hons) MSc MRICS

B Murphy BA (Hons) MRUP MRTPI A Meech BSc MRICS S Page BA MA (Cantab) MSc MRTPI A Knight BSc (Hons) MSc MAAT MRICS

Consultants A M Davis FRICS IRRV K Dalton FRICS

List of BEIS Consultees, Keadby II

Contact Details Address

Environment Agency

Waterside House Waterside North Lincoln LN2 5HA

Natural England

Natural England Lateral 8 City Walk Leeds LS11 9AT

North Lincolnshire Council

Civic Centre Ashby road Scunthorpe North Lincolnshire DN16 1AB

Historic England

2nd floor Windsor House Cliftonville Northampton NN1 5BE

NATS

NATS En‐Route (NERL) Safeguarding Mailbox 25, NATS Corporate and Technical Centre 4000 Parkway Whiteley, Fareham Hampshire PO15 7FL

CAA

Safety and Airspace Regulation Group CAA House 45 – 49 Kingsway London WC2B 2TE

Ministry of Defence

Defence Infrastructure Organisation Building 49 Kingston Road

2

List of BEIS Consultees, Keadby II

Contact Details Address

Sutton Coldfield West Midlands B75 7RL

Met Office Met Office Fitzroy Road Exeter Devon EX1 3PB

HSE

Health and Safety Executive FOD HQ 1.3 desk 6 Redgrave Court Bootle Merseyside L20 7HS

Highways England

Lateral 8 City Walk Leeds LS11 9AT

Other Consultees, Keadby II

Address

National Grid

National Grid Land & Acquisitions Team National Grid House, Warwick Technology Park Gallows Hill, Warwick, CV34 6DA

RSPB

Stalham House 65 Thorpe Road Norwich Norfolk NR1 1UD

Greater Lincolnshire Local Enterprise

Greater Lincolnshire LEP Unit 4 Witham Park House

3

Partnership (LEP)

Waterside South Lincoln LN5 7JN

Lincolnshire Wildlife Trust

Banovallum House Manor House Street Honcastle LN9 5HF

Humberside Police

Scunthorpe Police Station Corporation Road Scunthorpe DN15 6QB

Anglian Water

Growth Planning and Equivalence Team Anglian Water Services Limited Thorpe Wood House Thorpe Wood Peterborough PE3 6WT



25 July 2017 Ref: 2941E

APPENDIX 2 - LETTER SENT TO CONSULTEES



Dalton Warner Davis LLP is a Limited Liability Partnership. Registered in England No. OC304838. Registered Office: 21 Garlick Hill, London, EC4V 2AU

Partners N M Fennell BSc MRICS R J Greeves BSc (Hons) MRICS A R Holden BSc (Hons) FRICS

G Bullock BA (Hons) BPI. MRTPI A Vickery BSc MRICS IRRV G Denning B.Eng (Hons) MSc MRICS

B Murphy BA (Hons) MRUP MRTPI A Meech BSc MRICS S Page BA MA (Cantab) MSc MRTPI A Knight BSc (Hons) MSc MAAT MRICS

Consultants A M Davis FRICS IRRV K Dalton FRICS

Date: 30 June 2017 Your Ref: ‐ Our Ref: 2941E

Dear

KEADBY DEVELOPMENTS LIMITED ‐ KEADBY 2 POWER STATION PROJECT, KEADBY POWER STATION SITE, TRENTSIDE, KEADBY, NEAR SCUNTHORPE, NORTH LINCOLNSHIRE, DN17 SEF

CONSULTATION IN RESPECT OF THE PROPOSED VARIATION OF THE SECTION 36 CONSENT DATED 3 NOVEMBER 2016 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION OF A 820 MEGAWATT COMBINED CYCLE GAS TURBINE GENERATING STATION

SECTION 36C OF THE ELECTRICITY ACT 1989 (VARIATION OF CONSENTS UNDER SECTION 36 ‘CONSENT REQUIRED FOR THE CONSTRUCTION ETC. OF GENERATING STATIONS’) & THE ELECTRICITY GENERATION STATIONS (VARIATION OF CONSENTS) (ENGLAND AND WALES) REGULATIONS 2013

We write on behalf of Keadby Developments Limited (‘KDL’) to seek your views on the proposed variation of the Section 36 consent dated 3 November 2016 for the Keadby 2 Power Station Project (the ‘Keadby 2 Project’) at the Keadby Power Station Site, Trentside, Keadby, near Scunthorpe, North Lincolnshire.

A plan showing the location and extent (outlined in red) of the site for the consented Project accompanies this letter.

Background

The original Section 36 consent for the Keadby 2 Project was granted by the Secretary of State (‘SoS’) for the Department of Trade and Industry in 1993. The consent allowed for the construction and operation of a 710 megawatt (‘MW’) generating station on land within the existing Keadby (Keadby 1) Power Station site.

On 3 November 2016, the SoS for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (‘BEIS’) varied the 1993 consent under Section 36C of ‘The Electricity Act 1989’ to provide for the construction and operation of a 820 MW combined cycle gas turbine generating station at the site (the ‘Consented Development’). Paragraph (2) of the November 2016 consent states that:

“2. The Development shall comprise:

(a) One combined cycle gas turbine generating station of up to 820MW consisting of:

(i) One industrial gas turbine with associated boilers and single exhaust stack; and

(ii) One steam turbine

22941E ‐ Keadby 2 Project Consultation

(b) An Access road;

(c) Ancillary plant and equipment; and

(d) The necessary buildings (including administration offices) and civil engineering works.”

In response to further detailed design work on the Keadby 2 Project and discussions with potential technology suppliers, KDL now wishes to make a number of changes to the Consented Development. These will require the submission of a further variation application to the SoS for BEIS. The proposed changes are outlined below.

The Proposed Changes

The principal change to the Keadby 2 Project relates to its generating capacity.

Recent advances in the design of combined cycle gas turbines (‘CCGT’) has resulted in the availability on the market of larger, more efficient CCGT units, which, as a consequence of their improved efficiencies, provide both economic and environmental benefits. To allow the new generation of CCGT units to be deployed on the Keadby 2 Project and for these benefits to be secured, KDL is therefore proposing to increase the generating capacity of the Project from 820 MW to 910 MW.

The variation application will also include the following changes:

Stack location ‐ the location of the emissions stack has been altered as a result of plant configuration optimisation.

Building dimensions ‐ largely as a result of the decision to deploy the new generation of CCGT units, it has been necessary to increase the size of the gas turbine building and the heat recovery steam generator building (‘HRSGB’). The gas turbine building dimensions will be 48m in width, 50m in length and 44m in height in comparison to the consented dimensions of 45m W, 47m L and 44m H and those for the HRSGB will be 30m W, 50m L and 52m H in comparison to the consented dimensions of 27m W, 46m L and 44m H. The width of the cooling tower banks will be increased from 17m to 24m.

Selective Catalytic Reduction (‘SCR’) ‐ a SCR system will be included as part of the Project. The SCR system is designed to limit NOx emissions from the gas turbine exhaust.

While the proposed changes are not anticipated to result in materially different environmental effects from those reported in the Environmental Statement (‘ES’) for the Consented Development, KDL is reviewing that ES and will submit an ES Addendum as part of the variation application. The ES Addendum will be accompanied by a Non‐technical Summary.

Based on a preliminary review of the increased generating capacity and design changes, the technical scope of the ES Addendum will focus upon the following:

a project description that provides a clear description of the design changes from the (820 MW) Consented Development;

operational air quality effects on people and any material changes from the Consented Development;

operational effects on ecological receptors due to air quality effects and any material changes from the Consented Development; and

32941E ‐ Keadby 2 Project Consultation

a Habitat Regulations Assessment in the context of air quality effects (if any applicable) at protected areas.

The above technical elements of the ES Addendum will be presented as fully amended versions of the original assessments presented in the ES for the Consented Development.

At this stage it is not considered that a full update of the Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment for the Consented Development is required but comparative photomontages for the proposed variation may be presented to illustrate the extent of the minor visual changes.

In addition to the above, the ES Addendum will contain a consideration in regard to all the other environmental and socio‐economic topics covered in the ES for the Consented Development, which will include any necessary updates to the assessment of cumulative and indirect effects.

If you wish to make any comments in respect of the proposed changes to the Keadby 2 Project we would request that these are made in writing and sent to:

Dalton Warner Davis LLP 21 Garlick Hill London EC4V 2AU FAO: Alternatively, you can submit comments by email to: Any comments should be submitted no later than 14 July 2017.

Following the close of the consultation period KDL will take into account the comments received in finalising the variation application and the ES Addendum.

It is anticipated that the variation application will be submitted to the SoS for BEIS by the end of July 2017 and subject to the SoS confirming that it is ‘suitable for publication’, that you will be notified of the application toward the end of August.

If you have any questions with regard to the proposed changes to the Keadby 2 Project or require any further information please contact either .

Yours faithfully

Dalton Warner Davis LLP (on behalf of KDL)

Enc. Site location plan



25 July 2017 Ref: 2941E

APPENDIX 3 - RESPONSES FROM CONSULTEES

1

From:Sent: 10 July 2017 14:52To:Subject: Keadby 2 Power Station Project

Dear Thank you for your letter of 30 June 2017, which I have just received today having been on leave last week. I will have to consult with our specialists regarding the proposed amendments and unfortunately it is unlikely that I will have received their comments back by your deadline of 14 July. Please accept my apologies for this, I will however forward on any comments I receive back as soon as possible. Kind regards,

Lincolnshire & Northamptonshire Area Environment Agency | Waterside House, Waterside North, Lincoln LN2 5HA :

We have recently published new webpages for LPAs, developers and Neighbourhood Planning Groups giving clarification on our planning consultation role. Please refer to this to check if we can provide you with advice on your development proposals. For developments in areas at risk of flooding, please refer to our new Flood Risk Assessment checklist.

Information in this message may be confidential and may be legally privileged. If you have received this message by mistake, please notify the sender immediately, delete it and do not copy it to anyone else. We have checked this email and its attachments for viruses. But you should still check any attachment before opening it. We may have to make this message and any reply to it public if asked to under the Freedom of Information Act, Data Protection Act or for litigation. Email messages and attachments sent to or from any Environment Agency address may also be accessed by someone other than the sender or recipient, for business purposes. Click here to report this email as spam ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned on behalf of Dalton Warner Davis by MessageLabs. ______________________________________________________________________

1

From:Sent: 17 July 2017 15:26To:Subject: RE: Keadby 2 Power Station Variation Project

Hi Yes that would be really helpful, Thank you,

From: Sent: 17 July 2017 14:28 To: Subject: Keadby 2 Power Station Variation Project Hi Thank you for your email last week. By way of an update on Keadby 2, we are intending to submit the Section36c application to BEIS this Friday 21st . Once it is confirmed for publication, the Environment Agency will be consulted again with a 28 day consultation period. We believe the changes between the previous varied consent and the new variation application are minor, as they predominately comprise of a rise in the mega‐wattage due to improved technology. If you feel it would be helpful, we would be happy to send out the application documents and environmental statement for the new application prior to the next consultation window, in order for the your specialists to provide a full response next month. Kind regards,

Chartered Surveyors& Town Planners 21 Garlick Hill London EC4V 2AU

www.dwdllp.com

This e-mail (and any attachments) may be confidential and privileged and exempt from disclosure under law. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately and delete the email. Any unauthorised disclosure, copying or dissemination is strictly prohibited. Thank you Dalton Warner Davis LLP is a Limited Liability Partnership. Registered in England No. OC304838. Registered Office: 21 Garlick Hill, London, EC4V 2AU.

From: Sent: 10 July 2017 14:52 To: Subject: Keadby 2 Power Station Project Dear , Thank you for your letter of 30 June 2017, which I have just received today having been on leave last week.

2

I will have to consult with our specialists regarding the proposed amendments and unfortunately it is unlikely that I will have received their comments back by your deadline of 14 July. Please accept my apologies for this, I will however forward on any comments I receive back as soon as possible. Kind regards,

Lincolnshire & Northamptonshire Area Environment Agency | Waterside House, Waterside North, Lincoln LN2 5HA

We have recently published new webpages for LPAs, developers and Neighbourhood Planning Groups giving clarification on our planning consultation role. Please refer to this to check if we can provide you with advice on your development proposals. For developments in areas at risk of flooding, please refer to our new Flood Risk Assessment checklist.

Information in this message may be confidential and may be legally privileged. If you have received this message by mistake, please notify the sender immediately, delete it and do not copy it to anyone else. We have checked this email and its attachments for viruses. But you should still check any attachment before opening it. We may have to make this message and any reply to it public if asked to under the Freedom of Information Act, Data Protection Act or for litigation. Email messages and attachments sent to or from any Environment Agency address may also be accessed by someone other than the sender or recipient, for business purposes. Click here to report this email as spam ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned on behalf of Dalton Warner Davis by MessageLabs. ______________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned on behalf of Dalton Warner Davis by MessageLabs. ______________________________________________________________________

This message has been scanned and no issues were discovered. Click here to report this email as spam Information in this message may be confidential and may be legally privileged. If you have received this message by mistake, please notify the sender immediately, delete it and do not copy it to anyone else.

3

We have checked this email and its attachments for viruses. But you should still check any attachment before opening it. We may have to make this message and any reply to it public if asked to under the Freedom of Information Act, Data Protection Act or for litigation. Email messages and attachments sent to or from any Environment Agency address may also be accessed by someone other than the sender or recipient, for business purposes. Click here to report this email as spam ______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned on behalf of Dalton Warner Davis by MessageLabs. ______________________________________________________________________

1

From:Sent: 14 July 2017 08:57To:Subject: Keadby II Power Station Proposed Variation of the Section 36 consent

Dear , Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the proposed variation to the approved Keaby II development. The following response is submitted on behalf of Anglian Water. Based upon the information provided the proposed revisions to the existing development do not appear to have an affect on Anglian Water’s existing assets. Therefore we do not have any further comments at this stage. However we reserve the right to comment on the planning application once submitted. I would be grateful if you could confirm that you have received this response. Should you have any queries relating to this response. Regards,

Anglian Water Services Limited

Thorpe Wood House, Thorpe Wood, Peterborough, PE3 6WT www.anglianwater.co.uk

--*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*----*---*----*--- The information contained in this message is likely to be confidential and may be legally privileged. The dissemination, distribution, copying or disclosure of this message, or its contents, is strictly prohibited unless authorised by Anglian Water. It is intended only for the person named as addressee. Anglian Water cannot accept any responsibility for the accuracy or completeness of this message, and does not authorise any contract to be made using the Internet. If you have received this message in error, please immediately return it to the sender at the above address and delete it from your computer. Anglian Water Services Limited Registered Office: Lancaster House, Lancaster Way, Ermine Business Park, Huntingdon, Cambridgeshire, PE29 6XU Registered in England No 2366656 Please consider the environment before printing this email.

2

______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned on behalf of Dalton Warner Davis by MessageLabs. ______________________________________________________________________

1

From:Sent: 21 July 2017 16:25To:Cc: NATS SafeguardingSubject: RE: Keadby Power Station, proposed variation of the Section 36 consent

Dear I refer to the consultation received by surface mail dated 30th June 2017 regarding the proposed variation of the section 36 consent for the CCGT. I can confirm that NATS’s position remains unchanged and we anticipate no impact on our infrastructure and have no comments to make. Regards

4000 Parkway, Whiteley, Fareham, Hants PO15 7FL www.nats.co.uk/windfarms

From: Sent: 18 May 2016 10:32 To: Cc: NATS Safeguarding Subject: RE: Keadby Power Station, Application under Section 37 of the 1989 Electricity Act Consultation Dear Sirs, NATS anticipates no impact from this development as its nearest installations are over 20km away. As such we have no comments to make on the EIA and have no objections to the proposals. Regards

NATS Safeguarding Office

2

NATS Safeguarding 4000 Parkway, Whiteley, PO15 7FL http://www.nats.co.uk/windfarms From: Sent: 17 May 2016 12:49 To: Cc: Subject: Keadby Power Station, Application under Section 37 of the 1989 Electricity Act Consultation Importance: High Dear Following recent correspondence, you will be aware that SSE (Keadby Developments Ltd) is proposing to construct anew CCGT power station (Keadby II) to the west of the existing Keadby I Power Station. Keadby II is currently the subject of an application to vary the original consent under section 36c of ‘The Electricity Act 1989’ (the ‘1989 Act’).

Once Keadby II is constructed it will need to be connected to the National Grid (‘NG’) electricity transmissionsystem. Keadby I has an existing connection to the NG electricity transmission system by means of two separateoverhead lines and associated transmission towers, which connect with the main Keadby 400kV NG substation(located to the north‐west of the Keadby I and II sites). SSE is therefore proposing overhead line works to facilitatethe Keadby II connection.

SSE intends to seek Environmental Impact Assessment (‘EIA’) screening opinions from the Secretary of State (‘SoS’)for the Department of Energy and Climate Change (‘DECC’) in respect of the overhead line works, following whichapplications will be submitted to DECC under section 37 of the 1989 Act. A final draft of the EIA Screening Reportand Figures that it is proposed you will find is attached to this email and has been dispatched to you via post.

In advance of seeking EIA screening opinions from the SoS for DECC, SSE wishes to provide you with the opportunityto comment on the proposed works. We would be grateful if you could find the time to review the screening reportfor the proposed lines and submit any comments you might have no later than 15 June.

Please forward any comments associated with the application under Section 37 to Kind regards,

Chartered Surveyors & Town Planners 21 Garlick Hill London EC4V 2AU

www.dwdllp.com

This e-mail (and any attachments) may be confidential and privileged and exempt from disclosure under law. If you are not the intended recipient please notify the sender immediately and delete the email. Any unauthorised disclosure, copying or dissemination is strictly prohibited. Thank you. Dalton Warner Davis LLP is a Limited Liability Partnership. Registered in England No. OC304838. Registered Office: 21 Garlick Hill, London, EC4V 2AU.

______________________________________________________________________

3

This email has been scanned on behalf of Dalton Warner Davis by MessageLabs. ______________________________________________________________________

If you are not the intended recipient, please notify our Help Desk at Email [email protected] immediately. You should not copy or use this email or attachment(s) for any purpose nor disclose their contents to any other person. NATS computer systems may be monitored and communications carried on them recorded, to secure the effective operation of the system. Please note that neither NATS nor the sender accepts any responsibility for viruses or any losses caused as a result of viruses and it is your responsibility to scan or otherwise check this email and any attachments. NATS means NATS (En Route) plc (company number: 4129273), NATS (Services) Ltd (company number 4129270), NATSNAV Ltd (company number: 4164590) or NATS Ltd (company number 3155567) or NATS Holdings Ltd (company number 4138218). All companies are registered in England and their registered office is at 4000 Parkway, Whiteley, Fareham, Hampshire, PO15 7FL.

______________________________________________________________________ This email has been scanned on behalf of Dalton Warner Davis by MessageLabs. ______________________________________________________________________



25 July 2017 Ref: 2941E

APPENDIX 4 - COMMUNITY NEWSLETTER

www.sse.com/keadby2

Keadby 2 Project This newsletter provides an update on our plans for the Keadby 2 CCGT (Combined Cycle Gas Turbine) power station.

July 2017 Update

SSE was originally granted consent for the 710MW Keadby 2 project in 1993. In 2016 the consent was generally updated and the maximum generating capacity increased to 820MW.Recent advances in gas turbine design means there are larger, more efficient turbines available on the market which provide both economic and environmental benefits as a consequence of improved efficiencies. To capitalise on these developments, SSE is looking to revise the current planning consent to enable new generation of turbines to be used on the K2 project.

SSE is seeking to amend the current planning permission for the Keadby 2 power station to increase its generating capacity to 910MW.

To support this planning amendment further environmental assessments are being carried out which take into consideration the following potential impacts:

• Visual Impact The layout for this varied development differs slightly from the previously consented development. The stack has moved approximately 20 metres to the north. This modification does not materially affect the overall footprint of the project. The final engineering design of Keadby 2 will be settled after the appointment of the main contractor.

Continued overleaf

Proposed Amendments to the existing consent

Consented Layout Proposed Layout

We welcome any comments or questions you may have about Keadby 2, you can contact our project liaison manager using the following details:

Jade Fearon (Liaison Manager) Tel: 01724 788236 Mob: 07584 313526 Email: [email protected]

Post: Keadby Power Station, Trentside, Keadby, SCUNTHORPE DN17 3EF

Further information is available on www.sse.com/keadby2

Contact us

The environmental assessments being carried out on the above are generally not expected to show additional impacts above those outlined in the consented development.

Information on the assessments carried out will be available later in July in an Environmental Statement Addendum Report which will be available to download via the project webpage www.sse.com/keadby2

The proposed revision to the consent will be subject to an application to the Department for Business, Energy and Industrial Strategy (DBEIS).

Members of the public are invited to make comments on the proposed amendment by 14th July 2017. Before we proceed to construction of Keadby 2, SSE would need to take a final investment decision.

Environmental Assessments

• Traffic and Transport SSE is aware the routes that vehicles will take to access the construction site of Keadby 2 are very important to residents. The planned route for construction traffic to the site will be via the North Pilfrey Bridge from the A18 therefore avoiding local villages. The current consent allows for up to 10 abnormal loads to be brought to site via Ealand village. This amendment to the consent will not increase this requirement.

• Air Quality and Ecology Emissions will be different as a result of the increased capacity and while this is not expected to lead to significant impacts on air quality for people, or for ecology, the assessment will examine these matters in detail.

Proposed Amendments to the existing consent Continued

keadby developments limited keadby ii section application...

Documents