the port talbot steelworks (power generation … port talbot steelworks (power generation...

Planning Act 2008 The Infrastructure Planning (Applications: Prescribed Forms and Procedure) Regulations 2009

The Port Talbot Steelworks (Power Generation Enhancement) Order

10.01 Planning Statement

PINS Reference EN010062

Document No. 10.01

Regulation 5(2)(q)

Author GVA

Revision Date Description

0 July 2014 Submission Version

The Port Talbot Steelworks (Power Generation Enhancement) Order Planning Statement 10.01

July 2014 2

CONTENTS 1 Introduction .............................................................................................................. 8

1.1 Overview ......................................................................................................... 8

1.2 The Applicant .................................................................................................. 9

1.3 The Background & Justification for the Proposed Development ................... 10

1.4 The Structure of this Statement .................................................................... 15

2 Site Context & The Proposed Development ........................................................ 16 2.1 Site Location ................................................................................................. 16

2.2 General Site History ...................................................................................... 17

2.3 Planning History ............................................................................................ 18

2.4 Land Ownership & Existing Land Use .......................................................... 18

3 The Proposed Development ................................................................................. 20 3.1 Preface ......................................................................................................... 20

3.2 Proposed Development: Project Summary ................................................... 20

3.3 Proposed Development: Project Detail ......................................................... 23

3.4 Proposed Development: Decommissioning of Existing Equipment............... 29

3.5 Proposed Development: Construction .......................................................... 29

4 Planning Policy Context ........................................................................................ 35 4.1 Preface ......................................................................................................... 35

4.2 National Planning Policy ............................................................................... 36

4.3 The Development Plan ................................................................................. 42

5 Planning Assessment ........................................................................................... 51 5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................... 51

5.2 NPS 1 – Overarching National Policy Statement for Energy (NPS EN-1) ..... 52

5.3 NPS 2 – Fossil Fuel Electricity Generating Infrastructure (NPS EN-2) ......... 97

5.4 NPS 4 – Gas Supply Infrastructure & Gas and Oil Pipelines (NPS EN-4) .. 104

5.5 NPS 5 – Electricity Networks Infrastructure (NPS EN-5) ............................ 108


July 2014 3

5.6 National Planning Policy ............................................................................. 111

6 DCO Requirements .............................................................................................. 120 6.1 Overview ..................................................................................................... 120

6.2 Planning Requirements .............................................................................. 120

7 Conclusion ........................................................................................................... 122

APPENDICES Appendix A Existing Site Layout Plan (inclusive of the “Order Limits”)

(Document Reference: 2.02)

Appendix B Site Location Plan (Document Reference: 2.01)

Appendix C Sites of Landscape Importance (Document Reference: 2.07.2)

Appendix D Nature Conservation Sites, Habitats and Diversity Features

(Document Reference: 2.07.1)


July 2014 4

GLOSSARY

AA Appropriate Assessment

AONB Area of Outstanding Natural Beauty

AQMA Air Quality Management Area

ASIDOHL Assessment of Significance of Impacts of Development on

Historic Landscape

BTA Boiler Turbo Alternator

CAA Civil Aviation Authority

CCS Carbon Capture Storage

CO2 Carbon Dioxide

CoCP Code of Construction Practice

CTMP Construction Traffic Management Plan

DAM Development Advice Map

DECC Department of Energy & Climate Change

DCO Development Consent Order

EIA Environmental Impact Assessment

EP Environmental Permit

ES Environmental Statement

EU European Union

FCA Flood Consequences Assessment

FWEP Flood Warning and Evacuation Plan

GGAT Gwent and Glamorgan Archaeological Trust

Ha / ha Hectare

HGV Heavy Goods Vehicle


July 2014 5

HMP Habitat Management Plan

HRA Habitats Regulations Assessment

IfA Institute for Archaeologists

IPC Infrastructure Planning Commission

Km Kilometre

LDP Local Development Plan

LNR Local Nature Reserve

LPA Local Planning Authority

MMP Materials Management Plan

MOD Ministry Of Defence

MWe Mega Watts Electrical – measure of energy, one million watts

MWth Mega Watts Thermal – measure of heat energy

NATS National Air Traffic Services

NGR National Grid Reference

NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide

NPS National Policy Statement

NPS EN-1 Overarching National Policy Statement for Energy

NPS EN-2 National Policy Statement for Fossil Fuel Electricity

Generating Infrastructure

NPS EN-4 National Policy Statement for Gas Supply Infrastructure and

Gas and Oil Pipelines

NPS EN-5 National Policy Statement for Electricity Networks

Infrastructure

NPTCBC Neath Port Talbot County Borough Council


July 2014 6

NPTUDP Neath Port Talbot Unitary Development Plan

NRW Natural Resources Wales (formally EAW and CCW)

NSIP Nationally Significant Infrastructure Project

NSR Noise Sensitive Receptor

Order Limits The site boundary defined by the Development Consent

Order and denoted by a red line in figures.

PDR Peripheral Distributor Road

PEIR Preliminary Environmental Information Report

PINS Planning Inspectorate

PJ Petajoule - measure of energy

PPG Pollution Prevention Guidelines

PPW Planning Policy Wales

PM10 Extremely small particulates or particulate matter (in the

order of ~10 micrometres or less)

PPP Pollution Prevention Plan

PROW Public Rights of Way

Ramsar Wetlands of international importance, designated under the

Ramsar Convention

SAC Special Area of Conservation

SINC Sites of Interest for Nature Conservation

SoS Secretary of State

SPA Special Protection Area

SPG Supplementary Planning Guidance

SSP Site Safety Plan


July 2014 7

SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest

SWMP Site Waste Management Plan

TA Turbo Alternators (Differentiation - this is followed by a

number)

TA Traffic Assessment

TAN Technical Advice Note

Tata Steel The overarching company (Includes the Applicant)

Tata Steel UK Limited The Applicant

TP Travel Plan

TSUL Tata Steel UK Limited. The Applicant

UDP Unitary Development Plan

ULCOS Ultra-Low CO2 Steelmaking

WG Welsh Government

ZTV Zone of Theoretical Visibility


July 2014 8

1 Introduction

1.1 Overview

1.1.1 This Planning Statement has been prepared by GVA, on behalf of Tata Steel

UK Limited (the Applicant), in support of an application for a Development

Consent Order (DCO) pursuant to the Planning Act 2008 (PA 2008) (‘the

Application’), for a scheme that proposes the enhancement of existing power

generation facilities (hereafter known as the ‘proposed development’) at Tata’s

Port Talbot Steelworks in South Wales.

1.1.2 As the proposed development comprises an electricity generating station with a

capacity of more than 50MW, it constitutes a Nationally Significant Infrastructure

Project (NSIP) under section 15 of the PA 2008. Accordingly, it requires

development consent under section 31 of the PA 2008. Development consent

may only be granted by order (a DCO) following an application to the Secretary

of State for Energy and Climate Change pursuant to section 37 of the PA 2008.

1.1.3 The location of the proposed development site and the limits of the DCO are

shown on the Existing Site Location Plan included in Appendix A (Document

Reference: 2.02).

1.1.4 This Application for development consent is for the installation of up to two new

boilers (nominally 164 Mega Watt thermal (MWth) each) and associated new

steam turbine sets with a gross capacity of up to 150 Mega Watt electrical

(MWe), which would be connected to the existing process gases (i.e. blast

furnace gas, etc) distribution network in order to receive these gases through

new pipe work, all to be located within the Order Limits. The proposed

development also includes the 66kV electrical connection to the grid (a cable

route of around 2.8km in length) and extensions to the existing on-site utility

connections (water, nitrogen, natural gas and compressed air).


July 2014 9

1.1.5 The proposed development would result in the total on-site power generation

capacity at the Port Talbot site increasing up to a maximum of 245 MWe.

1.1.6 In accordance with the PA 2008, this Application is submitted to the Planning

Inspectorate (PINS) (the Examining Authority) for consideration and, ultimately,

for its recommendation to the Secretary of State, who will determine the

Application.

1.2 The Applicant

1.2.1 Tata Steel UK Limited (hereafter referred to as “TSUL”) is the Applicant for the

DCO and has control of the vast majority of the land identified for the proposed

development (see the plan in Appendix A of this statement (Document

Reference: 2.02 for the Order Limits). The Order Limits also include two small

sections of Network Rail owned land which comprise a disused internal railway

within the steelworks site. The railway line would be crossed by the proposed

electricity connection and an extension to the gas pipe network, authorisation

for which is included within the DCO.

1.2.2 For the purposes of this Application, reference may be made to Tata Steel in a

wider sense which includes a number of steelmaking companies all owned by

the same parent company operating in various jurisdictions, of which Tata Steel

UK Limited is the company operating in the UK. However, it should be clear

from the outset that TSUL is the Applicant for the Application.

1.2.3 The Applicant is committed to environmental care and protection, to a

sustainable society, and the safety of its neighbours and everyone on its sites.

The Applicant recognises its environmental responsibilities, and is committed to

minimising the environmental impact of its operations and products by adopting

sustainable practices and by continuously improving environmental

performance. The Applicant has implemented environmental management

systems that have been certified as meeting the requirements of international


July 2014 10

standard ISO14001 at all of its main manufacturing sites, including its Port

Talbot site.

1.2.4 Tata Steel is a leading member of ULCOS (Ultra-Low CO2 Steelmaking) – a

pioneering partnership of 48 companies and organisations from 15 European

countries that recently completed the first phase of a cooperative research

initiative to achieve a step change in CO2 emissions from steelmaking. The

ambitious aim of the ULCOS project, which began in 2004 and is supported by

the European Commission, is to reduce CO2 emissions per tonne of steel

produced by at least 50% by 2050.

1.3 The Background & Justification for the Proposed Development

1.3.1 The current total on-site power generation capacity of the Port Talbot site is

115.7 MWe. This capacity provides electrical power and process steam to the

production processes on-site. However the majority of this existing power

generation equipment dates back to the 1950’s and is becoming increasingly

unreliable and inefficient due to its age.

1.3.2 The Port Talbot steelworks represents a major contributor to the local and

regional economies. It directly employs approximately 3,500 people in a variety

of disciplines and supports a huge amount of subsidiary businesses in the local

area, but also at a national and international level. The Welsh Government

recognises Tata Steel as an “anchor employer” within south Wales, employing

up to 17,000 people both directly and indirectly through the localised supply

chain. It must also be noted that the operations of the Port Talbot site support

the other Tata Steel sites at Llanwern, Shotton, Corby and Trostre.

1.3.3 The steel market is a global one and, at Port Talbot, TSUL is making continual

investment to increase its competitiveness in that marketplace. The applicant is

committed to the Port Talbot site and in recent times has made significant


July 2014 11

investment in the steelworks to increase its competitiveness in the global steel

market. Recent investment in the Port Talbot site includes:

the commissioning of a £60m energy efficiency scheme in 2010 to capture

and reuse of gas from the Basic Oxygen Steelmaking (BOS) plant;

a £50m investment scheme to recover and re-use process-generated waste

heat, which was fully commissioned in early 2013, and

the £185m rebuild of Blast Furnace 4 (also in 2013).

1.3.4 However, market competition is intense, and on 1st July 2014, TSUL

announced restructuring proposals to improve the competitiveness of its South

Wales steelmaking business. The proposed changes would enable the UK

Strip Products business to compete in Europe’s lower market demand era by

reducing costs equivalent to the loss of about 400 jobs in Port Talbot. Extracts

from a news report published on the BBC website are included below to

illustrate the rationale for the restructuring:

The company [TSUL] said in statement the job losses would reduce

costs and enable it to compete in an era of lower market demand.

Mr Koehler [TSUL Chief Executive] said: "Steel demand and prices are

likely to be under pressure for some years. Our business rates in the

UK are much higher than other EU countries and our UK energy costs

will remain uncompetitive until new mitigation measures come into

effect.

"These proposed changes then are vital if we are to build a competitive

future for our strip products business in the UK."

The company spends £60m on electricity in Wales alone, and pays

about 40% more for the electricity than competitors in continental

Europe.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-28104757

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-28104757


July 2014 12

1.3.5 This demonstrates the commercial pressure TSUL is currently experiencing in

the UK and highlights the acute economic need for the proposed development.

1.3.6 The proposed development represents a further investment in the Port Talbot of

around £200m which will increase economic efficiency through reduction in

electricity import costs and will help to protect the long-term future of

steelmaking in South Wales. Clearly, the proposed development will also

contribute to the economic stability of the steelworks and therefore the County

Borough of Neath Port Talbot and the wider regional economy. This

contribution will come during the construction and operational phases of the

proposed development.

1.3.7 The following sections outline the current and future operations of the Port

Talbot site in the context of the proposed development.

Current Operations

1.3.8 The iron and steel making process generates by-product gases which, if not

utilised or recycled by the site, are burnt through the flare stacks. The current

minimum operational flare is approximately 1 Petajoule (PJ).

1.3.9 Energy represents a large proportion of steel manufacturing costs. In order to

remain competitive within the market place, the Applicant has embarked on a

series of improvement measures, of which energy efficiency is one. A

significant opportunity is presented by the enhancement of the existing on-site

power generation which could result in a considerable reduction in imported

electricity against current site demand.

1.3.10 Although the total on-site power generation capacity is 115.7 MWe, the relative

age and efficiency of the existing equipment, combined with the variable cycle

of process gas production, results in an average power generation of 75 MWe.

Combined with the grid import of 50MWe, this meets current site demand of 125


July 2014 13

MWe. The minimum amount of flared process gases is approximately 1 PJ per

annum.

Future Operations without Proposed Development

1.3.11 The Applicant has an ambition to increase production to 4.7 million tonnes of

iron per annum at the Port Talbot site. Once production increases to this level,

and in the absence of the proposed development and/or any other energy

efficiency improvements, the amount of process gas being flared would

increase to approximately 7 PJ per annum. With on-going tactical

improvements and capital projects, the flare could be reduced by 2.2 PJ to 4.8

PJ per annum and therefore deliver a reduction in reliance on imported fuel

(natural gas).

1.3.12 The existing power generation facilities contain equipment dating back to the

1950s and do not have sufficient capacity to convert the available process

gases associated with the current and increased iron production.

1.3.13 In terms of demand for electricity, at 4.7 million tonnes of iron per annum the

site would require approximately 140 MWe, but the total average site capacity,

without the proposed development, would remain the same (at 75 MWe),

resulting in electrical imports increasing to 65 MWe from 50 MWe.

Future Operations with Proposed Development

1.3.14 In order to improve efficiency and increase generation, the Applicant proposes

to enhance the total on-site power generation by installing up to two new boilers

(nominally 164 MWth each) and associated steam turbine sets with a gross

capacity of 150 MWe. The proposed development would be housed in a new

building and would be connected to the existing blast furnace gas distribution

network in order to receive fuel gases through new pipe work.


July 2014 14

1.3.15 The enhancement of the existing on-site power generation through the

development of new facilities will allow the existing inefficient facilities to be

decommissioned as part of the proposed development. It is proposed that the

decommissioned facilities would be retained in situ on site but would not be

operational. Further detail on the equipment to be decommissioned is provided

in section 3.4 of this statement.

1.3.16 The total on-site power generation capacity, inclusive of the proposed

development, would be increased up to a maximum of 245 MWe. This would

result in an average power generation of approximately 130 MWe (due to the

variable cycle of process gas production on-site). This would result in a

reduction of grid import to 10 MWe (a decrease of 55Mwe). The estimated

amount of process gases being flared would significantly reduce by 4.3 PJ to

approximately 0.5 PJ per annum.

1.3.17 The proposed development would have a number of net benefits including:

Air quality improvements through the reduction in flared process gases;

Saving of up to approximately 400,000 tonnes per annum of CO2

compared to grid generators (based on generation from coal fired stations);

Reduced on-site electricity imports (to 10Mwe on average);

Increased operational efficiency and reliability of on-site power and steam

production; and

Increased economic efficiency through cost reduction to protect the long-

term future of steelmaking in South Wales.

1.3.18 In conclusion, the increase in total on-site power generation capacity as a result

of the proposed development would reduce the requirement for electricity

imports and hence significantly reduce the site’s cost base and improve its

environmental performance through reduction in flaring of process gases.


July 2014 15

1.4 The Structure of this Statement

1.4.1 This statement sets out the justification for the proposed development in

planning terms. Following this introductory section, the statement includes:

a description of the site, its location and context (Section 2);

an explanation of the proposed development, which is considered to a key

element of the future viability and sustainability of the steelworks site as a

whole (Section 3);

a review of the key points presented by the planning policy context to the

site, including an overview of the relevant National Policy Statements

(NPS), the Unitary Development Plan (UDP) for Neath Port Talbot and the

emerging Local Development Plan (LDP) (Section 4);

an assessment of planning policy compliance with the national and local

planning policy in relation to the principle of installing internal power

generation enhancement at the application site (Section 5);

an examination of the role played by the DCO requirements for the

proposed development (Section 6); and

key conclusions on the merits of the proposal to develop this vacant area of

land, within the confines of the existing steelworks, to improve the efficiency

of the site operations (Section 7).


July 2014 16

2 Site Context & The Proposed Development

2.1 Site Location

2.1.1 The Port Talbot steelworks is located wholly within the County Borough of

Neath Port Talbot and extends to a total of 1005.5 hectares, which comprises

all of the major components of the steelworks, together with the ancillary

structures/buildings. The proposed development site sits within the steelworks

site and the Order Limits of the proposed development extends to a total of

22.9ha.

2.1.2 The site is located approximately 1.5km to the southeast of Port Talbot. The

Peripheral Distributor Road, known as “Harbour Way” (which opened in October

2013), lies just to the east of the site running parallel to the M4. The Port Talbot

Docks Industrial Area lies to the northwest as does Port Talbot Parkway station

and Port Talbot town centre.

2.1.3 Within the wider locality, existing residential communities include Margam,

Cwmavon, Goetre, Bryn, Pwll-y-glaw, Pontrhydyfen, North Cornelly, South

Cornelly, Pyle, Kenfig, Briton Ferry, Llandarcy, Skewen, Neath and Baglan.

The location of the proposed development is illustrated on the plan included in

Appendix B (Document Reference: 2.01).

2.1.4 The proposed development would be located in the north of the Port Talbot

steelworks site adjacent to the existing power generation facilities. The

proposed development would be separated from local communities by Harbour

Way.

2.1.5 An Air Quality Management Area (AQMA) is located directly to the northeast

and east of the proposed development. There are two Landscape of

Outstanding Historic Interest designations located to northeast (partially within


July 2014 17

the blue line boundary) and to the south. These are shown on the plan included

in Appendix C (Document Reference: 2.07.2).

2.1.6 Within 10km of the proposed development site, there are a number of

ecological designations. These comprise eleven Sites of Special Scientific

Interest (SSSI), three Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), one Ramsar and

two National Nature Reserves (NNR) – all designated for their habitats and

plant assemblages. These are shown on the plan included in Appendix D

(Document Reference: 2.07.1).

2.1.7 There are no archaeological designations, listed buildings, scheduled ancient

monuments or registered parks and gardens located within the site boundary

but some are located within close proximity of the proposed development and

within the 15km study area assessed within the cultural heritage chapter of the

ES.

2.2 General Site History

2.2.1 Steelmaking at the Port Talbot site began with the Margam Iron and Steel

Works (completed between 1923 and 1926) and then the Abbey Works, which

opened in 1951 and was fully operational by 1953. These sites formed part of

the Steel Company of Wales. At the time of peak employment in the 1960s, the

Abbey Works was Europe's largest steelworks and the largest single employer

in Wales, with a labour force of 18,000.

2.2.2 In 1967, the Steel Company of Wales was merged with the UK’s other main

steel producing companies to form the British Steel Corporation. The British

Steel Corporation was later privatised to form British Steel Plc before becoming

an entirely private company in 1999; British Steel Limited. British Steel later

merged with Dutch steelmaker Koninkijke Hoogovens to form Corus UK Limited

in the year 2000. In 2007, Corus UK Limited was acquired by Tata Steel.


July 2014 18

2.2.3 The Port Talbot site is an integrated steelmaking site using imported raw

materials. The site makes hot-rolled, cold-rolled and metallic coated strip steels

and provides solutions in product design, processing technologies and

management of the supply chain. The steel products are transported direct to

customers, to other Tata downstream processors and to distribution centres (in

the UK and Europe) for use in the flat products steel markets.

2.2.4 The Port Talbot Steelworks competes in a global market and significant

investment has been, and continues to be, made to increase its

competitiveness in that marketplace. As summarised earlier, significant

investment has already been made at the Port Talbot site, for example the

rebuild of Blast Furnace 4, construction of a BOS Off gas waste heat recovery

plant, and the recovery and re-use of process-generated waste heat.

2.2.5 Therefore, this proposed development will increase economic efficiency through

cost reduction and will help to protect the long-term future of steelmaking in

South Wales.

2.3 Planning History

2.3.1 The planning history of the site is extensive and relates to the on-going

operation and development of the steelworks. However, the previous planning

applications are not considered to be of direct relevance to the proposed

development and as such a summary has not been included within this

statement.

2.4 Land Ownership & Existing Land Use

2.4.1 The vast majority of the proposed development site (denoted by the Order

Limits shown on the plan in Appendix A) falls within the ownership of TSUL.

However, the electrical connection and gas pipework cross a disused railway

line which runs through the steelworks site, and is in the ownership of Network

Rail (the proposed development would not affect the operations of the rail line


July 2014 19

should it become operational again in the future). The applicant is in dialogue

with Network Rail to agree the necessary rights required to cross these two

sections of land. However, for the reasons set out in the Statement of Reasons

(Document Reference 4.01), acquisition of the necessary rights have also been

included in the Book Reference (Document Reference 4.03) and the draft DCO

submitted with the Application.

2.4.2 The location of the main generation facilities within the Order Limits was

historically the location of an on-site coke works, which was demolished in the

1960s. The site is currently open scrubland with a car park/concrete

hardstanding in the north-western portion of the site. A new internal site road

was constructed within the proposed development site in 2013. Overall, the site

has a low-lying industrial land character.

2.4.3 Harbour Way runs directly to the north of the main generating station site with

the existing Port Talbot works to the east, an internal railway line (owned by

Network Rail) to the south and the existing power station to the west.

2.4.4 The land use within the corridor for the electrical connection is predominantly

within the internal highway verge and where new cable length is needed, these

would be in areas characterised by scrubland. New ducts and pipe work would

be routed under or over the existing internal railway track as site conditions

allow. For most of the route, the cables would either be run underground (either

in new and existing ducting and excavations) or be supported off existing

structures. There would potentially be a cable bridge constructed, due to

restricted space to run cables underground, at the southern end of the cable

route between the two onsite existing substations. If required, this cable bridge

would be consistent with the other cable bridges on site and be constructed of a

metal lattice structure approximately 5m in height (to provide suitable clearance)

and approximately 800m in length.


July 2014 20

3 The Proposed Development

3.1 Preface

3.1.1 This section of this statement provides a summary of the description of the

proposed development. A full description is set out in the Environmental

Statement (ES) and Schedule 1 (authorised development) of the DCO that

accompanies the Application.

3.2 Proposed Development: Project Summary

3.2.1 Within the DCO limits, the proposed development comprises the following

major components and ancillary buildings:

up to two steam boilers and their associated stacks (maximum 80m in

height), annexe bay and boiler house;

a turbine hall housing turbine sets and associated condensers;

cooling tower units;

an electrical switchgear station building;

a condensate storage tank and additional condensate polishing units;

water treatment plant and chemical dosing system skids;

administration, workshop, pump house, gas booster house, control

buildings and ancillary infrastructure;

the extension of existing pipe work connections (for water, nitrogen,

process gases, natural gas and compressed air) from the existing on site

utilities pipe work infrastructure to the generating station. All the extended

pipe work will be contained within the Order Limits. The indicative location


July 2014 21

of these connections are shown in Figure 3.10 of the ES (Document

Reference: 6.02.2);

a 66kV electrical connection up to 2.8km in length to connect the

generating station to the existing on-site substations on the southeast of

the site. For most of the route, the cables will either be run underground

(either in new and existing ducting and excavations) or be supported off

existing structures. There will potentially be a cable bridge constructed,

due to restricted space to run cables underground, at the southern end of

the electrical connection between the two on-site existing substations. If

required, this cable bridge will be consistent with the other cable bridges

on the wider steelworks site and be constructed of a metal lattice structure

approximately 5m in height (to provide suitable clearance) and

approximately 800m in length;

modifications to the two existing on-site substations to accept the electrical

connection including the installation of new 66kV bays at each substation;

security infrastructure, including perimeter fencing and site lighting

infrastructure;

connections to the existing internal road layout for the provision of site

vehicular access(es), roads, pedestrian network, parking and cycle

storage;

temporary construction compounds; and

connection to site drainage systems.

3.2.2 Smaller standalone buildings and structures are also included within the

proposed development. These include tanks, pump house for cooling water

pumps for the cooling towers, booster house for process gases supply to the

boilers, switch gear housing, electrical control room for cooling towers and for


July 2014 22

the power station. There is also a motor control centre building housing

electrical drives, computer system and an operator’s control centre.

3.2.3 The following table provides the physical dimensions of the above

components:

Table 3.1: Summary of Project Description Components

Item Indicative & Maximum Dimensions

Stack(s) 80m high

Cooling Towers Up to 22m high x 160m long x 16m wide

Turbine Hall Up to 25m high x 55m long x 65m wide

Boiler House Up to 35m high (at apex) x 60m long x 65m wide

Electrical Connection 66kV cables, approximately 2.8km in length to be run underground, off existing above ground infrastructure, on a cable bridge or a combination

Switchgear Station Building

Up to 35m long x 55m Wide

3.2.4 On average, all the electricity produced by the on-site power generation

facilities would be utilised on-site. However, due to the cyclical nature of

electricity demand on-site (in line with current operations), excess electricity

may be exported to the Grid for short periods.

3.2.5 The proposed location of the main components of the proposed development

(i.e. the new turbine sets and two new boilers) is centred at National Grid

Reference (NGR) SS 77198 88433 with the electrical connection extending

2.8km south east to two onsite substations at with NGRs centred on SS 78263

86743 and SS 78505 86021 at the electrical connection termination point.

3.2.6 There is the potential for a two phase construction approach. Option 1 would

involve the full and complete construction of the proposed development.


July 2014 23

Option 2 would involve half the proposed development (one stack, one boiler

and associated turbine sets) being installed (Phase 1) with all foundation and

engineering being undertaken in that Phase. Phase 2 of Option 2 would

involve the second and complete installation of the second stack, boiler and

associated turbine sets. Phase 2 could occur up to 10 years after Phase 1.

Further details can be found in Chapter 3 Project Description of the ES.

3.2.7 The following sections of this statement provide more detail in relation to the

utilities connections within the proposed development.

3.3 Proposed Development: Project Detail

External Appearance

3.3.1 The external appearance of the proposed development would be subject to

requirements included within the DCO. It is anticipated and the exterior finish

of the proposed development would be consistent with other buildings within

the steelworks which are finished in grey with blue accents.

Landscaping

3.3.2 The community consultation identified a desire for the boundary of the site with

Harbour Way to be sensitively landscaped to soften the visual impact of the

proposed development. It is anticipated that the landscaping strategy would

include tree planting along the frontage with Harbour Way, and this would be

subject to approval by NPTCBC as a requirement of the DCO.

Access and Traffic Movement

3.3.3 All construction traffic would access the proposed development directly from

the existing junction from Harbour Way. No additional access would be

required to be constructed.


July 2014 24

3.3.4 Staff travel would be regulated by a Code of Construction Practice (CoCP)

which would be agreed with NPTCBC prior to the commissioning and

operational phase of the scheme.

Fuel

3.3.5 The proposed development would be predominantly fuelled by gases, which

are generated by the steel making processes, with imported Natural Gas being

used as a standby fuel to maintain minimum load on the boiler if and when

process gases are not available.

3.3.6 The proposed development would not entirely remove the requirement to flare

process gases but will significantly reduce it to create a positive impact.

Gas and Utilities

3.3.7 The gas, steam and utilities network pipes are integral to the proposed

development.

3.3.8 The pipe work would be an extension of the pipe work that is already in place

for the existing power generation facilities and the existing on site gas

distribution, steam and utilities network. Therefore, no significant additional

pipe work is required. The extension of individual existing utilities and fuel

pipe work would be up to 450m in length and contained within the Order

Limits.

3.3.9 Any such pipe work would form an integral part of the proposed development

and would be contained within the Order Limits.

Electrical Connection Cable Route

3.3.10 A 66kV electrical connection would be located adjacent to the proposed

development and within the Order Limits. This new 66kV cable would connect

the new switchgear building to the two existing on-site substation


July 2014 25

approximately 2.8km to the southeast. The cables would either be run

underground (either in new and existing ducting and excavations) or be

supported off existing structures.

3.3.11 Where a new section of ducting is required, a trench would be excavated and

the new cables installed. This denotes a 12m corridor which is required to

take account of local ground conditions and existing infrastructure.

3.3.12 Such works would be carried out by hand/machine to install plastic ducts

which are then backfilled with sand and cable tiles placed on top.

Cooling Method

3.3.13 The proposed cooling system would be an open circuit (i.e. water used in the

turbine condensers is cooled in cooling towers and recycled back into the

system), whereas the current cooling system operates as a once through feed

and return system (i.e. the cooling water is abstracted from the Port Talbot

Dock, goes through the turbine condensers and is then returned directly to the

Port Talbot Dock). The new proposed system would therefore no longer

require the current volume of abstraction from, and discharge to, the Port

Talbot Dock.

3.3.14 The volumes of water required for operation of the proposed development

would be significantly less than the present system of continually abstracting

and discharging water for the turbine condenser cooling operations. There

would, however, be an additional abstraction requirement from the River Afan

on top of the current average abstraction rate. Stresses placed on the River

Afan would be managed by utilising a proposed abstraction hierarchy,

whereby the River Afan would be the primary abstraction source, followed by

two secondary sources; the Nant Ffrwdwyllt and the Port Talbot Dock.

3.3.15 An alert system would be agreed with Natural Resources Wales (NRW) for the

implementation of the proposed abstraction hierarchy. This would involve


July 2014 26

NRW informing the Applicant of times when low flow / no flow is expected and

when NRW have concerns about this impacting upon salmon migration. This

would be enforced so that the Applicant can switch abstraction to the

secondary back up sources. All abstractions would be made through existing

infrastructure and no new abstraction points are proposed.

3.3.16 Due to the close proximity of the proposed development to Harbour Way, the

cooling towers will be designed to mitigate any potential visibility issues

associated with the release of a water vapour plume. This would be confirmed

as part of the detailed design process.

3.3.17 An additional condensate tank and additional condensate polishing unit are

included as part of the proposed development within the Order Limits. No net

additional de-mineralisation capacity is required given decommissioning of the

four boilers within the Port Talbot Site. However, some refurbishment of the

existing de-mineralisation plant may be required.

3.3.18 Further details on abstractions and discharges, including volumes associated

with the cooling method are outlined in ES Chapter 14 (Surface Water

Environment).

Drainage System

3.3.19 Surface waters from the plant roofs, impermeable hardstanding (including car

park and roads), and external areas of gravel and landscaping would be

collected within surface water drains and discharged via the W2 discharge

point to the Arnalt Culvert. During storm events surface water would

discharge via W3 to Swansea Bay. Some surface waters would also flow via

lateral ditches and attenuation ponds into nearby watercourses / bodies.


July 2014 27

Emissions to Air

3.3.20 Up to two new stacks would be installed as part of the proposed development.

These would be no higher than 80m.

3.3.21 Combustion gas released to air will be discharged from the stack(s).

Emissions to Land

3.3.22 There would be no emissions to land from the plant.

Noise Emissions

3.3.23 Noise impacts would be adequately mitigated through building design and

controlled by the Environmental Permit.

Waste and Fugitive Emissions

3.3.24 Waste generation during operation would be minimal, resulting mainly from

maintenance activities. Low volume waste streams are likely to comprise:

oily rags and residues from oily water separators and minor oil spills;

spent turbine inlet filter elements;

washing effluent;

packaging and other general maintenance waste; and

office waste.

3.3.25 Waste would either be recycled using the onsite recycling facilities or where

this is not possible be disposed of in the on-site landfill.


July 2014 28

Proximity to Community & Health and Safety

3.3.26 The location of the proposed development in relation to nearby dwellings is a

key design factor not only from an amenity aspect but also health and safety.

The ES assesses residential amenity from nearby dwellings and also

incorporates details on health and safety considerations such as release of

gases and emergency situations.

Hours of Operation and Shift Pattern

3.3.27 The proposed development would have continuous operation throughout its

lifecycle except for planned maintenance. It is assumed that it would be

operational for approximately 8716.2 hours a year or approximately 99.5%

available.

3.3.28 Two shift patterns operate on site consisting of 12 hour shifts which are

rotated on a daily basis. This would continue in connection with the operation

of the proposed development.

Lighting

3.3.29 It is proposed that ancillary and security lighting would be provided on the

main buildings and in the small car park area of the proposed development.

The Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has provided guidance that aviation lighting

may be required for the stack(s) if the stacks are over 80m in height.

Temporary Construction Buildings & Infrastructure

3.3.30 Temporary construction compounds would be required. These would be

located within the Order Limits and will comprise a number of modular

buildings. Buildings will be used for site offices and will provide staff welfare

facilities. There will also be a storage area for small plant and equipment,

materials and waste layout areas and a construction staff car park area.


July 2014 29

3.4 Proposed Development: Decommissioning of Existing Equipment

3.4.1 Three turbo alternators (TAB1, TA2 and TA3 (nominally 7 to 8 MWe each)),

four steam boilers (Service Boilers 4 and 5, Boiler 5 (Margam A) and Mitchell

Boiler (Margam B)) and three stacks will be decommissioned. The

decommissioning of this equipment (which is located at various positions

throughout the steelworks site) will take place once the proposed development

is fully commissioned and in reliable and continuous operation in order to

maintain a continuous power supply.

3.4.2 The three turbo alternators and four steam boilers to be decommissioned are

contained within existing buildings and there is no intention to demolish the

buildings. Three existing stacks will also be decommissioned and left in situ.

The buildings and stacks have been constructed as integral parts of other

operational buildings within the steelworks site, and as such, demolition of

these components in isolation would be unachievable. Once these facilities

have been decommissioned, however, future re-use is too costly to be

feasible. Should any demolition works be required, this will be subject to

receiving the prior planning consent from NPTCBC.

3.5 Proposed Development: Construction

3.5.1 Two construction scenarios are proposed for the development. These are

known as Option 1 and Option 2, and both have been assessed as part of the

EIA undertaken in connection with the proposed development. The proposed

construction and operational phasing for each option is outlined below.

Option 1

3.5.2 Option 1 represents the full single installation of the proposed development

and involves installation and construction of the boilers and their associated

stacks, the turbine sets and the full installation of the electrical connection to


July 2014 30

the existing on-site substations in one single Phase of construction. All

smaller standalone buildings and structures would also be included within the

full single-phase installation of the proposed development.

3.5.3 This construction phase would be 36 months with a commissioning phase

lasting for a 6 month period within this timeframe. Delivery routes for

construction traffic will be via Junction 38 of the M4 and then via Harbour Way

directly to the proposed development through the existing Harbour Way

junction.

3.5.4 The proposed decommissioning of the existing 4 boilers and 3 turbo

alternators would be undertaken once the new equipment is in continuous

reliable operation.

Table 3.2: Summary of Project Description Components for Single Phased Build (Option 1)

Item Indicative & Maximum Dimensions

Stack(s) Up to two stacks, both at 80m high

Cooling Tower Units Up to 22m high x 160m long x 16m wide

Turbine Hall Up to 25m high x 55m long x 65m wide


Electrical Connection 66kV cables, approximately 2.8km in length to be run underground, off existing above ground infrastructure, on a cable bridge or a combination of both


Up to 35m long x 55m Wide

Option 2

3.5.5 This is an alternative scenario where the proposed development components

(boiler and turbine sets) are installed in two phases - (i.e. one boiler and one


July 2014 31

stack at a time with corresponding turbine sets). The first installation (Phase

1) would be after development consent is granted and the second installation

(Phase 2) at a later stage (which could be up to 10 years after the

commencement of development on Phase 1).

Phase 1

3.5.6 Construction timescales would be 36 months for first installation (as per Option

1). The full building footprint of the switchgear station would be built but only

sufficient building envelopes to house one boiler, and the corresponding stack

and turbine sets would be constructed in the first phase of the installation. The

ground would also be fully prepared for the second boiler and remainder of the

turbine house (for example utility connections and ground works including

creation of the building slab footprint) but with no above ground structures

being installed. The electrical connection would still be fully installed as per

Option 1.

3.5.7 Around 50% of the total cooling tower unit(s) infrastructure would be

constructed in Phase 1.

3.5.8 Construction workforce would be the same for Phase 1 of Option 2 as it would

be for Option 1 (500 over the whole construction period and 300 at peak). The

same delivery routes would be used as per Option 1 (Junction 38 of the M4

and onto Harbour Way).

3.5.9 During the interim period between Phase 1 and Phase 2, the existing power

generation equipment would remain operational and would only be

decommissioned once Phase 2 is complete and is in reliable continuous

operation. Therefore the existing emissions to air, and water abstractions and

discharges from the existing generating facilities would still occur during this

interim period.


July 2014 32

3.5.10 The flared gas, however, would be significantly reduced as per Option 1 as the

first boiler (installed during Phase 1) would take the process gas which

otherwise would be flared – therefore there would be immediate improvements

as per Option 1.

Phase 2

3.5.11 Construction timescales would be an additional 24 months for the second

phase of installation. This will commence within 10 years of the

commencement of development of Phase 1.

3.5.12 In Phase 2, the above ground structures of the remaining turbine housing and

second boiler housing would be constructed immediately alongside the

existing boiler and turbine house. In order to minimise noise impact of the

operating turbine sets, the external wall installed at Phase 1 (which would in

effect become an internal wall), would not be removed until all the final

installation is complete. This wall would only consist of the external waterproof

cladding and appropriate insulation, hence, no demolition of brickwork would

be required and the dust could be controlled through existing best practice

methods as it would be contained within the new building envelope. The boiler

and the turbine housings would be built / extended to incorporate the second

boiler and turbine sets up to the dimensions outlined in Option 1.

3.5.13 The remaining cooling tower unit(s) would be constructed during the second

installation.

3.5.14 The second stack would only be installed at Phase 2 when the second boiler

unit is constructed. At the appropriate time, the second boiler would then take

on the capacity of the existing boiler units being decommissioned.

3.5.15 Construction workforce would be similar to the first installation phase (500

over the whole construction period and 300 at peak) but over a shorter


July 2014 33

construction period of 24 months. There would be no change in operational

workforce.

3.5.16 The same delivery routes would be used as per Option 1. It is assumed that

the second turbine and boiler building would be to the north of the first

installation. The temporary laydown area would remain the same for both

installations.

3.5.17 The ES Chapter 3 Project Description incorporates a construction timetable for

each option and a summary of the components to be delivered under each

phase is provided below.

3.5.18 It is assumed the 35 years life cycle of the proposed development will start

from the completion of Phase 1.

Table 3.3: Summary of Project Description Components for Phased Build (Option 2)

Item Phase 1 Phase 2

Stack(s) One 80m stack One 80m stack

Cooling Tower Units Up to 22m high x 80m long x 16m wide

Up to 22m high x 160m long (to take structure to maximum length as in option 1 ) x 16m wide

Turbine Hall Up to 25m high x 55m long x 45 wide

Up to 25m high x 55m long x 65m wide as in option 1


Up to 35m high (at apex) x 60m long x 65m wide as in option 1

Electrical Connection

66kV cables, approximately 2.8km in length to be run underground, off existing above ground infrastructure, on a cable bridge or a combination of above.


Up to 35m long x 55m wide (to be installed as part of first installation)


July 2014 34

Proposed Development Decommissioning Phase

3.5.19 At the end of the 35 year indicative operational lifespan of the proposed

development, a number of options would exist:

The proposed development would be decommissioned;

An application would be made to extend the life of the proposed

development using existing equipment; or

An application would be made to replace the existing equipment and to

refurbish the proposed development for continuing power and steam

generation.

3.5.20 Decommissioning would involve shutting off and isolating electrical and utility

connections and switching off the mechanical and plant equipment, including

the boilers and turbines. It is likely that the main power generation equipment

and electrical connection would remain in situ but electrically decommissioned.

The stack(s) would remain in situ but would be closed off to disable their

potential for future emissions.

3.5.21 It is not anticipated that the new power generation building would be

demolished. Smaller ancillary buildings may be removed subject to receiving

necessary consent from NPTCBC (if required) but this is unlikely.


July 2014 35

4 Planning Policy Context

4.1 Preface

4.1.1 The planning policy applicable to the proposed development exists at a

number of levels and extends to a range of guiding documents.

4.1.2 To highlight the proposed development’s potential, the following sections

record the main provisions of the principal statutory planning documents and

strategies of relevance. It establishes the context within which any proposed

development would need to be brought forward.

4.1.3 This section looks at existing policy at the national level, before moving on to

consider adopted planning policy at the local level.

4.1.4 National guidance comprises the relevant National Planning Policy Statements

(NPS), Planning Policy Wales Edition 6 (PPW) (February 2014), as well as a

range of supplementary Technical Advice Notes (TANs). At the local level, the

Neath Port Talbot Unitary Development Plan (NPTUDP) (March 2008)

constitutes the statutory development plan against which the proposed

development will be assessed, alongside the emerging Local Development

Plan (LDP). Policies of relevance in terms of both the national and local

context are set out below.

4.1.5 The NPSs comprise the principal level of planning policy that is applicable to

the consideration of DCO applications. Accordingly, whilst PPW, the TANs,

the NPTUDP, and the emerging LDP form material considerations, the NPSs

are considered to be the most important policy to the decision-making process

and have been assessed in detail in the following section of this statement.


July 2014 36

4.2 National Planning Policy

National Planning Policy Statements

4.2.1 The PA 2008 requires that any DCO application is decided in accordance with

any relevant national policy statement, with certain exceptions. For this

proposed development, the relevant national policies contained within those

NPSs are outlined below:

NPS for Energy (EN – 1) (July 2011) – The overarching NPS relevant to the proposed development;

NPS for Fossil Fuel Electricity Generating Infrastructure (EN – 2);

NPS for Gas Supply Infrastructure and Gas and Oil Pipelines (EN – 4);

and

NPS for Electricity Networks Infrastructure (EN – 5).

4.2.2 The overarching NPS for Energy (EN-1), published by The Department for

Energy and Climate Change (DECC) in July 2011, provides the principal

planning policy context of relevance to the proposed development, but

consideration is also be given to the provisions of NPSs EN-2, EN-4, and EN-5

where applicable in the context of the proposed development.

4.2.3 NPS EN-1 sets out the UK Government’s policy for delivery of major new

energy infrastructure in England and Wales. The policies within EN-1 reflect

the UK Low Carbon Transition Plan (DECC, 2008) which sets out a detailed

low carbon transition plan to 2020. Underlying the Government’s climate

change strategy is a legally binding target of cutting emissions by 80% by

2050 compared to 1990 levels, set in legislation by the Climate Change Act

2008. The Government’s five steps to meet this target are:

1. Protecting the public from immediate risk;

2. Preparing for the future;


July 2014 37

3. Limiting the severity of future climate change through a new

international agreement;

4. Building a low carbon UK including: cutting emissions, maintaining

secure energy supplies, maximising economic opportunities, and

protecting the most vulnerable; and

5. Supporting individuals, communities, and businesses to play their

part.

4.2.4 NPS EN-1 establishes a significant need for new major energy infrastructure

over the next 10-15 years delivered through a diverse mix of energy

generating technologies. Under Section 3.1 EN-1 states that:

“It is for industry to propose new energy infrastructure projects within

the strategic framework set by Government. The Government does not

consider it appropriate for planning policy to set targets for or limits on

different technologies.

The IPC should therefore assess all applications for development

consent for the types of infrastructure covered by the energy NPSs on

the basis that the Government has demonstrated that there is a need

for those types of infrastructure…”

4.2.5 In taking its decision on the DCO application, the SoS is required to have

regard to ‘any national policy statement which has effect in relation to

development of the description to which the application relates’ (Planning Act

2008, s104(2))(a)). The SoS must also, in accordance with s104(3), decide

the application in accordance with any relevant national policy statement,

unless certain limited exceptions apply. As such, the NPSs, principally EN-1

but also (where applicable) EN-2, EN-4 and EN-5, provide the primary basis

for decisions by the SoS. However, it is highly likely that in relation to NSIPs

the SoS will also regard Welsh policy as being both important and relevant to

his decision (s104(2)(d)).


July 2014 38

4.2.6 A detailed assessment of the proposed development against the provisions of

the relevant NPSs is set out in the next chapter of this statement.

Planning Policy Wales

4.2.7 The Welsh Government (WG) issued the sixth edition of Planning Policy

Wales (PPW) in February 2014. The updated document incorporates

amendments to strengthen and clarify the presumption in favour of economic

development in-line with the release of TAN 23 (Planning for Economic

Development), and a revised Chapter 12 in relation to ‘planning to manage

waste’ and ‘renewable and low carbon energy’.

4.2.8 PPW sets out the land use planning policies of the WG and translates the

WG’s commitment to sustainable development into the planning system. It is

supplemented by a series of TANs, with procedural advice given in circulars

and policy clarification letters – together, these comprise national planning

policy for Wales. PPW and the Wales Spatial Plan are required to be taken

into account in the preparation of development plans and may be material to

decisions on individual planning applications. They are taken into account by

the Welsh Ministers and Planning Inspectors in the determination of called-in

planning applications and appeals.

4.2.9 Chapter 7 of PPW defines the WG’s objectives for the delivery of economic

development through the planning system. Para 7.1.3 states:

“The planning system should support economic and employment

growth alongside social and environmental considerations within the

context of sustainable development.”

4.2.10 The guidance seeks to ensure that economic development is encouraged and

advises Local Authorities to support the shift towards a low carbon economy.

PPW states that Local Planning Authorities should:


July 2014 39

“look favourably on proposals for new on-site low carbon energy

generation (para 7.4.1); adopt a positive and constructive approach to

applications for economic development (para 7.6.1); take account of the

likely economic benefits of the development [when determining planning

applications] based on robust evidence” (para 7.6.1).

4.2.11 Chapter 12 of PPW sets out the WG’s policy for delivering infrastructure and

services across Wales. One of the key aims of this national policy is to:

“Promote the generation and use of energy from renewable and low

carbon energy sources at all scales and promote energy efficiency,

especially as a means to secure zero or low carbon developments and

to tackle the causes of climate change.”

4.2.12 This guidance also confirms the WG’s commitment to achieving the UK target

of 15% of energy from renewables by 2020 by specifically stating:

“The Welsh Government is committed to playing its part by delivering

an energy programme which contributes to reducing carbon emissions

as part of our approach to tackling climate change whilst enhancing the

economic, social and environmental wellbeing of the people and

communities of Wales in order to achieve a better quality of life for our

own and future generations. This is outlined in the Welsh

Government’s Energy Policy Statement Energy Wales: A Low Carbon

Transition (2012).”

Technical Advice Notes

4.2.13 As set out above, PPW is supplemented by a series of Technical Advice Notes

(TANs). A range of these apply to the proposed development, and their

specific provisions are addressed through the technical reports and ES

submitted in support of this DCO Application. Relevant TANs include:


July 2014 40

Technical Advice Note 5 (Nature Conservation and Planning), published in 2009, provides advice on the procedure that LPAs should

follow to protect designated nature conservation sites and conserve the

natural environment.

Technical Advice Note 8 (Renewable Energy) was published in July

2005 and provides technical advice in relation to renewable energy. This

TAN relates to land use planning considerations of renewable energy,

however, UK and national energy policy provide its context.

Technical Advice Note 11 (Noise) was published in October 1997 and

provides advice on how the planning system can be used to minimise the

adverse impact of noise without placing unreasonable restrictions on

development or adding unduly to costs and administrative burdens of

business.

Technical Advice Note 12 (Design) was published in June 2009 and has

been amended in 2014. It provides detailed advice on how good design in

development may be facilitated by the planning system. The guidance

states that good design has the potential to assist in environmental

sustainability, economic growth and social inclusion.

Technical Advice Note 14 (Coastal Planning) was published in 1998

and recognises that on-shore development can often have an impact off-

shore. This TAN outlines the specific planning considerations that will

relate to a coastline location.

Technical Advice Note 15 (Development and Flood Risk) was

published in July 2004 and advises on development and flood risk as this

relates to sustainability principles, and provides a framework within which

risks arising from both river and coastal flooding, and from additional run-

off from development in any location, can be assessed.


July 2014 41

Technical Advice Note 18 (Transport) was published in 2007 and

recognises the key role of the planning system to facilitate sustainable

travel patterns. As in TAN 12, the guidance aims to influence the location

of new development to reduce the need to travel and subsequently

promote more sustainable forms of transport which contribute to

environmental improvement in the longer term.

Technical Advice Note 21 (Waste) was introduced in 2014 and provides

advice on how land use planning should contribute towards sustainable

waste management and resources efficiency, reflecting the new waste

management drivers at a European Union and Wales Level.

Technical Advice Note 23 (Economic Development), was published in

February 2014 and focuses on the need to encourage development in

order to generate wealth, jobs and income. This TAN recognises the

importance of all aspects of development and that planning decisions are

made in a sustainable way which balance social, environmental and

economic considerations.

The Wales Spatial Plan (2008)

4.2.14 The purpose of the Wales Spatial Plan is to ensure that what is done in the

public, private and third sectors in Wales is integrated and sustainable, and

that actions within an area support each other and jointly move towards a

shared vision for Wales and for the different parts of Wales. The Spatial Plan

area which the proposed development falls under is South East Wales ‘Capital

Region’.

4.2.15 It is a principle of the Wales Spatial Plan that development should be

sustainable. Sustainable development is about improving wellbeing and

quality of life by integrating social, economic and environmental objectives in

the context of more efficient use of natural resources. The Wales Spatial Plan

aims to deliver sustainable development through its Area Strategies in the


July 2014 42

context of the Welsh Assembly Government’s statutory Sustainable

Development Scheme.

4.2.16 Chapter 11 if the Plan refers to ‘promoting a sustainable economy’ and

recognises that the economy in Wales has a spatial dimension. Paragraph

11.6 states that “we must take a joint approach with local authorities, travel

consortia, and others to tackling regional infrastructure problems on issues of

housing, transport, water, sewerage, energy, waste and ICT.”

Environment Strategy for Wales (2006)

4.2.17 The Environment Strategy for Wales outlines the Welsh Government’s long

term strategy for the environment of Wales, setting out the strategic direction

for the next 20 years.

4.2.18 The purpose of the Strategy is to provide a framework within which to achieve

an environment that is clean, healthy, biologically diverse and valued by the

people of Wales.

4.2.19 The Welsh Government wishes to see the Welsh environment thriving and

contributing to the economic and social well-being and health of all of the

people of Wales. The Environment Strategy is currently being reviewed by the

Welsh Government to ensure that it reflects the relevant commitments in the

Natural Resource Management Programme.

4.3 The Development Plan

Introduction

4.3.1 The site lies within the administrative area of NPTCBC. The statutory

development plan for the site, in accordance with Section 38 of the Planning

and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004, is the Neath Port Talbot Unitary

Development Plan (NPTUDP). This was formally adopted in March 2008.


July 2014 43

4.3.2 The Council is currently in the process of preparing its Local Development

Plan (LDP) which once adopted will replace the existing UDP. The LDP will

contain land use allocations and policies for future development in Neath Port

Talbot for the period up to 2026. The LDP preparation process commenced in

2007 and the Deposit LDP was published for public consultation from 28th

August 2013 to 15th October 2013. Following this period, the ‘Register of

Alternatives Sites’ was published in January 2014 for a six week consultation

period (closing 10th March 2014). It is anticipated that the LDP will be

adopted in November 2015.

Neath Port Talbot Unitary Development Plan (Adopted March 2008)

4.3.3 The NPTUDP was adopted on 26th March 2008 and comprises a range of

policies against which all planning applications are considered. These include

the plan’s development strategy and its policies on environment, economy and

employment, community and social considerations, transport, infrastructure

and energy, and waste. For clarity, this statement considers in detail only the

policies central to the development proposals subject to this DCO application.

4.3.4 The Community Plan sets out the vision for Neath Port Talbot that by 2012 its

communities will be:

healthier, more prosperous, attractive and welcoming;

able to offer an increasingly skilled and qualified workforce;

able to offer a better quality of life; and

able to offer a wider range of facilities, services and jobs within easy

travelling distance.


July 2014 44

Strategic Policies

4.3.5 The strategic policies within Part 1 of the UDP reflect the key objectives of the

Council. The plan seeks to guide development to locations that will minimise

the need to travel promoting good design and preservation of the County

Borough’s natural and historic resources. These strategic objectives inform

and underpin the UDP’s detailed policies. A list of the strategic policies

relevant to the consideration of the proposed development is included below

for ease of reference.

Environment

Policy 1 – Countryside, Seascapes & Landscapes

Policy 2 – Wildlife & Habitats

Policy 4 – Pollution

Policy 5 – Built Environment

Policy 6 – Historic Environment

Economy & Employment

Policy 8 – Employment

Policy 9 – Diversification & Strengthening of the Local Economy

Policy 10 – Expansion of Existing Enterprises

Community & Social Considerations

Policy 11 – Social Needs

Transport

Policy 13 – Sustainable Communities


July 2014 45

Policy 14 – Highway Considerations

Policy 18 – Efficient Use of Infrastructure & Resources

Policy 19 – Opportunities to Create Renewable Energy

Waste

Policy 24 – Minimise the Creation of Waste

Policy 26 – Collection, Treatment or Disposal of Waste

4.3.6 Overall, the strategic policies of the UDP seek to support the economy,

encourage sustainable patterns of development and preserve the natural and

historic resource. The proposed development is considered to accord with

these strategic policy principles and objectives and the ES demonstrates that

all technical policy requirements can be met. The development would ensure

that a sustainable steel industry is maintained at the Port Talbot site, creating

direct and indirect positive effects to the local economy during construction

and operation.

Site Specific Policy

4.3.7 The Port Talbot Steelworks complex is not subject to any specific land use

allocation and lies outside the defined settlement boundary for Port Talbot. In

this light, the proposed development is assessed against the generic policies

of the NPTUDP (including inter alia those relating to contaminated and

previously developed land, design, air quality, noise, flood risk, nature

conservation, landscape, and archaeology).

4.3.8 In the absence of any specific land use designation, the principle of the

proposed development will be assessed against Policy EC2, which seeks to

support the redevelopment, intensification and expansion of existing industrial

premises subject to their impact on local amenities, existing industrial and


July 2014 46

commercial activities, townscape, landscape, biodiversity or highway safety.

The proposed development will also be assessed against Policy IE2, which

seeks to ensure that proposals for new infrastructure have taken account of

potential alternative options (including the reuse of existing facilities), and

given careful consideration to location and design to minimise any detrimental

impact.

4.3.9 In relation to nearby allocations, the site subject to this DCO Application lies at

the northern end of the Port Talbot complex to the east of land identified as the

route for the Port Talbot Distributor Road (Policy T8(a)), and to the west of

land allocated for mixed use redevelopment as part of the Port Talbot

Harbourside Regeneration Area (under policies PT1, EC1/4 and H1/33).

Technical Planning Policies

4.3.10 In addition to the above named policies, we outline below the technical and

detailed UDP policies that are relevant to this DCO Application.

Policy GC1 New Buildings/Structures & Changes of Use

Policy GC2 Engineering Works & Operations

Policy ENV3 Impacts on the Landscape

Policy ENV4 International & National sites for Nature Conservation

Policy ENV5 Nature Conservation

Policy ENV10 Coastal Protection

Policy ENV11 Proposals in Areas of Flood Risk

Policy ENV12 Proposals Affecting Water Resources

Policy ENV15 Air Quality


July 2014 47

Policy ENV16 Contaminated Land

Policy ENV17 Design

Policy ENV19 Proposals Affecting the Setting of a Listed Building

Policy ENV22 Archaeological Remains

Policy ENV23 Archaeological Evaluation

Policy ENV24 Archaeological Recording

Policy ENV26 External Lighting

Policy ENV28 Polluting or Hazardous Installations

Policy ENV29 Environmental Quality & Amenity

Policy EC2 Extensions to Industrial/Business Premises

Policy T1 Location, Layout & Accessibility of New Proposals

Policy T3 Public Transport Quality Corridors

Policy T11 Traffic Management

Policy IE1 Existing & Programmed Infrastructure

Policy IE2 Infrastructure Facilities (Not Including Drainage

Policy IE3 Main Sewage Treatment

Policy IE6 Renewable Energy

Policy W6 Recycling of Industrial Waste

Policy PT1 Regeneration Initiative


July 2014 48

Supplementary Planning Guidance

4.3.11 A range of adopted Supplementary Planning Guidance (SPG) documents

provide further detailed guidance on, and facilitate the implementation of, the

adopted UDP policies. The SPGs of relevance to this DCO Application are as

follows:

Biodiversity (July 2008) – This expands on Policies ENV4 and ENV5 of

the UDP to clarify how they will be applied. It is aimed at helping to

ensure that biodiversity is appropriately considered, protected and

enhanced within any proposed development.

Landscape (July 2008) – This document expands on Policies ENV2,

ENV3 and GC1 of the UDP. It explains the application of national

guidance in a Neath Port Talbot context, provides an introduction to the

general principles and practice of landscape, heritage protection and

enhancement within the planning process, and provides a strategic good

practice guide for development.

Emerging Planning Policy: Local Development Plan

4.3.12 The Planning and Compulsory Purchase Act 2004 introduced the requirement

for all local planning authorities to produce a new form of development plan for

their areas – a Local Development Plan.

4.3.13 The NPTUDP will remain the adopted development plan until it is superseded

by the LDP, which is scheduled for adoption in 2015. Until it is formally

adopted, and its soundness has been tested at Examination, the Deposit LDP

carries limited weight for development management purposes.

Emerging Neath Port Talbot Local Development Plan (Deposit, August 2013)

4.3.14 In terms of emerging planning policy, the NPTLDP was placed on Deposit on

28th August 2013 for a period of consultation until the 15th October 2013. The


July 2014 49

consultation has now closed and, on the 27th January 2014, the Council

commenced its consultation on the ‘Alternative Sites’ submitted as part of the

Deposit consultation. The consultation ran until 10th March 2014. Having had

regard to the representation received following the respective consultations,

along with the consideration of new information that has emerged following the

Council’s decision to place the LDP of ‘deposit’, the Council considered and

agreed its response to the representation received. Accordingly, Full Council

met on the 23rd July 2014 to consider the officer responses and

recommendations, together with the proposed focussed changes to the

deposit plan contained with the report to the Committee. At this meeting Full

Council endorsed the responses and focussed changes. The Council will now

run a six week consultation period on these changes and responses, which is

set to commence on the 2nd September and will close on the 13th October.

4.3.15 Following this, the Council will submit the NPTLDP along with a variety of

accompanying documents to the Welsh Government (WG) and Planning

Inspectorate for examination. The Council anticipate that this will take place

on the 29th September 2014.

4.3.16 The NPTLDP is intended to provide a more concise and evidence-based set of

development policies that will replace the current NPTUDP. It will set the

objectives and policies for the development and use of land in the County

Borough up to 2026. As one of its key strategic policy objectives, the LDP

seeks to address the causes and consequences of climate change including

the promotion of renewable and low carbon energy sources. The plan

recognises Tata Steel as one of the major employers with the County Borough

and seeks to safeguard and support existing employment uses. The Port

Talbot Steelworks complex lies within the Coastal Corridor Strategy Area, but

outside the defined settlement limit of Port Talbot.

4.3.17 As the NPTLDP has yet to be subject to formal Examination, it can only be

given limited weight as a material consideration. However, these emerging


July 2014 50

policies have been considered as context to the proposed development and

the assessment of its impact as set out in the ES.


July 2014 51

5 Planning Assessment

5.1 Introduction

5.1.1 The Government issued a number of National Policy Statements (NPSs) in

accordance with the provisions of the PA 2008. These statements form the

primary policy context for the assessment of DCO applications and include the

Government’s objectives for the development of nationally significant

infrastructure, and include any policies or circumstances that Ministers consider

should be taken into account in decisions on nationally significant infrastructure

development. Accordingly, applications for a DCO must be determined in

accordance with the relevant NPSs.

5.1.2 The determination process for DCO applications is controlled by The Planning

Inspectorate (PINS) who examine the applications for nationally significant

infrastructure and then make a recommendation to the SoS as to whether

consent should be granted.

5.1.3 There are six NPSs which apply to the ‘energy sector’. Four of these

statements are applicable to this DCO Application and have been considered

during the preparation of this Application (see paragraph 4.2.1).

5.1.4 The PA 2008 does not require the Development Plan for Neath Port Talbot to

be applied as it would be if this were an application under the Town and

Country Planning Act. However, Section 104(2) of the PA 2008 allows the SoS

to have regard to any matters which it thinks are both important and relevant to

its decision. Under Section 60(2) of the PA 2008, PINS will invite relevant local

authorities (i.e. the host local authority for the proposed development plus all

neighbouring local authorities) to submit Local Impact Reports (LIRs) to inform

examination of the DCO application. Section 60(3) of the PA 2008 confirms that

a LIR is a report giving details of the likely impact of the proposed development


July 2014 52

on the relevant local authority’s area, to which consideration must be given by

PINS.

5.1.5 In view of this, this section of the Planning Statement will also consider the

other relevant planning policy documents (at a national and local level) which

are considered to be likely to inform the LIRs that will be submitted to PINS by

the host and neighbouring local authorities.

5.2 NPS 1 – Overarching National Policy Statement for Energy (NPS EN-1)

5.2.1 This NPS is the overarching statement which is applicable to all types of new

energy infrastructure and sets out how the impacts of energy infrastructure

development in general are to be assessed.

5.2.2 Part 4 of NPS EN-1 sets out the general policies against which applications

relating to energy infrastructure are to be decided, whilst Part 5 of NPS EN-1

references generic impacts associated with such proposals. This section of this

statement seeks to assess the proposed development having regard to the

relevant headings set out under Parts 4 & 5 of NPS EN-1.

Assessment Principles

Environmental Statement (NPS EN-1, 4.2)

5.2.3 The Council Directive of the 27th June 1985 on the assessment of the effects of

certain public and private projects on the environment (amended by Directives

97/11/EC, 2003/35/EC, 2009/31/EC and a codified Directive 2011/92/EU) states

that all proposals which are subject to the European Environmental Impact

Assessment Directive must be accompanied by an ES describing the aspects of

the environment likely to be positively and negatively affected by the proposed

development at all stages. Measures for avoiding or mitigating significant

adverse effects must also be included.


July 2014 53

5.2.4 The Directive is implemented principally by the Town and Country Planning

(Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 2011. However, since the

original implementation of the Directive a wide range of project-specific

Regulations have been developed.

5.2.5 The Infrastructure Planning (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations

2009 (as amended) (the EIA Regulations) apply in the case of applications

under the PA 2008. Accordingly, this DCO Application is accompanied by an

ES (Document Reference 6.01), which reports the conclusions of an

Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) which assessed the likely significant

environmental, social and economic effects that may arise during the various

stages of the proposed development.

5.2.6 A Scoping Report was submitted to the SoS on the 25th September 2013 as

part of a request for an opinion on the scope of the assessment in the ES.

PINS responded on the 5th November 2013 enclosing their Scoping Opinion

having undertaken a consultation exercise with prescribed consultation bodies

and other interested parties, taken account of the received responses, and

taken account of the specific characteristics of the project.

5.2.7 The main steps followed in the EIA were as follows:

Baseline surveys have been undertaken in order to identify and describe

the environmental character of the area potentially affected by the

proposed development. This information was provided to the scheme

designers at the earliest opportunity;

Relevant natural and manmade processes that may change the character

of the site were identified;

Consideration was then given to the possible interactions between the

proposed development and both existing and future site conditions. These

interactions or impacts have been assessed using set criteria based on

accepted guidance and good practice;


July 2014 54

The likely significant environmental effects, both direct and indirect, have

been established as a result of the proposed development;

Recommendations have been made to avoid, minimise or mitigate adverse

effects and enhance positive effects. The proposed development was then

reassessed talking account of the proposed mitigation and the residual

significance of likely environmental impacts assessed; and

Following statutory consultation, the results of the EIA in combination with

the responses to the Preliminary Environmental Impact Report (PEIR) are

set out in the ES.

Habitats & Species Regulations – Impact upon European Site (NPS EN-1, 4.3)

5.2.8 Paragraph 4.3.1 of NPS EN-1 discusses the need for PINS to consider whether

the proposed development may have a significant effect on a European site, or

on any site to which the same protection is applied as a matter of policy, either

alone or in combination with other plans or projects. Accordingly, prior to

granting a DCO, PINS must review the proposed development in the context of

the Conservation Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 (SI 2010/490).

5.2.9 A desk study (Chapter 6 (Ecology) of the ES) was undertaken to identify

designated sites within close proximity to the proposed development site. This

confirmed that there are no statutory internationally or nationally designated

nature conservation sites within a 1km radius of the proposed development site.

However, there are eleven Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), three

Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), one Ramsar and two National Nature

Reserves (NNR) within 10km of the proposed development site, designated for

their habitats, bird and plant assemblages. The ES provides further details on

these designations.

5.2.10 It should be noted that there are no designated sites within 10km of the

proposed development that have reference to or been designated for great

crested newts or other amphibian populations. In addition, there are no


July 2014 55

designated sites within 10km of the proposed development that have reference

to or been designated for bats.

5.2.11 An Article 6 Test of Likely Significance (The Conservation (Natural Habitats)

Regulations 2010 (as amended)) is required for all the Natura 2000 sites within

a 30km buffer zone around the proposed development to ascertain if the

proposed development may have a Likely Significant Effect on the interest

features of the sites alone or in-combination with other plans/projects.

Accordingly, a Habitats Regulation Assessment (HRA) (Document Reference:

5.03) also contained within Volume 3, Appendix 6.6 of the ES) has been

undertaken paying due regard to the PINS guidance document: Advice Note

Ten: Habitats Regulations Assessment relevant to nationally significant

infrastructure projects (2013).

5.2.12 The HRA, in accordance with the Conservation (Natural Habitats, etc.)

Regulations 2010 (as amended), considers whether the proposed development

is likely to have a significant effect on a Natura 2000 Site. As part of this

assessment, consideration has been given to the effect of the proposed

development in isolation and in-combination with other plans or projects. The

HRA concluded that the proposed development would not result in any likely

significant effects on any Natura 2000 sites either alone or in-combination with

other proposals. In particular, the HRA concludes that the proposed

development would not have any likely significant effects on Natura 2000 Sites

as the acidifying and eutrophying emissions of the proposed development each

contribute to <1% of the relevant Critical Loads for the individual Qualifying

Features on each Natura 2000 Site.

5.2.13 NRW supports the conclusions of the HRA in relation to the proposed

development in isolation and agrees that there are no likely significant effects

which would require an Appropriate Assessment. NRW and the Applicant are

still in discussions as to HRA's conclusions on the in-combination effects of the


July 2014 56

proposed development and therefore whether an Appropriate Assessment is

required.

Alternatives (NPS EN-1, 4.4)

5.2.14 Paragraph 4.4.1 of NPS EN-1 states that there is no general requirement to

consider alternatives to the proposed development or to establish whether the

proposed project represents the best option. However, it does indicate that the

main reasons for the choice of the project and information about the main

alternatives that have been considered should be included in the ES.

5.2.15 In order to improve the efficiency of the steelworks site and secure its long-term

viability, the Applicant has implemented a variety of projects to increase

productivity and cost effectiveness. Given the scale of the site, energy

efficiency is a key area for improvement and forms the basis of this DCO

Application.

5.2.16 In accordance with this assessment principle, a summary of the main

alternatives to the proposed development, which are covered in further detail in

Chapter 2 (Environmental Impact Assessment) of the ES, has been provided

below:

Do Nothing Scenario: The existing on-site equipment would eventually

reach a position of uneconomical repair with a resulting drop in electrical

generation capacity and an increase in process gas flare. This would

increase electricity imports from the grid, resulting in a significant cost

penalty to the business. The existing facility may also become obsolete

due to controls imposed by the Industrial Emission Directive (IED), which

requires adherence to emission limits for a range of pollutants. Emission

Limits are maximum concentrations of residual pollutants that can be

released at source usually from a stack from the proposed development.

Historic plant and equipment will struggle to meet such regulation.


July 2014 57

Alternative Scenario: Import electricity from the grid to support steel

making activities at the site, which would be an expensive and

uneconomical exercise. This would increase the cost of steel making

and would adversely impact on its market competitiveness, not to

mention increase the site’s carbon footprint.

Alternative Locations for the Proposed Development: The Kepner

Tregoe decision analysis tool has been used to select the most optimal

location for the proposed development. Further detail regarding this

selection method is contained within the ES. Through the use of this

analysis tool, three possible locations for the proposed development

were identified as listed below (1 – 3). Having assessed these sites

location (1) was identified as the most suitable site.

1) Old Margam Coke Oven Site;

2) North Side of Harbour Way Dock Site; and

3) Old A Strand Sinter Plant Site

Alternative Technology: Alternative technologies have been considered

to ascertain what type of technology would best generate power from the

available process gases at the site.

1) Boiler Turbo Alternator (BTA) Units; and

2) Combined Cycle Gas Turbine (CCGT)

5.2.17 The ES considers each of these technologies in further depth. Following a full

assessment, it has been concluded that the BTA unit is the preferred

technology for the proposed development given that it would be more adaptable

and less expensive.


July 2014 58

Criteria for “good design” for Energy Infrastructure (NPS EN-1, 4.5)

5.2.18 Section 4.5 of NPS EN-1 refers to the need to apply good design to energy

projects, which should produce sustainable infrastructure sensitive to place.

However, Paragraph 4.5.1 does acknowledge that:

“…the nature of much energy infrastructure development will often limit

the extent to which it can contribute to the enhancement of the quality of

the area.”

5.2.19 Paragraph 4.5.2 goes on to discuss how good design is also a means by which

many policy objectives in the NPS can be met. Good design can often be used

to mitigate adverse impacts such as noise etc.

5.2.20 The design of the proposed buildings and various components of this proposed

development have been considered throughout the scheme’s evolution. This

DCO Application is accompanied by a Design and Access Statement

(Document Reference: 10.03), which sets out the design principles for the

development and provides information on the design parameters of the

proposed development as far as practicable to allow for the Application to be

fully considered by the SoS.

5.2.21 It is not possible to fix the exact size/design of the buildings/structures

associated with the proposed development. As such, the technical

assessments that support this Application have assessed ‘maximum

parameters’ within which the work would take place. This strategy accords with

the principles of the ‘Rochdale Envelope’, as identified in NPS EN-1, which

allows an element of flexibility to be built into development proposals to address

areas of uncertainty which will be clarified as proposals progress.

5.2.22 The design parameters for this proposed development have been outlined in

further depth in Section 3 of this statement. Whilst the build parameters have

been set, the detailed design of the proposed development would be subject to


July 2014 59

separate approval by NPTCBC prior to the commencement of development

through the requirements in the DCO.

5.2.23 The Applicant considers that the current broad design parameters of the

proposed development are acceptable, particularly when taking into

consideration the location of the application site, which sits against the context

of the existing steelworks site that is wholly industrial in character. To this end,

the proposed development complies with the design requirements of NPS EN-1.

5.2.24 Paragraph 4.5.3 of NPS EN-1 states that the SoS will need to be satisfied that:

“energy infrastructure developments are sustainable and, having regard

to regulatory and other constraints, are as attractive, durable and

adaptable (including taking account of natural hazards such as flooding)

as they can be”.

5.2.25 The Development Advice Map (DAM) referred to in TAN 15 show large areas of

the proposed development site to be located within Flood Zones B and C. The

key sources of flooding shown in these maps are the River Afan, the Ffrwdwyllt,

plus the Severn Estuary (i.e. the sea), which appear to flow over land during

extreme flood events towards the site.

5.2.26 However, since the models used to produce this mapping were completed (in

2009), new embankments and a diversion of the Ffrwdwyllt, through culverts for

Harbour Way, have been constructed. Modelling of these works as part of the

FCA prepared in support of this DCO indicate that they divert fluvial flooding

away from the Port Talbot steelworks site. In extreme events, such as the 1 in

1000 chance fluvial + MHWS tidal, whilst the main power generation site does

not flood, some of the 66kV cable route is shown to flood and some parts of the

Harbour Way to the north are shown to flood to depths of up to 1m. This will be

accounted for in a FWEP for the proposed development (to be incorporated into

either within the CoCP or as part of wider emergency planning procedures in

operation).


July 2014 60

5.2.27 In terms of sustainability, the proposed development would be sited within the

confines of the existing steelworks site and would enable a significant reduction

in the amount of imported energy from the national grid. Moreover, the

proposed development would vastly improve the energy efficiency of the

steelworks as a whole, allowing for continued production and increased

competiveness.

5.2.28 Paragraph 4.5.4 of NPS EN-1 seeks that applicants:

“demonstrate in their application documents how the design process was

conducted and how the proposed design evolved. Where a number of

different designs were considered, applicants should set out the reasons

why the favoured choice has been selected”.

5.2.29 The design evolution is explained in further depth in the Design and Access

Statement (Document Reference: 10.03), and the alternatives to the proposed

development are set out briefly above at paragraph 5.2.15 onwards and further

explored in Chapter 2 (Environmental Impact Assessment) of the ES. These

documents discuss the nature of the proposed development, the scheme

design and extent of the built-form required as part of the proposals.

5.2.30 Given the nature of the proposed development, the design has largely evolved

in response to the objectives of the proposals. The proposed development

seeks to increase the power generation of the site through the installation of an

internal power generation enhancement system. The plant and equipment

associated with which have been chosen to achieve this specific objective and

fairly rigidly dictate the form, design and arrangement of proposed buildings on

the site. Whilst the scale and form of these buildings has been kept to a

minimum, for both visual impact and cost reasons, they would be viewed in the

context of the overall steelworks site, which is a wholly industrial landscape.

Consideration of Combined Heat & Power (CHP) (NPS EN-1, 4.6)

5.2.31 Section 4.6.6 of NPS EN-1 states that:


July 2014 61

“Under guidelines issued by DECC (then DTI) in 2006, any application to

develop thermal generating station under Section 36 of the Electricity Act

1989 must either include CHP or contain evidence that the possibilities

for CHP have been fully explored to inform the [Secretary of State]’s

consideration of the application.”

5.2.32 Due consideration has been given to the general support in NPS EN-1 for CHP.

5.2.33 The steam produced in the boiler(s) of the proposed development would be

used for electricity generation and would also be recycled (via new pipework

connections into existing infrastructure) for office heating, space heating within

the wider steelworks site and for various other on-site process requirements,

contributing to the overall sustainability of the proposed development and the

critical plant operations of the steelworks site. The existing on-site demand for

heat is sufficient such that it would make any export of waste heat from the

plant to other external users uneconomical. Accordingly, the export of the heat

to users outside the steelworks site is not proposed by the Applicant.

Carbon Capture Storage (CCS) & Carbon Capture Readiness (CCR) (NPS EN-

1, 4.7)

5.2.34 Section 4.7 of NPS EN-1 explains the considerations to be given to CCS and

CCR and explains that all applications for new combustion plant which are of a

generating capacity at or over 300MW and of a type covered by the EU’s Large

Combustion Plant Directive (LCPD) should demonstrate that the plant is

“Carbon Capture Ready”.

5.2.35 The maximum total combined output of the generating facilities at the

steelworks site following the construction of the proposed development with be

245MW and would therefore not meet or exceed the threshold of 300MW. The

proposed development is therefore not required to demonstrate carbon capture

readiness.


July 2014 62

Climate Change Adaption (NPS EN-1, 4.8)

5.2.36 Section 4.8 of NPS EN-1 relates to climate change adaption and covers the

Government’s energy and climate change strategy, advising that the effects of

climate change should be taken into account when developing and consenting

infrastructure. Paragraph 4.8.5 states that:

“New energy infrastructure will typically be a long-term investment and

will need to remain operational over many decades, in the face of a

changing climate. Consequently, applicants must consider the impacts

of climate change when planning the location, design, build, operation

and, where appropriate, decommissioning of new energy infrastructure.”

5.2.37 In terms of flood risk, the application site falls mainly within Flood Risk Zone B

(areas known to have flooded in the past), however, the north-western corner of

the site falls within Zone C1 (areas served by significant infrastructure, including

flood defences), as defined by the Development Advice Map (DAM) referred to

under TAN 15 (Development & Flood Risk) (2004). In view of this, a Flood

Consequences Assessment (FCA) has been undertaken in accordance with the

requirements of TAN 15 and is submitted in support of this Application

(contained within Appendix 13.1 of the ES). This document considers the

effects of climate change over the lifetime of the proposed development.

5.2.38 The FCA has identified the key sources of flooding as being the River Afan, the

Ffrwdwyllt, and the Severn Estuary. Since NRW undertook their previous

modelling to produce the DAM, new embankments and a diversion of the

Ffrwdwyllt have been constructed. These have significantly lessened the

impacts associated with flooding. Following discussions, NRW has requested

modelling for the minor watercourses which flow into the reservoir, as they may

affect fluvial flooding to the site. This work has since been carried out (see

Chapter 13 (Flood Risk) of the ES) and indicates that these minor watercourses

divert fluvial flooding away from the Port Talbot steelworks site. In extreme

events such as the 1 in 1000 chance fluvial + mean high water spring tidal,


July 2014 63

whilst the main power generation site would not flood, some of the 66 kV cable

route is shown to flood and some parts of the Harbour Way to the north are

shown to flood to depths of up to 1.0 m. This would need to be accounted for in

a flood warning evacuation plan for the proposed development (either within the

CoCP or as part of wider emergency planning procedures in operation).

5.2.39 Ordinary watercourses near to the site are not considered to be a constraint to

the proposed development.

5.2.40 There is anticipated to be a number of pressurised proposed process water

pipes which present a potential flood risk at all stages of the development due

to failures of the system. This would be mitigated through the design of the

system

5.2.41 The site is partially located in an area potentially at risk of flooding from the

Eglyws Nunydd and Cwmwernderi Reservoirs; however modelling and

engineering assessment (see Chapter 13 (Flood Risk) of the ES) has shown

that neither presents a significant constraint to the proposed development.

5.2.42 Groundwater flooding is not anticipated to be a significant constraint to the

construction, operational or decommissioning stages as there are no significant

below ground works during construction or operation of the proposed

development.

5.2.43 Following submission of the hydraulic model (contained within the FCA,

Appendix 13.1.5 of the ES) and associated FCA to NRW for review, a

consultation response was issued by NRW on the 23rd May 2014 (Document

Reference: 6.02, Volume 2, Chapter 13) stating that they have confidence in the

findings and conclusions of the FCA. As such, NRW accept that flood risk to

the site can be managed and that the proposed development complies with the

requirements of Welsh Government guidance TAN 15: Development and Flood

Risk (July 2004).


July 2014 64

5.2.44 In terms of surface water resources, the proposed development has the

potential to impact upon water quality, which is interrelated with effects on

groundwater and flood risk.

5.2.45 The proposed development would involve an initial abstraction of water from the

River Afan during the construction phase of the cooling towers. Abstraction

would also be needed to make up for evaporative loses. The River Afan would

be the primary source of abstraction, with secondary sources during no flow/low

flow conditions being the Nant Ffrwdwyllt, followed by the Port Talbot Dock.

5.2.46 The effects of the abstraction-discharge regime have been assessed under

chapter 14 of the ES on the basis that the River Afan would be the primary

source of abstraction and that an abstraction hierarchy would be employed.

This approach has been agreed in principle with NRW. A statement of common

ground will be sought for this prior to examination process.

5.2.47 The Applicant will secure the necessary abstraction license agreements and will

adhere to monitoring requirements of NRW. Essentially, this proposed

development presents an opportunity to improve flow conditions and strain

placed on salmon migration over and above the existing situation.

5.2.48 Surface water is proposed to discharge into Swansea Bay. Such discharges

are not considered to be significant and would be managed through the

imposition of suitable conditions and via an amended discharge permit.

5.2.49 Miscellaneous discharges from rainwater run-off and discharges from ancillary

equipment may also occur. Such discharges can be addressed through

adherence to a CoCP and by managing and pre-treating site drainage, as

necessary, before discharging via consented discharge points, which are

controlled through the conditions of an environmental permit. Additionally,

surface water run-off effects on the drainage channel (Middle Mother Ditch)

outside the site boundary, and other downstream water bodies / courses would

be mitigated via the attenuation ponds constructed as part of the Harbour Way


July 2014 65

development. Therefore, the effect on controlled waters from intermittent

miscellaneous discharges is not significant and presents a residual negligible

effect.

5.2.50 The abstraction necessary during the commissioning of the cooling towers to

full operation would not have a significant effect on the River Afan flows as this

is a one off and small abstraction volume presenting a residual negligible effect

only.

5.2.51 The abstraction during operation of the proposed development would also have

a residual negligible effect on the River Afan flows. Abstraction effects on the

River Afan flows would be mitigated through abstraction licence agreements,

agreed monitoring requirements and operation of the agreed abstraction

hierarchy with NRW. The operation of this abstraction hierarchy between NRW

and the Applicant would actively manage additional stress placed on the River

Afan during low flow periods, enabling an effective and more sustainable

operating system for the Applicant by ensuring flows are available for the

additional abstraction when required without adversely affecting the flows in the

River Afan.

5.2.52 Discharges to Swansea Bay during all phases of the proposed development

would have a residual negligible effect and therefore insignificant effect on the

water body. Discharges would be managed through conditions imposed by an

amended permit or new permit.

5.2.53 Chapter 14 (Surface Water Environment) of the ES includes details of baseline

data, together with a full assessment of surface water matters and

methodology.

Grid Connection (NPS EN-1, 4.9)

5.2.54 Section 4.9 of NPS EN-1 relates to the connection of the proposed development

to the national grid. Specifically, paragraph 4.9.1 states that:


July 2014 66

“In the market system, it is for the applicant to ensure that there will be

necessary infrastructure and capacity within an existing or planning

transmission or distribution network to accommodate the electricity

generated.”

5.2.55 The proposed development represents an extension to the existing operational

steelworks. As such, there is already a grid connection in place. The proposed

development would however involve the need to install new and additional

infrastructure to integrate the proposed buildings/structures into the existing

facility. Whilst the electricity generated by the proposed development would be

intermittently exported to the national grid, the majority of the power generated

would be used on-site to reduce the site’s external energy draw. In order to

facilitate the connection of the proposed development to the national grid

upgrading works would be required, involving the installation of a 66kV

switchgear building adjacent to the generating station and modifications to the

existing on-site sub-stations. These modification works would be undertaken

following direct consultation with Western Power Distribution and are included in

the works authorised by the DCO at Schedule 1 of the draft DCO.

Pollution Control & Other Environmental Regulatory Regimes (NPS EN-1, 4.10)

5.2.56 The assessment principle outlined at Section 4.10 of NPS EN-1 relates to

issues involving discharges or emissions from the proposed facility that may

affect air quality, water quality, land quality and the marine environment, or

which may include noise and vibration. Whilst NPS EN-1 acknowledges that

the planning and pollution control systems are separate entities, it does point

out that they can work together to achieve the best result. Paragraph 4.10.3

states that:

“In considering an application for development consent, the [Secretary of

State] should focus on whether the development itself is an acceptable

use of the land, and on the impacts of that use, rather than the control of

processes, emissions or discharges themselves. The [Secretary of


July 2014 67

State] should work on the assumption that the relevant pollution control

regime and other environmental regulatory regimes….will be properly

applied….It should act to complement but not seek to duplicate them.”

5.2.57 The ES that has been submitted in support of this DCO Application identifies

and considers all of the environmental issues associated with this proposed

development. Discussion has been undertaken with relevant pollution control

authorities to ensure that potential releases can be regulated appropriately.

Accordingly, a number of permits, licences and consents would be required for

the proposed development. The requirement for additional consents and

licences is referenced and considered within Chapter 5 (Air Quality), Chapter 8

(Noise and Vibration), and Chapter 14 (Surface Water Environment) of the ES

and a list of expected required consents and licences is set out within the

[Additional Consents and Licence Document]. These relevant matters are

controlled under separate legislation that should not be duplicated through the

planning process. Instead, it is advised that the necessary consents etc would

be gained following the approval of this DCO and prior to the commencement of

works.

5.2.58 As required by the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations

2010 as amended, the Applicant will submit an application for an Environmental

Permit, required to operate the proposed development, to Natural Resources

Wales. The Applicant has met with Natural Resources Wales who have

indicated that, at this stage, they see no impediment to the grant of the

Environmental Permit but reserve their right to decide the application for the

Environmental Permit after it has been submitted.

Safety (NPS EN-1, 4.11)

5.2.59 Occupational health and safety legislation is regulated by the Health and safety

Executive (HSE) and would be applicable to the construction, operation and

decommissioning of the proposed development. Paragraph 4.11.1 of NPS EN-


July 2014 68

1 states that consultation should be undertaken with the HSE on matters

relating to safety.

5.2.60 Early engagement and consultation has been undertaken with the HSE as part

of this DCO Application. The Applicant already engages with the HSE in

respect of the existing on-site operations. Liaison with the HSE will continue to

inform the detailed design of the proposed development. A Health and Safety

Statement has been prepared as part of the Application (Document Reference:

8.07).

Hazardous Substances (NPS EN-1, 4.12)

5.2.61 Paragraph 4.12.1 of NPS EN-1 advises that in the event that the proposed

development would hold stocks of or is intending to use hazardous substances,

consultation should be undertaken with the HSE at the pre-application stage to

determine whether hazardous substances consent is required.

5.2.62 The proposed development would not involve the use of hazardous substances

and therefore no such consent would be required.

Health (NPS EN-1, 4.13)

5.2.63 Section 4.13 of NPS EN-1 refers to the potential impact on the health and well-

being of the population as a result of energy production processes. Paragraph

4.13.2 states that:

“…where the proposed project has an effect on human beings, the ES

should assess these effects for each element of the project, identifying

any adverse health impacts, and identifying measures to avoid, reduce or

compensate for these impacts as appropriate.”

5.2.64 As advised by NPS EN-1, the ES fully considers the potential impacts of the

proposed development on public health in relation to contamination (Chapter 9),

air quality (Chapter 5), noise, vibration (Chapter 8), and water quality (Chapter


July 2014 69

14). Certain aspects (i.e. air pollution) are covered by separate legislation.

Nevertheless, all matters have been afforded due consideration as part of this

submission and an assessment of the individual topics has been made below,

with further information available within the ES.

Statutory Nuisance (NPS EN-1, 4.14)

5.2.65 Section 4.14 of NPS EN-1 relates to statutory nuisances as outlined under

section 79(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990. Paragraph 4.14.2 of

NPS EN-1 states that:

“It is very important that, at the application stage of an energy NSIP,

possible sources of nuisance under section 79(1) of the 1990 Act and

how they may be mitigated or limited are considered by the [Secretary of

State]…”

5.2.66 Document 5.02 (Statement in respect of Statutory Nuisance) contains further

information on such matters and considers how the proposed development

would engage s79(1) of the Environmental Protection Act 1990.

5.2.67 The Statement concludes that whilst the proposed development has the

potential to engage some of the matters set out in s 79(1), appropriate

mitigation measures have been incorporated (including embedded mitigation in

the design of the project - and additional measures to be implemented during

construction and operation) to ensure that these impacts do not give rise to a

statutory nuisance within the meaning of s. 79(1). These measures include the

CoCP and other measures as set out in ES Chapter 17 Schedule of Mitigation).

Security Considerations (NPS EN-1, 4.15)

5.2.68 Paragraph 4.15.2 of NPS EN-1 states that, where possible, proportionate

protective security measures are designed into new infrastructure projects at an

early stage as there may be national security considerations.


July 2014 70

5.2.69 The existing steelworks site is already subject to rigorous security measures

which would be applicable to the development proposed under this Application.

The following security measures are already in place at the steelworks site and

would continue to operate in relation to this proposed development:

A network of close circuit television cameras;

24 hour on-site security presence;

Security fencing to contain areas and prevent access; and

Restricted access controlled via security passes.

Generic Impacts

5.2.70 Part 5 of NPS EN-1 covers those impacts that are termed as ‘generic’ given that

they arise from the development of any type of energy infrastructure project. A

breakdown of the generic impacts listed within Part 5 is provided below with

commentary in relation to the proposed development.

Air Quality & Emissions (NPS EN-1, 5.2)

5.2.71 Paragraph 5.2.6 of NPS EN-1 states that:

“Where the project is likely to have adverse effects on air quality the

applicant should undertake an assessment of the impacts of the

proposed project as part of the Environmental Statement (ES).”

5.2.72 In accordance with this requirement, the ES submitted in support of this

proposed development duly considers the potential for impacts associated with

air quality (Chapter 5) and contains a full air quality assessment.

5.2.73 In summary, the results of the air quality assessment at sensitive receptors

along the construction route indicate that the proposed development is

expected to have a negligible effect on annual mean NO2 and PM10

concentrations at the worst affected sites.


July 2014 71

5.2.74 In terms of emissions from the proposed development, these have been

assessed through detailed atmospheric dispersion modelling using best practice

approaches (included in Chapter 5 (Air Quality) of the ES).

5.2.75 Construction-phase dust effects have been assessed to be low to medium risk if

unmitigated, but are expected to be negligible following the implementation of

appropriate mitigation measures (set out in ES Chapter 5 Air Quality and ES

Chapter 15 Construction Environmental and Waste Management, together with

the Dust Management Plan and the Code of Construction Practice (CoCP)

(Document Reference: 8.06).

5.2.76 Construction related traffic effects on air quality are predicted to be negligible at

receptors adjacent to the main access routes used by traffic associated with the


5.2.77 Overall, the maximum long-term impacts with the worst-case conditions are

negligible. Despite this marginal impact, it is noted that paragraph 5.2.10 of

NPS EN-1 provides allowance for the breach of air quality limits by stating that:

“Where a project is likely to lead to a breach of such limits the developer

should work with the relevant authorities to secure appropriate mitigation

measures to allow the proposal to proceed.”

Biodiversity & Geological Conservation (NPS EN-1, 5.3)

5.2.78 Section 5.3 of NPS EN-1 places emphasis on the need to provide

environmental information that is proportionate to the infrastructure proposed

and has taken advantage of the opportunities to conserve and enhance

biodiversity and geological conservation interests.

5.2.79 As part of the decision making process the SoS will take account of the context

of the challenge of climate change, which in itself will result in significant

adverse impacts to biodiversity. Whilst the proposed development may result in

harm to features of acknowledged ecological importance, this must be weighed


July 2014 72

against the benefits of nationally significant low carbon energy infrastructure

development which, as paragraph 5.3.6 of NPS EN-1 recognises, may include

wider benefits for biodiversity and geological conservation interests.

5.2.80 Section 5.3 of NPS EN-1 identifies the following as designations as being key

for consideration by the SoS:

International Sites (Ramsar, Special Area of Conservation (SAC), Special

Protection Areas (SPA) (including proposed sites);

Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI);

Regional and Local Sites (e.g. Local Nature Reserves (LNR));

Ancient Woodland and Veteran Trees;

Biodiversity within Developments; and

Protection of Habitats and Other Species (i.e. species and habitats of

principle importance nationally, or species and habitats of regional

importance.

5.2.81 The Applicant has included as part of the Application a detailed ES which

provides the environmental information required by the NPS. The following

detailed survey work has been undertaken to inform the ES:

A Desk Study (Chapter 6 (Ecology) of the ES);

Extended Phase 1 Habitat Survey (Volume 3, Appendix 6.1 of the ES);

Bat Survey (Chapter 6 (Ecology) Table 6.1 of the ES);

Reptile Survey (Volume 3, Appendix 6.2 of the ES);

Great Crested Newt Habitat Suitability Assessment (Volume 3, Appendix

6.3 of the ES);

Breeding Bird Suitability Assessment (Volume 3, Appendix 6.4 of the ES);


July 2014 73

Kidney Vetch Survey (Volume 3, Appendix 6.5 of the ES);

Walkover of the cable route to identify and map habitats and identify

presence or potential for habitats to host protected and priority species

(Volume 3, Appendix 6.1 of the ES); and

Invertebrate Habitat Suitability Assessment of the cable route and

proposed development (Volume 3, Appendix 6.5 of the ES).

5.2.82 The land within the Order Limits comprises scattered scrub, semi-improved

grassland, amenity grassland, pipe work, hard standing, gravelled areas,

buildings and a ditch.

5.2.83 Whilst it would be necessary to remove vegetation on the site, the appropriate

surveys have been carried out to assess the potential for biodiversity and the

associated impacts thereon and mitigation proposed.

5.2.84 In accordance with the findings of the Phase I Survey, Phase II surveys have

been undertaken to identify species present on the site and potential effects on

species and populations.

5.2.85 The main findings of the survey of the main power generation facilities area

included the presence of small blue butterfly and gulls; habitat suitable to

support small passerines; and several stands of Japanese knotweed. No

reptiles were found during the Phase II surveys and habitats were not assessed

as suitable for amphibians or bats. No evidence of badgers was observed.

5.2.86 In reference to the electrical connection, this would mainly be located within the

verge of the existing internal road which consists of a combination of

hardstanding and scrubby areas. The route is also routed once across the

internal railway line in existing ducting or be supported off existing structures.

Nevertheless, a walkover survey of the cable route has been undertaken is

reported in Chapter 6 (Ecology) of the ES.


July 2014 74

5.2.87 The key ecological impacts have been split into two categories and are

described in further detail in the ES Chapter 6 (Ecology):

i. Minor effects are likely to occur during construction where there is:

Temporary damage of semi-improved grassland;

Permanent disturbance to buildings;

Loss of habitat for breeding birds;

Killing or injuring of reptiles; and

Loss of habitat for reptiles.

ii. Moderate effects are likely to occur during construction where there is:

Permanent loss of semi-improved grassland;

Permanent loss of semi-improved scrub;

Permanent drying of the ditch;

Temporary loss of habitat along the cable route;

Temporary degradation of habitat for invertebrates; and

Potential spread of invasive species.

iii. Major effects are likely to occur during construction where there is:

Permanent loss of invertebrate habitat.

5.2.88 The ES Ecology Chapter (Chapter 6) also considers impacts of the proposed

development on designated sites. All effects on designated sites would be

minor to negligible.

5.2.89 The proposed development will have a residual minor adverse effect on semi-

improved grassland through the partial and temporary loss of the habitat during


July 2014 75

construction. The creation of an ‘invertebrate sanctuary’ will manage an

existing area of semi-improved grassland to be of equal or greater value than

that removed and will provide compensation for the partial loss of the semi-

improved grassland. The semi-improved grassland removed temporarily will be

reinstated after the completion of the cable installation works. The effect on

semi-improved grassland is deemed to be not significant.

5.2.90 There would be a residual minor adverse effect on invertebrates through the

removal of the wet ditch and partial removal of the semi-improved grassland

and scrub. Management of a retained area of semi-improved grassland to

create an ‘invertebrate sanctuary’ will mitigate the loss of habitats. In addition,

there will be a proportion of the habitat retained on-site and there is grassland

habitat of equal or greater value in the immediate surroundings. The effect on

invertebrates is deemed to be not significant.

5.2.91 There would be no effect on any other habitats or species during operation.

5.2.92 The proposed development will have a residual minor adverse effect on wet

ditch through the infilling of the habitat during construction. There is similar

habitat of equal or greater in the surrounding landscape. No mitigation or

compensation is proposed for the partial loss of the habitat. The effect on the

wet ditch is deemed to be not significant.

5.2.93 The proposed development will have a residual minor adverse effect on reptiles

through the partial loss of the semi-improved grassland. No mitigation or

compensation is proposed for the partial loss of the habitat with potential to

support reptiles. The effect on reptiles is deemed to be not significant.

5.2.94 During decommissioning there would be no effect to designated sites as there is

no demolition proposed because the existing steam boilers and turbo

alternators are contained within an existing building which would be

decommissioned and left insitu. There is no intention to demolish this building.

Similarly, the three existing stacks would also be decommissioned and left in


July 2014 76

situ. Should any demolition works be required, this would be subject to

receiving the prior approval of NPTCBC.

5.2.95 Details of this translocation and also management of habitats and invasive

species are outlined in ES Appendix 6.8 Mitigation.

Civil & Military Aviation & Defence Interests (NPS EN-1, 5.4)


“Civil and military aerodromes, aviation technical sites, and other types of

defence interests (both onshore and offshore) can be affected by new

energy development.”

5.2.97 The proposed development incorporates the erection of up to two new chimney

stacks each reaching a height of up to 80m. Accordingly, this element of the

proposed development has the potential to effect civil or military aviation and/or

other defence assets. As advised by paragraph 5.4.11 of NPS EN-1,

consultation has been undertaken with the Ministry of Defence (MoD), the Civil

Aviation Authority (CAA), and the National Air Traffic Services (NATS).

5.2.98 Consultation with the CAA has identified the requirement of omni-directional red

lighting on the top of cranes during construction and also on the top of the

stacks during operation. This is consistent with other lighting on the wider Port

Talbot Steelworks site. The proposed development would not be venting any

gases and due to the implementation of the proposed development, the

presence of the flare would be greatly reduced. Therefore there is no impact to

aerodromes or nearby aviation facilities.

Coastal Change (NPS EN-1, 5.5)

5.2.99 Section 5.5 of NPS EN-1 refers to the protection of coastal communities which

are susceptible to change and can be affected by the direct and indirect impact

associated with energy infrastructure projects. Paragraph 5.5.2 defines coastal


July 2014 77

change as “physical change to the shoreline (i.e. erosion, coastal landslip,

permanent inundation and coastal accretion).” Paragraph 5.5.4 goes on to

state that indirect changes to the coastline and seabed can also arise, which

have the potential to lead to localised or more widespread coastal erosion.

5.2.100 The steelworks site occupies a coastal location, and whilst the application site is

set back from the coastline, within the confines of the steelworks, the proposed

development has the potential to impact upon the coast by reason of discharge

and abstraction from nearby water resources.

5.2.101 The ES incorporates an assessment of the effects of the proposed development

on the coast (Document Reference: 6.02, Volume 2, Chapter 13), which

considers physical changes to the integrity of coast and the associated

implications for matters of ecology, shoreline management, coastal recreation

etc. The HRA has shown that effects are negligible and, cumulatively with

Swansea tidal lagoon, effects of discharges are negligible.

5.2.102 Principally, the SoS will need to be satisfied that the proposed development

would be resilient to coastal erosion and deposition, also taking account of

climate change and the risks from flooding.

5.2.103 A FCA has been carried out separately and forms part of this DCO Application.

This demonstrates that the risk and consequences of coastal flooding can be

acceptably managed. NRW has reviewed the FCA and hydraulic modelling and

accepts that the risk and consequences of flooding cab be suitably managed in

line with TAN 15.

Dust, Odour, Artificial Light, Smoke, Steam & Insect Infestation (NPS EN-1, 5.6)

5.2.104 Impact upon existing occupiers’ amenity is outlined as a key consideration

under Section 5.6 of NPS EN-1, which indicates that an assessment should be

made of the proposals potential for insect infestation and emissions of odour,


July 2014 78

dust, steam or smoke and artificial light. Paragraph 5.6.1 of NPS EN-1 states

that:

“During construction, operation and decommissioning of energy

infrastructure there is potential for the release of a range of

emissions….All have the potential to have a detrimental impact on

amenity or cause a common law nuisance or statutory nuisance under

Part III, Environmental Protection Act 1990.”

5.2.105 The Statement in Respect of Statutory Nuisance included as part of the

Application (Document Reference: 5.06) sets out the extent to which the

proposed development would engage section 79(1) of the Environmental

Protection Act 1990.

5.2.106 Increasing the steel production at the site using the current processes to 4.7

million tonnes per annum, if electricity generation was to remain constant, would

result in around 4.8 PJ per annum of process gases that would need to be

flared. This would obviously have detrimental implications for the surrounding

populace. The proposed development, to replace four existing boilers with two

new larger boilers, would reduce the flaring rate to 0.5 PJ per annum. Whilst

this is a considerable reduction, in accordance with the requirements of

paragraphs 5.6.7 – 5.6.10 of NPS EN-1, the ES takes account of air quality

(Chapter 5) and the associated implications for surrounding sensitive receptors,

having particular regard for the emissions generated by the proposed

development, which would principally be through the operational emissions to

the atmosphere from the gases exhausted by the boiler stack.

5.2.107 Following a thorough assessment of the emissions in the ES, it is concluded

that the predicted concentrations of pollutants from the operational phase of the

proposed development would meet all relevant air quality standards and

objectives. No further mitigation is required beyond that incorporated into the

design of the scheme. Moreover, the proposed development would need to

obtain an Environmental Permit (either a new bespoke Permit or a variation on


July 2014 79

the wider Port Talbot Steelworks Permit) under the Environmental Permitting

Regulations (EPR), which would be monitored and would need to be strictly

adhered to.

5.2.108 Other possible sources of emissions include dust and emissions from transport

associated with the construction of the proposed development. In this respect,

the ES concludes that the number of traffic movements (which are assumed to

use the M4 for accessing the site) generated by the construction of the

proposed development and its future operation will be negligible when

considered against the volume of traffic on the M4 and the distance of the

nearest properties to the site. In addition the implementation of a Dust

Management Plan as part of the CoCP which incorporates the Applicants

existing “traffic light” dust management system, would also manage any effects

of dust, as well as other potential construction effects.

5.2.109 Consultation has been undertaken with NPTCBC in respect of the modelling

and to scope out the consideration of operational traffic effects.

5.2.110 Overall, it is considered that the requirements of Section 5.6 of NPS EN-1 are

satisfied.

Flood Risk (NPS EN-1, 5.7)

5.2.111 Section 5.7 of NPS EN-1 provides advice in relation to the aims of planning

policy on development and flood risk. Paragraph 5.7.4 states that:

“Applications for energy projects of 1 hectare or greater in Flood Zone 1

in England or Zone A in Wales and all proposals for energy projects

located in Flood Zones 2 and 3 in England or Zones B and C in Wales

should be accompanied by a flood risk assessment (FRA).”

5.2.112 The application site is located partially within Flood Risk Zones B and C. As

such, a FCA (contained in Volume 3, Appendix 13.1 of the ES) has been

undertaken and is submitted in support of this DCO Application. The FCA has


July 2014 80

been informed by a hydraulic modelling review following early engagement with

NRW. This takes account of the newly constructed Harbour Way (distributor

road) which acts as a barrier from flooding. It has also modelled the minor

watercourses that flow into the Eglwys Nunydd Reservoir.

5.2.113 The FCA assesses the risks and consequences associated with flooding for the

development site, together with the impacts that the development could have on

flood risk conditions as well as taking account of climate change.

5.2.114 Given its location, the site is considered to be at risk from flooding in both the 1

in 200 year (0.5%) and 1 in 1000 year (0.1%) tidal event. However, the risk and

consequences of flooding can be managed acceptably in accordance with TAN

15. Accordingly, NRW has confirmed that the proposed development is

acceptable from a flood risk perspective.

5.2.115 The proposed development would be undertaken in accordance with the

findings of the FCA, and the exact finished floor levels of the proposed buildings

would be subject to the approval of NPTCBC through the detailed design

requirements as set out within Schedule 2 (Requirements) to the DCO.

5.2.116 The FCA has been undertaken in consultation with NRW, with the hydraulic

model created for the proposed development submitted for validation, and NRW

have concluded that the risks and consequences of flooding can be acceptably

managed as the modelling has been validated. As such, the proposed

development complies with the requirements of Section 5.7 of EN-1.

Historic Environment (NPS EN-1, 5.8)

5.2.117 The historic environment consists of assets that are considered to be valued for

their historic, archaeological, architectural or artistic interest. Such assets can

include buildings, monuments, sites, places or landscapes. Paragraph 5.8.1

states that:


July 2014 81

“the construction, operation and decommissioning of energy

infrastructure has the potential to result in adverse impacts on the historic

environment.”

5.2.118 Paragraph 5.8.8 goes on to state that:

“As part of the ES the applicant should provide a description of the

significance of the heritage assets affected by the proposed development

and the contribution of their setting to that significance. The level of

detail should be proportionate to the importance of the heritage assets

and no more than is sufficient to understand the potential impact of the

proposal on the significance of the heritage asset.”

5.2.119 A Cultural Heritage Assessment (contained within section 11.3 of Chapter 11

(Cultural Heritage & Archaeology) of the ES) has been carried out for the

application site, which follows the guidelines from the Institute for

Archaeologists (IfA) for historic environment desk-based assessments (2012).

5.2.120 Within the 1km study area there are 99 previously recorded heritage assets,

including five Scheduled Ancient Monuments, one Grade II* Listed Building,

three Grade II Listed Buildings, and one Grade II Registered Park and Garden.

5.2.121 Consultation has been undertaken with Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust

(GGAT), Cadw and NRW. The main heritage assets were deemed to be the

Margam Copper Works and the Margam Iron and Steel Works. The

construction of the proposed development may have a direct physical impact

upon these sites, however, the ES (Chapter 11 – Cultural Heritage) has

determined the level of significance to be minor adverse.

5.2.122 In relation to the impact of the proposed development on the setting of nearby

heritage assets, the Grade II* Listed Church of St. Theodore has the potential to

be affected by reason of the proposed boiler chimney stack(s). A cultural

heritage assessment (contained within Chapter 11 of the ES) has been


July 2014 82

undertaken and considers the impact of the proposed stack(s) on the setting of

the listed church to be negligible.

5.2.123 NRW recommended that an Assessment of the Significance of Impacts of

Development on Historic Landscape (ASIDOHL) should be undertaken.

However, following further discussion with Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological

Trust (GGAT) and Cadw such an assessment was not considered to be

necessary on the basis of the industrial use of the site, which has been in

operation since the 1800s.

5.2.124 GGAT has reviewed and approved the draft ES Chapter and supporting

appendices, and advised that a written scheme of archaeological investigation

will need to be carried out for the proposed development site. This is contained

as a requirement in the draft DCO.

Landscape & Visual (NPS EN-1, 5.9)

5.2.125 Section 5.9 of NPS EN-1 relates to landscape and visual effects of energy

projects and indicates that common features of energy infrastructure are cooling

towers and, exhaust stacks and their plumes, which have the most obvious

impact on landscape and visual amenity.

5.2.126 Paragraph 5.9.5 states that:

“The applicant should carry out a landscape and visual assessment and

report it in the ES. A number of guides have been produced to assist in

addressing landscape issues.”

5.2.127 Paragraph 5.9.8 goes on to state that:

“Landscape effects depend on the existing character of the local

landscape, its current quality, how highly it is valued and its capacity to

accommodate change….Virtually all nationally significant energy

infrastructure projects will have effects on the landscape.”


July 2014 83

5.2.128 A LVIA has been carried out for the site in accordance with the relevant

guidance, including the Guidelines for Landscape and Visual Impact

Assessments (3rd Edition). Further detail on this is included in Chapter 7

(Landscape & Visual) of the ES.

5.2.129 The LVIA covers an area of 15km radius from the building extent within the

Order Limits, with the exception of the electrical connection and potential cable

bridge as agreed with statutory consultees in the Scoping Report. The Zone of

Theoretical Visibility (ZTV) used in the LVIA is based on the presence of the

stack(s) and overall building mass of the proposed development as these are

the largest and most visible structures and, therefore, may result in the most

significant impact upon the landscape.

5.2.130 The LVIA has reviewed the effects of the proposed development during the

construction, operation and decommissioning stages. It focuses on the physical

changes to the fabric of the land, such as the addition or removal of industrial

buildings, plant, machinery and lighting.

5.2.131 Within the 15km study area the sensitive landscape designations and main

receptors include:

Margam Mountain, Merthyr Mawr, Kenfig and Margam Burrows (Historic

Landscape Areas (HLA));

Glamorgan Coast (Heritage Coast);

Gower (Area of Outstanding National Beauty (AONB));

Talbot Memorial Park and Margam Country Park (Registered Parks &

Gardens);

Corus Abbey Works (NPTCL004) (LANDMAP Aspect Areas);

Mumbles Head to Porthcawl Point (Swansea Bay) (Seascape Unit No.46);

and


July 2014 84

The residential properties located between Port Talbot Town Centre,

Taibach, Pen-y-Cae and Margam, the M4 motorway, the A48 and Harbour

Way.

5.2.132 Landscape character is defined by the Guidelines for Landscape and Visual

Impact Assessment (3rd Edition) as “distinct, recognisable and consistent

pattern of elements in the landscape that makes one landscape different from

another, rather than better or worse.” The LVIA outlines that the application site

is located within the Port Talbot steelworks site which is heavily industrialised in

nature. The proposed development comprises a new building adjacent to the

existing power station that would house new power generation facilities together

with new gas, steam and utilities network connections.

5.2.133 There are currently 16 existing buildings and structures within the red line

boundary of the proposed development. The existing chimney stack connecting

to the existing power station has an overall height of 135 metres.

5.2.134 The LVIA has been undertaken on a daytime (in relation to lighting impact)

basis from publically accessible locations from a range of receptors including

residences, public rights of way (PROW), public open spaces, settlements and

transport routes. This approach was agreed with NPTCBC at the scoping

stage, when it was confirmed by NRW that the proposed development would be

unlikely to result in any significant night-time visual effects through additional

lighting given the existing heavily illuminated character of the steelworks site.

5.2.135 The proposed development would be visible from a number of the identified

landscape designations, however, the buildings/structures would be viewed in

the context of the existing steelworks site. Whilst the sensitivity of some of the

landscape designations would normally be considered to be very high, the

susceptibility to change would actually be low due to the existing steelworks that

encases the site.


July 2014 85

5.2.136 Through dialogue with the City & County Swansea, it was agreed that three

additional viewpoints would be included within the LVIA. These are:

i. Grape & Olive Bar & Restaurant, Meridian Quay

ii. Verdi's Cafe, Knab Rock, Mumbles

iii. Swansea Bay Promenade

5.2.137 These three viewpoints have been assessed and are reported on within the ES

(Chapter 7 – Landscape & Visual).

5.2.138 In conclusion, the LVIA has determined the landscape impacts on the above-

mentioned identified receptors to be minor and not significant. In relation to the

visual effects, these would be minor and negligible and not significant, aside

from those from Harbour Way which would be moderate and significant.

However, the scale of the proposed development within the confines of the

existing steelworks site should be afforded considerable weight when

considering landscape and visual impact.

5.2.139 Despite the industrialised nature of the site there are opportunities to reduce the

visual presence of the proposed development. Such mitigation would take the

form of tree planting and earth bank development, particularly along the

Harbour Way frontage. Landscaping will form part of the [Landscaping Plan]

which has to be submitted to and approved by NPTCBC in accordance with

requirements in the draft DCO. In addition, the colour of the buildings/structures

will be approved by NPTCBC as part of the detailed design approval process, in

accordance with the requirements of the draft DCO, to limit the effect of close

and more distant views. It is considered appropriate to use a mid to light grey

for the building masses, with Tata blue for the trim details. In terms of lighting

requirements, this is minimal and there are techniques included within the ES

Chapter 3 which can be used to limit detrimental impacts. The DCO Application

covers the need for lighting, and specific details of lighting can be controlled by

way of requirement in the DCO.


July 2014 86

5.2.140 Further information in relation to the LVIA assessment methodology and

findings can be found in Chapter 7 of the ES. Given the scale of the proposed

development set against that of the existing steelworks site and taking into

account the sensitivity of the receptors it is considered that the proposed

development is compliant with Section 5.9 of NPS EN-1.

Land Use Including Open Space, Green Infrastructure & Green Belt (NPS EN-1,

5.10)

5.2.141 NPS EN-1 notes at 5.10 that:

“An energy infrastructure project will have direct effects on the existing

use of the proposed site and may have indirect effects on the use, or

planned use, of land in the vicinity for other types of development.”

5.2.142 The proposed development is located on land within the existing operational

boundary of the Port Talbot Steelworks. The power generation plant can be

accommodated within the Order Limits on previously developed land. It is

considered that the proposed development has been sited, laid out, and

designed with the appropriate regard to the land use provisions of the NPS.

Noise & Vibration (NPS EN-1, 5.11)

5.2.143 Noise and vibration is a generic impact referred to under Section 5.11 of NPS

EN-1. This section promotes effective noise management in order to maintain

good health and good quality of life. It also places emphasis on the potential for

noise to adversely affect wildlife and biodiversity. Paragraph 5.11.4 of NPS EN-

1 states that:

“Where noise impacts are likely to arise from the proposed development,

the applicant should include the following in the noise assessment:

a description of the noise generating aspects of the

development proposal leading to noise impacts, including the


July 2014 87

identification of any distinctive tonal, impulsive or low

frequency characteristics of the noise;

identification of noise sensitive premises and noise sensitive

areas that may be affected;

the characteristics of the existing noise environment;

a prediction of how the noise environment will change with

the proposed development;

in the shorter term such as during the construction period;

in the longer term during the operating life of the

infrastructure;

at particular times of the day, evening and night as

appropriate;

an assessment of the effect of predicted changes in the

noise environment on any noise sensitive premises and

noise sensitive areas; and

measures to be employed in mitigating noise.”

5.2.144 Chapter 8 (Noise & Vibration) of the ES incorporates a full noise and vibration

assessment. This concludes that operational noise from the installation of plant

during each Option/Phase of the proposed development will be below existing

background levels at nearby Noise Sensitive Receptors (NSRs) such that there

will be no adverse impacts.

5.2.145 During daytime periods, the Rating Level of plant (within inclusion of a +5dB

penalty for tonal/impulsive elements) is predicted to be 21 to 22 dB below the

measured background noise levels at each NSR survey location. During night-


July 2014 88

time periods the Rating Level of plant is predicted to be 39 to 42 dB below

background levels.

5.2.146 The survey results show that there will be a reduction in sound levels when the

existing power plant is removed. It is considered that the dominant noise

source in the area will continue to be road traffic along the M4 motorway and so

the future background noise levels will be broadly similar to the measured

background noise levels from the AECOM survey.

5.2.147 Predicted noise levels from plant are considered to be sufficiently below existing

background levels such that they would be indiscernible and not significantly

contribute to the noise environment at the identified NSRs.

5.2.148 Due to the distance between the proposed development site and NSRs,

operational vibration impacts are considered to be negligible.

5.2.149 In terms of decommissioning noise, it is anticipated that there will be no noise

impacts from these works as there will be no demolition or removal of plant and

equipment. The boilers and associated turbine sets will be decommissioned

and left insitu.

5.2.150 This DCO Application is considered to satisfy the requirements of Section 5.11

of NPS EN-1. Further information and a detailed analysis of noise and vibration

are contained within ES Chapter 8 (Noise & Vibration).

Socio-economic (NPS EN-1, 5.12)

5.2.151 The proposed development would result in socio-economic impacts during the

construction, operation and decommissioning stages at a local and regional

level, which is recognised under Section 5.12 of NPS EN-1 as a generic impact

for all energy infrastructure projects. Paragraph 5.12.2 states that:


July 2014 89

“Where the project is likely to have socio-economic impacts at local or

regional levels, the applicant should undertake and include in their

application an assessment of these impacts as part of the ES…”

5.2.152 Paragraph 5.12.3 goes on to provide a list of relevant socio-economic impacts

(not exclusive) which may be included in such an assessment. These include

matters of job creation and training opportunities, provision of community and

infrastructure improvements, effects on tourism, and changing population

dynamics from increased employment in the area.

5.2.153 In accordance with the requirements of Section 5.12, a socio-economic impact

assessment (Document Reference 6.02, Volume 2, Chapter 12) has been

included in the ES (Chapter 12 – Scio-Economics) which considers the

proposed development in view of the local community and associated

economies in the vicinity of the proposed development, tourist/visitor attractions,

as well as recreational land uses.

5.2.154 The steelworks site already represents a major contributor to the local and

regional economies. It employs approximately 3,500 people in a variety of

disciplines. Dependent upon the contracts being serviced the secondary supply

chain can vary although the Welsh Government has recognised the Applicant

for being the largest “anchor employer” in South Wales with up to 17,000 people

either directly or indirectly employed in the local supply chain. It must also be

noted that the operations of the Port Talbot site support the other Tata Steel

sites at Llanwern, Shotton, Corby and Trostre.

5.2.155 The key potential effects based on the impact assessment are outlined below

and have been split into the three project stages:

i. Construction:

Regional employment opportunities;


July 2014 90

Indirect economic effects as a result of expenditure in the local area

through increased activity in the area;

Temporary effects on local community associated with increased

disturbance from construction activities;

Temporary local adverse effects on users of local PROWs

associated within increased disturbance; and

Effects on tourism (use of accommodation & impact upon views);

ii. Operation:

Effects on tourism (use of accommodation & impact upon views);

Regional employment opportunities.

iii. Decommissioning:

The plant and equipment contained within the old power station

would be decommissioned but not demolished. Therefore, there is

limited scope for employment opportunities or impacts to tourism.

5.2.156 It is acknowledged that there would be both positive and negative impacts at a

socio-economic level. However, the positive impacts would considerably out-

weigh the negative impacts, which largely relate to visual implications that

would only marginally impinge upon the tourism economy. These would be

greatly overshadowed by the fact the proposed development would be located

in an industrialised area surrounded by similar works which are already a

feature of Port Talbot’s character. Moreover, the proposed development is

vastly important to ensuring the competitiveness of the Port Talbot steelworks in

the steel industry. As such, the proposed development will enable the site to

improve efficiency, the viability of the site and, therefore, its longevity.


July 2014 91

5.2.157 In view of the findings of the socio-economic impact assessment, Section 5.12

of NPS EN-1 has been suitably satisfied.

Traffic & Transport (NPS EN-1, 5.13)

5.2.158 The consideration and mitigation of transport is an essential part of the

Government’s wider policy objectives for sustainable development. Impacts

associated with the transport of materials, goods and personnel to and from the

development at all phases of the proposed development can be economic,

social and environmental. Paragraph 5.13.3 states that:

“If a project is likely to have significant transport implications, the

applicant’s ES (see Section 4.2) should include a transport assessment,

using the NATA/WebTAG methodology stipulated in Department for

Transport guidance, or any successor to such methodology. Applicants

should consult the Highways Agency and Highways Authorities as

appropriate on the assessment and mitigation.”

5.2.159 Consultation has been undertaken with NPTCBC Highway Department in

relation to the study area and scope of the information required to support this

Application. ES Chapter 10 (Traffic and Transportation) provides an in-depth

analysis of the highway safety matters associated with this proposed

development. In view of the detail provided in Chapter 10 (Traffic and

Transport) of the ES, NPTCBC Highways Department has confirmed that there

is no requirement for a Transport Assessment (TA) to be submitted as part of

this DCO Application.

5.2.160 The study area includes 12 highways links, which incorporate the majority of

“Harbour Way”, and routes between the site and the M4 Junctions 38, 40 and

41. Additionally, a baseline of accessibility by all modes, including footpaths,

cycleways and PROWs has been established.

5.2.161 It is anticipated that the construction period would last approximately 36 months

in the case of Option 1, and 36 months (Phase 1) with an additional 24 months


July 2014 92

(Phase 2) in the case of Option 2. The peak period for deliveries would be

months 8 to 11, when 14 Heavy Goods Vehicle (HGV) trips per day would be

made to and from the site for concrete deliveries. One additional HGV trip and

ten van trips would be made each day during this time. There would be no

need to remove waste material as Tata Steel readily recycle materials on-site.

5.2.162 HGV trips would be restricted to the route between the site and the M4 Junction

38 using Harbour Way. This would minimise the impact of construction traffic

on local residences and communities.

5.2.163 Construction phase delivery traffic would account for an increase of merely 5%

of the number of HGV movements for the 08:00-09:00 hour, 17:00-18:00 hour,

and 06:00-24:00 hour periods. The exception is Link 5, which would experience

a 5.4% increase in HGV movements. Chapter 10 of the ES concludes that the

overall impact would therefore be negligible.

5.2.164 Abnormal loads would be required as part of the construction phase. There are

expected to be 15-20 such deliveries during the construction phase; equating to

one trip every two months. The impact of this on the highway network would

therefore be negligible.

5.2.165 The construction period will increase the number of staff present on the site by

300. The site is currently run in a split-shift system consisting of 2000 staff per

split (total of 4000 across any one day). This will therefore amount to a 15%

increase between 07:00-19:00. Chapter 10 (Traffic & Transport) of the ES

considers this increase to be negligible given that the increase in traffic flows is

far less than the 30% which is considered to be acceptable.

5.2.166 A Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) will be prepared in

consultation with NPTCBC and will identify traffic routes to serve the proposed

development. As above-mentioned, NPTCBC has confirmed that a TP will not

be required to support this DCO application given that Chapter 10 (Traffic and

Transport) of the ES covers this aspect in sufficient detail.


July 2014 93

5.2.167 In addition to an acceptable construction phase, other phases of the proposed

development are considered to comply with the requirements of Section 5.13 of

NPS EN-1 given that there would not be a significant increase in traffic

generation. This can be attributed to the following:

At the operational stage, there would be no net change in staff as those

working on the existing facility would continue to be employed at the

proposed facility, with no requirement to increase or reduce staff numbers;

The new facility would continue to operate two operational shifts; 07:00-

19:00 hours and 19:00-07:00 hours;

The existing facility would be decommissioned during the operational

phase, but there would be no demolition and all buildings and components

would be left in situ;

There would be no additional maintenance requirements as the proposed

facility would be newer and more efficient than the existing facility; and

The proposed development would be predominantly fuelled by gasses

generated by the steelmaking process, with imported Natural Gas used as

a standby fuel. These gases would be transported by pipeline.

Waste Management (NPS EN-1, 5.14)

5.2.168 Paragraph 5.14.6 of NPS EN-1 makes it a requirement to demonstrate the

arrangements for the management of any waste produced by the proposed

development. A Site Waste Management Plan should be prepared to include

information on the proposed waste recovery and disposal system for all waste

generated by the development, together with an assessment of the impact of

the waste arising from development on the capacity of waste management

facilities in the area for at least five years of operation.

5.2.169 Paragraph 5.14.7 relates to the key considerations of the PINS in relation to

waste management and states that:


July 2014 94

“The [Secretary of State] should consider the extent to which the

applicant has proposed an effective system for managing hazardous and

non-hazardous waste arising from the construction, operation and

decommissioning of the proposed development.”

5.2.170 The DCO will include a requirement for the approval of a CoCP by the relevant

planning authority prior to the commencement of construction. This will be

prepared in accordance with the outline CoCP set out in Appendix 15.1 of ES

Vol. 3 and will cover the following environmental management topics:

Pollution Prevention Plan (PPP);

Water Management Plan (WTMP);

Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP);

Dust Management Plan (DMP);

Noise Management Plan (NMP);

Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP);

Travel Plan (TP);

Emergency Response and Flood Management Plan (ERFMP);

Materials Management Plan (MMP);

Habitat Management Plan (HMP); and

Site Safety Plan (SSP).

5.2.171 The SWMP would follow the waste hierarchy to reduce the amount of waste

generated, and ensure as much waste as possible is recycled/reused. The

proposed development would generate waste, however, this would be disposed

of following best practice guidance.


July 2014 95

5.2.172 During construction, the building contractors would be responsible for the

removal and disposal of all packaging and waste. It should be noted that all

contractors would be made aware of the SWMP.

5.2.173 Material excavated from the site would be stored on-site and recycled at the on-

site recycling facility where possible.

5.2.174 In the event that contaminated material is found, this would be treated on-site.

No waste material would be removed from the site, and where it is not possible

to dispose of the waste on-site a licensed off-site waste disposal facility would

be used.

5.2.175 There would be minimal waste proposed during the operation of the proposed

development. Maintenance activities will be the main cause of waste

generation. Such waste will be recycled (where possible) or disposed of in the

existing landfill within the steelworks complex.

5.2.176 There would be minimal waste generation as a result of the proposed

development during construction, operation or decommissioning. It is therefore

considered that the proposal complies with Section 5.14 of NPS EN-1.

5.2.177 Further information in relation to waste disposal can be found in Chapter 15

(Environmental & Waste Management) of the ES.

Water Quality & Resources (NPS EN-1, 5.15)

5.2.178 Section 5.15 of NPS EN-1 relates to the potential adverse effects that energy

infrastructure projects can have on the water environment, including

groundwater, inland surface water, transitional waters and coastal waters.

Paragraph 5.15.2 states that:

“Where the project is likely to have effects on the water environment, the

applicant should undertake an assessment of the existing status of, and

impacts of the proposed project on, water quality, water resources and


July 2014 96

physical characteristics of the water environment as part of the ES or

equivalent.”

5.2.179 In accordance with the requirements of Section 5.15 of EN-1, the ES

incorporates a section on surface water and water quality (Chapter 14 – Surface

Water Environment), which should be read in conjunction with ‘Ground

Conditions’ (Chapter 9).

5.2.180 Whilst there are no watercourses or groundwater source protection zones on

the proposed development site, the soil is classified as having a high leaching

potential. As such, temporary measures would be implemented to manage the

run-off draining from the construction site. Drainage infrastructure would be

created to remove excess sediment from run-off. The specific detail of which is

set out in the ES and has been agreed in consultation with NRW.

5.2.181 The abstraction of water would be minimised as far as possible for on-site

construction activities. During the construction phase, concrete would either be

delivered to site ready mixed to reduce the need to use water during the

construction phase or prepared on-site at batching plants. Due to the level of

the water table, it is unlikely that a permit to abstract water from foundation

trenches would be required.

5.2.182 During the operational and decommissioning phase, water abstraction and

discharge would be needed. As referenced in the ‘Climate Change’ section of

this statement these activities would be covered by the allowances within the

existing permit.

5.2.183 Having considered the operations proposed as part of this DCO Application at

the three identified stages it is considered that the impacts upon the local water

environment are minimal and can be suitably controlled and mitigated for.

Section 5.15 of NPS EN-1 is therefore complied with.


July 2014 97

5.3 NPS 2 – Fossil Fuel Electricity Generating Infrastructure (NPS EN-2)

5.3.1 NPS EN-2 is part of a suite of energy infrastructure NPSs, which should be read

in conjunction with the overarching NPS (EN-1). This NPS does not seek to

repeat material already outlined in EN-1. Instead, it provides a focus on Fossil

Fuel Electricity Generating Infrastructure and reiterates that fossil fuel

generating stations will play a vital role in providing reliable electricity supplies

and a secure and diverse energy mix as the UK makes the transition to a low

carbon economy (referenced in paragraph 1.1.1).

5.3.2 The assessment of such projects should begin on the basis that need has

already been demonstrated (referenced in paragraph 2.1.2).

5.3.3 The following sub-headings are taken directly from NPS EN-2 and are cited as

the factors that are specific to influencing the Applicant’s site selection for fossil

fuel NSIPs, known as ‘Assessment and Technology-specific Information’. A

number of these matters have already been considered in respect of NPS EN-1

(in the preceding section of this statement). As such, a brief summary of the

requirements of NPS EN-2, together with a short assessment of how those

requirements have been met or directions to preceding sections which cover

these matters, are provided in this section.

5.3.4 It should be noted that this NPS is only relevant insofar as the proposed

development would occasionally be fuelled by natural gas, which is the standby

fuel for the facility in instances of shortage when gases generated by the

steelmaking processes are not available.

Land Use (NPS EN-2, 2.2.2 – 2.2.4)

5.3.5 This criterion acknowledges that fossil fuel generating stations will generally

have large land footprints and will therefore only be possible where the

applicant is able to acquire a suitably-sized site. Paragraph 2.2.2 states that:


July 2014 98

“The site will also need to be big enough to confirm to Government policy

on CCR and CCS, set out in Section 4.7 of EN-1….”

5.3.6 The proposed development would not incorporate Carbon Capture Readiness

or Carbon Capture Storage given that these processes are not relevant given

the generating capacity of the proposed development. The facility would

however improve efficiency of the existing steelworks site and increase product

generation. A saving of up to 400,000 tonnes of CO2 per annum would be

made compared to fossil fuel power stations, through the vast reduction (up to

55 MWe) in on-site electricity importation.

5.3.7 As described above, the proposed development would be sited within the

existing steelworks site which provides sufficient room to incorporate the

proposed development. As set out in the Statement of Reasons (Document

Reference: 4.01) which accompanies this Application, the proposed

development would not necessitate the compulsory acquisition of any freehold

land and only seeks to acquire rights over two sections of the disused railway

line in order to facilitate the electrical connection, significantly minimising the

extent of compulsory acquisition required when compared to the large area of

land needed to bring forward a significant power generation development.

Transport Infrastructure (NPS EN-2, 2.2.5 – 2.2.6)

5.3.8 Paragraph 2.2.5 of NPS EN-2 emphasises that new fossil fuel generating

stations will need to be accessible for the delivery and removal of construction

materials, fuel, waste and equipment, and for employees. Multi-modal transport

methods are promoted by government policy.

5.3.9 The proposed development would be situated within the existing steelworks

site, which is accessible by means of road, rail or sea. All three of these modes

of transport are utilised for the existing site operations and would continue to be

used for the construction and operation of the proposed development.


July 2014 99

5.3.10 Chapter 10 (Traffic and Transport) of the ES provides an in-depth assessment

on the effects of the projects and the opportunities to improve transport

sustainability.

Water Resources (NPS EN-2, 2.2.7 – 2.2.9)


“High water demands will mean that developers’ preferred sites are likely

to be coastal, beside estuaries or alongside large rivers. If sufficient

quantities of water from natural sources are not available at a site then

some use of mains supplies may be necessary, although it should be

noted that a water company has no duty to supply water. If a sufficient

supply of water is not available, an alternative means of cooling such as

air-cooled condensers would be required.”

5.3.12 The proposed development would use a water cooling system as part of its

operations. This would take the form of an ‘open system’, which is where water

used in the turbine condensers is cooled in cooling towers and recycled back

into the system. The current system that is in use on the site is far less efficient

and operates as a ‘feed and return system’, in which water is abstracted from

Port Talbot Dock, used in the heat exchanger and returned to the Dock.

5.3.13 The volumes of water required for the new system are far less than those

currently required. This represents betterment over and above the existing

situation and, therefore, it is considered that the proposed development

complies with Section 2.2 of NPS EN-2.

5.3.14 Further information regarding abstraction and discharge, together with the

necessary mitigation has been assessed in the ES at Chapter 14 (Surface

Water Environment).


July 2014 100

Grid Connection (NPS EN-2, 2.2.10 – 2.2.11)

5.3.15 Paragraph 2.2.10 of NPS EN-2 relates to the technical feasibility of exporting

electricity from the proposed site, which is dependent upon the capacity of the

grid network to accept the likely electricity output, together with the voltage and

distance of the connection. Information must be provided in relation to the grid

connection and its associated environmental issues.

5.3.16 Consideration has already been afforded to the grid connection under

paragraph 5.2.53 of this statement. Further information on this topic can be

found in Chapter 3 (Project Description) of the ES.

Climate Change Adaption (NPS EN-2, 2.3.13 – 2.3.14)

5.3.17 Paragraph 2.3.13 relates to energy and climate change and makes reference to

Part 2 of NPS EN-1 which, at Section 4.8, sets out generic considerations that

the applicant and PINS should take into account. Paragraph 2.3.13 states that:

“As fossil fuel generating stations are likely to be proposed for coastal or

estuarine sites and climate change is likely, for example, to increase risks

from flooding or rising sea levels, applicants should in particular set out

how the proposal would be resilient to:

coastal changes and increased risk from storm surge;

effects of higher temperatures, including higher temperatures

of cooling water; and

increased risk of drought leading to a lack of available cooling

water.”

5.3.18 Matters relating to climate change are considered above at paragraph 5.2.35 –

52 and set out in more detail in ES Chapter 13 (Flood Risk). The proposed

development would result in numerous benefits that would combat climate


July 2014 101

change, as well as resulting in cost reductions for the steelworks site that would

secure the long-term future of the entire operation.

Consideration of “Good Design” for Energy Infrastructure (NPS EN-2, 2.3.15 –

2.3.16)

5.3.19 Paragraph 2.3.16 of NPS EN-2 places emphasis on the need for energy

infrastructure projects to demonstrate good design, particularly in respect of

landscape and visual amenity.

5.3.20 This DCO Application is accompanied by a Design & Access Statement

(Document Reference: 10.03) which sets out the design principles for the

development and provides information on the design parameters of the

proposed development as far as practicable to allow for the Application to be

fully considered by the SoS.

5.3.21 Further information on this topic is considered under paragraph 5.2.18 of this

statement and in the ES (Chapter 7 – Landscape & Visual).

Air Quality & Emissions (NPS EN-2, 2.5)

5.3.22 Section 2.5 of NPS EN-2 relates to air quality and emissions and makes

reference to NPS EN-1, which covers generic air emissions impacts.

Paragraph 2.5.5 of NPS EN-2 states that:

“The applicant should carry out an assessment as required in EN-1,

consulting the EA and other statutory authorities at the initial stages of

developing their proposals, as set out in EN-1 Section 4.2….”

5.3.23 The Applicant has consulted extensively with NRW in preparing the Application

and Chapter 5 (Air Quality) of the ES provides detail of the methodology and

outcome of the assessment regarding the air quality and emissions impacts

related to the proposed development and sets out the mitigation measures that

would be put in place to combat significant negative effects.


July 2014 102

5.3.24 In summary, the results of the air quality indicate that the proposed

development is expected to have a negligible effect on annual mean NO2 and

PM10 concentrations at the worst affected properties.

5.3.25 Emissions from the proposed development have been assessed through

detailed atmospheric dispersion modelling using best practice approaches. The

assessment has been undertaken based on a number of worst-case

assumptions.

5.3.26 Construction-phase dust effects have been assessed to be low to medium risk if

unmitigated, but are expected to be negligible following the implementation of

appropriate mitigation measures.

5.3.27 Construction related traffic effects on air quality are predicted to be negligible at

receptors adjacent to the main access routes used by traffic associated with the


5.3.28 Two additional boilers (Option 1 or Option 2 Phase 2) are predicted to lead to

an improvement or a negligible increase in concentrations, depending upon the

receptor location. One additional boiler (Option 2 Phase 1) would lead to a

minor adverse impact at some receptors although this is considered to be not

significant.


5.3.29 Generic landscape and visual impacts are covered in detail in NPS EN-1. In

addition the generic impacts outlined in NPS EN-2 are the specific

considerations which apply to fossil fuel generating stations. Paragraph 2.6.2

states that:

“The main structures for a fossil fuel generating station, including the

turbine and boiler halls, exhaust gas stacks, storage facilities, cooling

towers, and water processing plant, are large. They will have an impact

on the surrounding landscape and visual amenity.”


July 2014 103

5.3.30 In accordance with the requirements of Section 4.2 of NPS EN-1 and Section

2.6 of NPS EN-2 a LVIA has been undertaken and submitted in support of this

DCO Application. A summary of this is provided at Section 3 of this statement.

Further detail and the full LVIA can be found in Chapter 7 (Landscape & Visual)

of the ES.


5.3.31 Section 5.11 of NPS EN-1 covers the generic information of the assessment of

noise and vibration impacts for energy infrastructure projects. NPS EN-2 sets

out the specific considerations which apply to fossil fuel generating stations

which included: (1) the milling of coal; (2) delivery and movement of fuel and

material at coal stations; (3) the operation of gas and steam turbines; and (4)

external noise sources such as air cooled condensers.

5.3.32 Noise and vibration matters related to the proposed development have been

considered in Paragraph 5.2.54 above. A noise assessment has been

undertaken and is included in Chapter 8 (Noise & Vibration) of the ES.

Water Quality & Resources (NPS EN-2, 2.8)

5.3.33 Section 2.10 of NPS EN-2 reiterates the generic water quality and resource

impacts, which are also set out in Section 5.15 of NPS EN-1. Paragraph 2.10.2

of NPS EN-2 states that:

“Where the project is likely to have effects on water quality or resources

the applicant should undertake an assessment as required in EN-1

Section 5.15. The assessment should particularly demonstrate that

appropriate measures will be put in place to avoid or minimise adverse

impacts of abstraction and discharge of cooling water.”


July 2014 104

5.3.34 Paragraph 5.2.35 of this statement provides an overview of the water quality

and resources impacts which area covered in further depth in Chapter 14

(Surface Water Environment) of the ES.

5.4 NPS 4 – Gas Supply Infrastructure & Gas and Oil Pipelines (NPS EN-4)

5.4.1 This NPS covers large underground gas storage and liquid natural gas facilities;

large gas reception facilities; gas transporter pipelines conveying gas to at least

50,000 potential customers; and oil and gas cross country pipelines, over 16

kilometres in length.

5.4.2 The NPS sets out technology related criteria, some of which are general and

some are relevant to specific infrastructure. General criteria include Climate

Change Adaptation, Good Design Principles, Noise and Vibration. Specific

criteria include Underground Natural Gas Storage, Liquid Natural Gas Import

Facilities, Gas Reception Facilities, and Networks Link Import Facilities,

Refineries, Storage and Distribution Facilities.

5.4.3 The proposed development incorporates an extension of the pipe work that

already exists for the existing power generation facilities and the existing gas

distribution, steam and utilities network. This alone would not constitute a NSIP

and does not meet the criteria defined in NPS EN-4. As such, NPS EN-4 is not

considered to be a material consideration applicable to the proposed

development. Nevertheless, the main headings from NPS EN-4 that are

applicable to gas supply infrastructure have been included as part of this

planning assessment.

Climate Change Adaption (NPS EN-4, Part 2 - 2.2)

5.4.4 Section 2.2 of NPS EN-4 relates to the specific considerations associated with

energy infrastructure projects and climate change. Paragraph 2.2.2 states that:


July 2014 105

“As climate change is likely to increase risks to some of this

infrastructure, from flooding or rising sea levels for example, applicants

should in particular set out how the proposal would be resilient to:

increased risk of flooding;

effects of rising sea levels and increased risk of storm surge;

higher temperatures;

increased risk of earth movement or subsidence from

increased risk of flooding and drought; and

any other increased risks identified in the applicant’s

assessment.”

5.4.5 Paragraph 5.2.34 of this statement incorporates an overview of the assessment

of climate change in relation to the proposed development. Further information

regarding this matter is included in ES Chapter 13.

Consideration of Good Design (NPS EN-4, Part 2 - 2.3)

5.4.6 Paragraph 2.3.2 refers to good design, which should be considered where

mitigating the impacts relevant to gas supply infrastructure.

5.4.7 The Design and Access Statement (Document Reference: 10.03) provides an

in-depth assessment of design related matters and the principles of design that

are incorporated into the proposal. A summary of the effects and mitigation has

been provided in paragraph 5.2.18 of this statement. Further information can

be found in ES Chapter 7 (Landscape & Visual).


July 2014 106

Hazardous Substances (NPS EN-4, Part 2 - 2.3)

5.4.8 Section 2.4 of NPS EN-4 states that, in the case of gas supply infrastructure,

the HSE will advise PINS on the risks, taking into account the quantities of gas

to be stored, the installation type and specification, and the local population.

5.4.9 The proposed development would not result in the need to store gas on-site and

would not utilise hazardous substances.

Gas & Oil Pipelines: Safety (NPS EN-4, Part 2 - 2.19)

5.4.10 The proposed development would incorporate an extension to the existing gas

pipeline infrastructure already on the site. Paragraph 2.19.4 of NPS EN-4

relates to gas pipeline safety and requires that pipelines are designed,

constructed and operated so that risks are as low as is reasonably practicable.

5.4.11 Full details of the proposed pipeline extension work can be found in ES Chapter

3 (Project Description). The Applicant will liaise with the HSE in relation to the

construction of the additional pipeline network, albeit to existing connections

within the Order Limits. A Health and Safety Statement has been prepared as

part of the Application.

Gas & Oil Pipelines Impacts: Noise & Vibration (NPS EN-4, Part 2 - 2.20)

5.4.12 In addition to the generic considerations to be given to the impacts of noise and

vibration are the specific considerations which apply to gas pipelines during the

pre-construction and construction phases.

5.4.13 This statement considers the impacts of noise and vibration at paragraph

5.2.140. Further information on these matters is provided in the ES Chapter 8

(Noise & Vibration).


July 2014 107

Gas & Oil Pipelines Impacts: Biodiversity, Landscape & Visual (NPS EN-4, Part

2 - 2.21)

5.4.14 Section 2.21 of NPS EN-4 relates to biodiversity, landscape and visual impacts

of gas pipelines. Paragraph 2.21.2 states that:

“Long term impacts upon the landscape for pipelines are likely to be

limited, as once operational the main infrastructure is usually buried.

They are likely to include:

limitations on the ability to replant landscape features such as

hedgerows or deep-rooted trees over or adjacent to the

pipeline; and

structures and indication points necessary to identify the

pipeline route and provide it with service access.”

5.4.15 Paragraph 5.2.77 of this statement outline the impacts of the proposed

development on biodiversity and from a visual perspective. Consideration of

the pipeline extension work has been included. Further detail regarding these

potential impacts is included in the ES Chapter 6 (Ecology).

Gas & Oil Pipelines Impacts: Water Quality & Resources (NPS EN-4, Part 2 -

2.22)

5.4.16 The generic policy on the protection of the water environment during

construction, operation and decommissioning of energy projects are set out in

Section 5.15 of NPS EN-1. Paragraph 2.22.3 of NPS EN-4 outlines the specific

considerations in respect of gas pipelines and states that:

“Where the project is likely to have effects on water resources or water

quality, for example impacts on groundwater recharge or on existing

surface water or groundwater abstraction points, or on associated

ecological receptors, the applicant should provide an assessment of the

impacts in line with Section 5.15 of EN-1 as part of the ES.”


July 2014 108

5.4.17 An overview of the generic impacts of the proposed development on water

quality and resources, together with those impacts associated with the gas

pipeline extension has been included in this statement at paragraph 5.2.162.

Further information is incorporated in ES Chapter 14 (Surface Water

Environment).

Gas & Oil Pipelines Impacts: Soil & Geology (NPS EN-4, Part 2 - 2.23)

5.4.18 Section 2.23 of NPS EN-4 relates to the impacts on soil and geology from laying

gas pipelines. This policy document highlights the importance for Applicants to

understand the soil types and nature of underlying strata, which may present

risks to pipeline projects. It also states that impacts could include sterilisation of

mineral resources or loss of soil quality. Accordingly, an assessment of the

ground conditions associated with the pipeline route should be made

(referenced in paragraph 2.23.2 of NPS EN-4).

5.4.19 An assessment of the ground conditions at the application site has been

undertaken and has been presented in the ES. A summary of the findings and

impacts on water quality and resources is included at paragraph 5.2.162 of this

statement.

5.5 NPS 5 – Electricity Networks Infrastructure (NPS EN-5)

5.5.1 This NPS relates to above ground electricity lines whose nominal voltage is

expected to be 132kV or above. Paragraph 1.8.2 of NPS EN-5 states that:

“Any other kind of electricity infrastructure (including lower voltage

overhead lines, underground or sub-sea cables at any voltage, and

associated infrastructure as referred to above) will only be subject to the

Planning Act 2008 – and so be covered by this NPS – if it is in England,

and it constitutes associated development for which consent is sought

along with an NSIP such as a generating station or relevant overhead

line.”


July 2014 109

5.5.2 The proposed development incorporates the provision of a 66kV electrical

connection only, which would be run underground for a distance of 2.8km

connecting the generating station to the existing on-site substation. Sections of

the cable may also be suspended overhead on cable bridges (approximately

5m high), constructed of a lattice style structure, approximately 800m in length

towards the southern end of the electrical connection route between the two

existing substations;

5.5.3 In view of the fact that the proposed development incorporates electricity

network infrastructure that has a voltage of less than 132kV, NPS EN-5 is not

considered to be applicable to the consideration of the proposed development

and, for that reason, does not form a material consideration. Nevertheless, the

most relevant heading of NPS EN-5 have been addressed below.

Climate Change Adaption (NPS EN-5, 2.4)

5.5.4 Section 4.8 of NPS EN-1 sets out the generic considerations that PINS should

take account of in relation to the impact of electricity infrastructure on climate

change. Paragraph 2.4.1 of NPS EN-5 outlines it what circumstances the

proposed development is expected to be resilient to issues associated with

climate change.

5.5.5 An overview of the proposed development’s impacts on, and mitigation for,

climate change have been set out in paragraph 5.2.34 of this statement.

Further information on such matters is included in ES Chapter 3 (Project

Description).

Consideration of Good Design (NPS EN-5, 2.5)

5.5.6 Section 4.5 of NPS EN-1 sets out the principles for good design that should be

applied to all energy infrastructure. Such matters have been broadly

considered under paragraph 5.2.18 of this statement, within the ES (Chapter 7),


July 2014 110

and have been considered in further detail in the Design and Access Statement

which supports this DCO Application.

Biodiversity & Geological Conservation (NPS EN-5, 2.6)

5.5.7 Generic biodiversity effects are covered in Section 5.3 of NPS EN-1. However,

electrical infrastructure presents its own specific impacts for biodiversity and

geology which must be considered by applicants (referenced in paragraph

2.7.2).

5.5.8 Paragraph 5.2.65 onwards of this statement summaries those potential impacts

that the proposed development could have in relation to such matters. The ES

contained further information at Chapter 6 (Ecology).



“While proposed underground lines do not require development consent

under the Planning Act 2008, wherever the nature or proposed route of

an overhead line proposal makes it likely that its visual impact will be

particularly significant, the applicant should have given appropriate

consideration to the potential costs and benefits of other feasible means

of connection or reinforcement, including underground and sub-sea

cables where appropriate.”

5.5.10 The proposed development does not incorporate overhead power lines, aside

from the potential for a cable bridge associated with a small section of the

electrical cable connection route. As such, it is considered that NPS EN-5 is not

applicable to the assessment of this Application.

5.5.11 Paragraph 5.2.18 of this statement provides an overview of the visual and

landscape impacts of the proposed development, together with a summary of

the intended mitigation measures. An LVIA has been undertaken for the


July 2014 111

proposed development and accompanies the submission of this DCO

Application.

5.5.12 Further information on this matter is also comprised in Chapter 7 (Landscape &

Visual) of the ES. These documents all take account of the generic landscape

and visual impacts, but also consider any specific points in relation to the

proposed electricity infrastructure, the impact from which would be negligible.


5.5.13 Section 5.11 of NPS EN-1 covers the generic noise effects associated with

noise and vibration from energy infrastructure projects. Section 2.9.8 of NPS

EN-5 states that:

“While standard methods of assessment and interpretation using the

principles of the relevant British Standards18 are satisfactory for dry

weather conditions, they are not appropriate for assessing noise during

rain, which is when overhead line noise mostly occurs, and when the

background noise itself will vary according to the intensity of the rain.”

5.5.14 Paragraph 5.2.54 of this statement summarises the effects of the proposed

development and proposed mitigation in relation to noise and vibration. A Noise

Assessment has been undertaken and accompanies this DCO Application.

Further information on this matter is also included in Chapter 8 (Noise &

Vibration) of the ES.

5.6 National Planning Policy

Planning Policy Wales

5.6.1 As outlined in Section 4 of this statement, PPW sets out the land use planning

policies of the WG and sets out WGs commitment to creating sustainable

developments and communities.


July 2014 112

5.6.2 This policy document provides an overview of the planning system and includes

a section on the context for planning in Wales. It does not include specific

policies of relevance to NSIPs which, as-abovementioned, are governed by the

requirements of the PA 2008 and the assessment principles contained within

the relevant NPS. As such, whilst PPW is applicable to the proposed

development and forms a material consideration for this DCO Application, it can

only be afforded limited weight.

5.6.3 An analysis of the applicable sections of PPW in relation to the proposed

development has been provided below.

Chapter 4 – Planning for Sustainability

5.6.4 Section 4.5 (Planning for climate change) of PPW highlights that tackling

climate change is a fundamental part of delivering sustainable development,

which is emphasised by the WGs target to achieve carbon reduction-equivalent

emissions reductions of 3% per year from 2011. Paragraph 4.5.2 of PPW also

states that:

“We are committed to achieving at least a 40% reduction in all

greenhouse gas emissions in Wales by 2020 against a 1990 baseline.

This will assist in making a significant contribution to the UK Carbon

Budgets.”

5.6.5 The desire to cut greenhouse gas emissions is also reflected in the aims of NPS

EN-1 which indicate that at least an 80% reduction should be achieved by 2050,

compared to 1990 levels.

5.6.6 Section 4.6 of PPW emphasises the need to recognise the strength of urban

communities, which are home to the majority of the population in Wales. It

states in paragraph 4.6.1 of PPW that:


July 2014 113

“Development can help to arrest the decline in community facilities and

deliver environmentally-sound modernisation, re-use or replacement of

urban infrastructure.”

5.6.7 Section 4.7 of PPW sets out criteria that local planning authorities should

adhere to when allocating land. This includes locating development so that it

can be well serviced by existing infrastructure (including energy supply, waste

management and water).

5.6.8 Section 4.9 of PPW directs that there is a preference for the re-use of previously

developed land, which will promote sustainability objectives.

5.6.9 The proposed development is intended to improve efficiency and increase

product generation. This would result in a reduction in grid import by 45 MWe,

a reduction in the amount of flared gases by 3.8 PJ per annum, an increase in

operational efficiency and reliability that would secure the long-term future for

the steelworks site as a whole, and would make significant contributions to the

local and national economies. The proposed development also makes use of

an already industrialised site and is supported by existing infrastructure. In view

of this, the proposed development is considered to be fully compliant with the

objectives of the WG as outlined under the sustainability chapter of PPW.

Chapter 5 – Conserving & Improving Natural Heritage & the Coast

5.6.10 The site is note constrained by any landscape or ecological designations,

however, there are some designations within close proximity to the steelworks

site and within the 15km study area. The site is also located on the coastline

and can be viewed from a handful of areas designated for their landscape

value.

5.6.11 PPW recognises at paragraph 5.1.3 of PPW that conservation and development

can often be fully integrated. Whilst the value of the landscapes in Wales is

recognised by PPW, the policy also stresses the need to have regard to the


July 2014 114

relative significance of designations and avoiding placing unnecessary

constraints on development.

5.6.12 Paragraph 5.5.5 advises that statutory designation do not necessarily prohibit

development, but proposal for development must be carefully assessed for the

effect on those natural heritage interests which the designation is intended to

protect.

5.6.13 In accordance with the requirements of the NPSs, and in particular the

assessment principles identified in NPS EN-1, the proposed development has

been assessed in light of all the relevant nearby designations having regard to

the features of acknowledged ecological and landscape importance. Technical

assessments have been undertaken in this regard and conclude that the

detrimental impacts of the proposed development can be suitably mitigated and,

in any case, are vastly outweighed by the benefits the scheme offers.

Chapter 6 – Conserving the Historic Environment

5.6.14 Chapter 6 of PPW places emphasis on the need to preserve or enhance the

historic environment.

5.6.15 There are no listed buildings, SAMs, or Registered Parks and Gardens within

the confines of the application site. However, within the 1km study area there

are 99 previously recorded heritage assets. Following consultation with

Glamorgan Gwent Archaeological Trust and Cadw archaeological constraints

were identified at the Margam Copper Works and the Margam Iron and Steel

Works.

5.6.16 A full impact assessment of the significance of effects on these assets is

incorporated in the ES. An overview of this has been included at paragraph

5.2.114 of this statement. Having considered the proposed development

against the setting of these features of acknowledged importance it is

considered that the detrimental impact would be minimal. In terms of the


July 2014 115

potential impacts upon archaeology, this would be controlled by way of a

watching brief style condition, which is set out in the draft DCO.

Chapter 7 – Economic Development

5.6.17 PPW has recently been revised (February 2014) to take account of TAN 23

(Economic Development) and now places further weight on the need for the

planning system to support economic and employment growth alongside social

and environmental considerations within the context of sustainable

development.

5.6.18 In particular, paragraph 7.2.2 of PPW states that:

“Local planning authorities are required to ensure that the economic

benefits associated with a proposed development are understood and

that these are given equal consideration with social and environmental

issues in the decision-making process, and should recognise that there

will be occasions when the economic benefits will outweigh social and

environmental considerations.”

5.6.19 The proposed development offers a host of economic benefits which would be

felt by the local and national economies during both the construction and

operational phases of the development, including the long-term support the

proposed development will offer the steelworks as a whole in terms of efficiency

savings, which in turn will increase the capacity of the steelworks to continue

supporting the local economy.

5.6.20 In addition, to the economic benefits of the proposed development are the vast

reductions in carbon emissions, which are supported by paragraph 7.4.1 of

PPW that recognises the shift towards a low carbon economy and encourages

the development of eco-industrial networks.


July 2014 116

Chapter 8 - Transport

5.6.21 Paragraph 8.1.1 of PPW states that:

“The Welsh Government aims to extend choice in transport and secure

accessibility in a way which supports sustainable development and helps

to tackle the causes of climate change by: encouraging a more effective

and efficient transport system, with greater use of the more sustainable

and healthy forms of travel, and minimising the need to travel.”

5.6.22 PPW aims to achieve sustainable transport through the implementation of a

number of key objectives. Paragraph 8.7.1 relates to development

management and transport, and provides a list of those matters that should be

considered when determining applications. Paragraph 8.7.2 recognises that the

provision of a TA is an important mechanism for setting out the scale of

anticipated impacts of a proposed development.

5.6.23 This DCO Application is accompanied by a TA which has considered the traffic

and transport implications associated with the proposed development. This has

concluded that the additional traffic generation would not result in a significant

detrimental impact upon the highway network or local amenity. Moreover, a TP

has been prepared which would seek to minimise single occupation trips and

encourage sustainable modes of transport.

Chapter 11 – Tourism, Sports and Recreation

5.6.24 PPW identifies tourism as being vital to economic prosperity and job creation

within Wales, which the WG consider to be a significant and growing source of

employment and investment.

5.6.25 The proposed development sits within the confines of the existing Port Talbot

site and, therefore, would be seen against the backdrop of the existing

structures and buildings that form the steelworks. The impacts of the proposed

development on tourism have been considered in the ES, of which there are


July 2014 117

positive and negative influences. However, the positive influences (i.e. the

need for accommodation for construction workers or visitors) are considered to

significantly outweigh the negative impacts (i.e. visual harm) given that the

proposed development will be consumed by the existing steelworks buildings

and would therefore not cause significant undue harm to visual amenity of the

area as a whole. This is qualified by the LVIA, contained within the ES.

Chapter 12 – Infrastructure & Services

5.6.26 This chapter of PPW deals with infrastructure and services, that is the issues of

water supply and waste water management, waste management, energy supply

from renewable and low carbon sources, and telecommunications. Paragraph

12.1.4 states that:

“The Welsh Government aims to secure the environmental and

telecommunications infrastructure necessary to achieve sustainable

development objectives, while minimising adverse impacts on the

environment, health and communities.”

5.6.27 PPW supports the use of existing infrastructure in order to achieve sustainable

development. The proposed development comprises an extension to the

existing steelworks operations that would improve efficiency, reduce energy

consumption and contribute to the economy.

5.6.28 Section 12.8 of PPW relates to renewable and low carbon energy and was

updated in February 2014 to take account of the UK Renewable Energy

Roadmap: 2013. This sets the path for the delivery of renewable energy

schemes to meet the target of 15% of electricity to come from renewable

sources by 2020, introduced in 2009 in the European Union Renewable Energy

Directive. In addition, emphasis is given to the WG’s Energy Policy Statement –

Energy Wales: A Low Carbon Transition (2012), which outlines the commitment

to the delivery of the energy programme in order to contribute to reducing

carbon emissions.


July 2014 118

5.6.29 The Energy Wales: A Low Carbon Transition document has been given

additional weight following its insertion into national planning policy for Wales.

This document reinforces the importance of energy, which is said to underpin

our entire way of life. It makes it clear that there is a need to ensure Wales is in

the best possible position to not only create new jobs and supply chain

opportunities, but also to take advantage of the potential to export energy

expertise, goods and services to other nations seeking to make the transition to

a low carbon economy.

5.6.30 Paragraph 12.8.2 of PPW states that:

“The Welsh Government is committed to playing its part by delivering an

energy programme which contributes to reducing carbon emissions as

part of our approach to tackling climate change.”

5.6.31 The proposed development would provide an enhanced on-site energy

generation project that would allow for the production of a sustainable form of

electricity for use on the site, enabling a vast reduction in imported electricity

from the grid, together with decreased volumes of flared gases. By generating

power through the reuse of process gases, it is estimated that the reduction in

electricity imports to the steelworks from the national grid would equate to an

off-set of approximately 400,000 tonnes per annum of CO2 (based on a fossil

fuel generating station). The proposed development is therefore considered to

comply with the aspirations of Chapter 12 of PPW.

Chapter 13 – Minimising & Managing Environmental Risks & Pollution

5.6.32 The WG has defined two objectives within this chapter of PPW: (1) maximise

environmental protection for people, natural and cultural resources, property

and infrastructure; and (2) prevent or manage pollution and promote good

environmental practice.


July 2014 119

5.6.33 The ES submitted in support of this DCO application has sought to address

such matters and concludes that the impacts of the proposed development on

the environment can be acceptably managed.

5.6.34 Paragraph 13.1.14 of PPW states that special attention should be given to

minimising the risks associated with climate change. The proposed

development will reduce the steelworks’ overall carbon footprint and has clear

benefits which will help to reduce climate change. The proposed development’s

resilience to the effects of climate change is set out in more detail above at

paragraph 5.2.35.

5.6.35 Chapter 13 advises that NRW and other bodies with an interest in managing the

environment should advise planning authorities as to where climate change will

increase the specific risks to areas proposed for development. The proposed

development has evolved through consultation with NRW and various other

bodies that share an interest in the features applicable to the application site.

The matters raised in the specific consultation responses have been suitably

addressed as part of this submission.


July 2014 120

6 DCO Requirements

6.1 Overview

6.1.1 It is a requirement of the PA 2008 for all DCO applications to be accompanied

by a draft of the DCO, together with an explanatory memorandum explaining

the purpose and effect of each provision in the draft order. Accordingly, a draft

DCO has been prepared and submitted in support of this Application. This has

been written in the form of a Statutory Instrument and is accompanied by

explanatory notes for each provision.

6.1.2 The Applicant has made every effort to set all components / scheme

requirements as far as possible. The level of consultation undertaken on the

lead-up to this submission has enabled the evolution of this proposed

development. .

6.1.3 An overview of the considerations applicable to the proposed development has

been provided in this statement. Further detail on these matters is provided in

the ES, which outlines any mitigation proposed as part of the proposed

development in order to ensure that the proposed development is acceptable

and does not result in significant detriment. Securing mitigation will be pertinent

to any decision being issued, the requirements for which are provided in the

draft DCO.

6.2 Planning Requirements

6.2.1 The draft DCO includes provisions which give the developer the authority to

take actions necessary for the proposed development to be implemented

satisfactorily. One such provision is known as the ‘Requirements’ to which the

development authorised by the DCO is to be subject. Requirements are similar

to conditions that are imposed on planning permissions granted under the Town

and Country Planning Act 1990, insofar as they specify matters for which


July 2014 121

detailed approval needs to be obtained before the development can be lawfully

commenced / completed.

6.2.2 It is necessary to control some aspects of the proposed development by way of

suitably worded requirements given that it will not be possible to design-in all

mitigation at this stage. The first draft of the requirements are included at

Schedule 2 of the draft DCO submitted with the Application. The specific

wording for the proposed requirements will be developed in consultation with

NPTCBC, who will be the authority responsible for ensuring the requirements

are discharged.


July 2014 122

7 Conclusion

7.1.1 The proposed development of an Internal Power Generation Enhancement

Project at the existing Port Talbot Steelworks site has been devised in order to

improve the energy efficiency, increase electrical generation and reduce the

flaring of the process gases on-site, allowing for the Applicant to remain cost

competitive and enable an increased production of iron per annum from 4.1

million tonnes to 4.7 million tonnes. This is crucial to support the viability of the

steelworks site as a whole and secure the longevity of the site operations, which

need to be competitive in this global market.

7.1.2 The principle of constructing an extension to this existing operational facility is

clearly acceptable from a planning policy perspective – at national and local

levels. The aspirations of the proposed development meet the Government’s

objectives for reducing carbon emissions and contributing to the European

Union’s Energy Directive, introduced in 2009, together with the WGs Energy

Policy Statement – Energy Wales: A Low Carbon Transition (2012), which

outlines the commitment to the delivery of the energy programme in order to

contribute to reducing carbon emissions.

7.1.3 Furthermore, and as demonstrated in detail in each of the technical

assessments and the ES (submitted with this DCO application), the proposed

development is fully compliant with the aims and objectives of the relevant

NPSs (EN-1, EN-2, EN-4 & EN-5), PPW and the adopted UDP.

7.1.4 In summary, this Internal Power Generation Enhancement Project provides the

following benefits:

the proposed development would result in a total on-site generation

capacity of up to 245 MWe of electricity to power the on-site operations

and for export to the national grid;


July 2014 123

the proposed development would allow for an off-set of approximately

400,000 tonnes per annum of CO2 through a reduction in electricity

import from the national grid;

the proposed development would result in a direct investment by the

applicant of in excess of £200 million into the County Borough of Neath

Port Talbot and the Welsh economy; and

the proposed development would utilise existing infrastructure, the use

of which is encouraged by Neath Port Talbot, and will constitute

development on an existing industrial site that will secure the continued

operation of the steelworks into the future.

7.1.5 The proposed development is considered to be acceptable and policy compliant

for the following reasons:

the proposed development would not result in any detrimental impact on

highway capacity or safety in the surrounding network;

the proposed development has been assessed having regard to the

potential for noise and vibration, which would be minimal and can be

suitably controlled by appropriate mitigation;

an air quality assessment has been undertaken for the proposed

development having regard to pollutant concentrations and sensitive

receptors in the vicinity of the site. This demonstrates that the

maximum long-term impacts in the worst case scenario are well below

the requirements of the Neath Port Talbot Local Air Quality Strategy –

there is therefore no demonstrable harm to local air quality;

the proposed development would not have a significant detrimental

impact on the ecological resource, which can be suitably managed;


July 2014 124

the proposed development would not result in detriment to features of

acknowledged importance in respect of archaeological resource of

cultural heritage assets;

the visual effects of the proposed development on the surrounding

landscape character would generally be minor and negligible and not

significant, largely due to the scale of the proposed development which

would sit well within the existing Port Talbot site;

the proposed development has been assessed in accordance with the

requirements of TAN 15 and it has been demonstrated that the risks

from with flooding can be acceptably managed; and

the proposed development is in accordance with principles of the

relevant NPSs and the relevant strategies of the WG and does not

conflict with the Development Plan, both extant and emerging for Neath

Port Talbot.

7.1.6 The findings of the Environmental Impact Assessment are reported in the ES,

which supports this DCO Application. Whilst, inevitably, the proposed

development would result in impacts on the local environment, none of these

are considered to be significantly detrimental and can be acceptably managed

through appropriate mitigation.

7.1.7 The proposed development complies with all aspects of planning policy, and will

not result in any significant detrimental environmental impacts that would not be

outweighed by the benefits of the proposed development. In this light, the

proposed development is considered to be acceptable and clear justification

exists for Development Consent to be granted.



Appendices



Appendix A: Existing Site Layout Plan (inclusive of the “Order Limits”)

#*#*

#*

#*

#*

Margam B, Mitchell Boiler

Margam C, Boilers 6&7

Margam A , Boiler 5

Service Boilers 4&5

GrangeSubstation

No.3 Boiler

Cefn Gwrgan Substation

Ogmore Vale Railway Line

Site Access Road

©Crown copyright. All rights reserved. License Number 0100031673

This document has been prepared by AECOM for the sole use of our Client (the "Client") and in accordance with generally accepted consultancy principles, the budget for fees and terms of reference agreed between

Drawn:

Date:

Checked:Scale at A3:Revision:

Drawing Reference:

AECOM and the Client. Any information provided by third parties and referred to herein has not been checked or verified by AECOM, unless otherwise expressly stated in the document. No third party may rely upon this document without the prior and express written agreement of AECOM.

1 Callaghan SquareCardiffCF10 5BT

Tel +44 (0)29 2067 4600Fax +44 (0)29 2067 4699

www.aecom.com

Ü

Regulation:

A3

Project:

Title:

0 490 Metres

EXISTING SITE LAYOUT PLAN

GM5(2)(o)

CM

AUGUST 20142.02 - Existing Layout Plan

KEY:#* Existing Chimney Stacks

Harbour Way (opened October 2013, not shown oncurrent OS map)Order Limits

1:10,000Client:

THE PORT TALBOT STEELWORKS (POWER GENERATION ENHANCEMENT) ORDER01



Appendix B: Site Location Plan

GF



Drawn:

Date:


Drawing Reference:



Tel +44 (0)29 2067 4600Fax +44 (0)29 2067 4699

www.aecom.com

Ü

Regulation:

A3

Project:

Title:

0 10,000 Metres

LOCATION PLAN

GM5(2)(o)

CM

JULY 20142.01 - Site Location

KEY:GF Site Location

1:250,000Client:




Appendix C: Sites of Landscape Importance



Drawn:

Date:


Drawing Reference:



Tel +44 (0)29 2067 4600Fax +44 (0)29 2067 4699

www.aecom.com

Ü

Regulation:

A3

Project:

Title:

0 1,000 Metres

SITES OF LANDSCAPE IMPORTANCE

GM5(2)(l)

CM

AUGUST 20142.07.2 - Sites of Landscape Importance

KEY:Conservation AreaLandscape of Outstanding Historic InterestOrder Limits

1:25,000Client:




Appendix D: Nature Conservation Sites, Habitats and Diversity Features



Drawn:

Date:


Drawing Reference:



Tel +44 (0)29 2067 4600Fax +44 (0)29 2067 4699

www.aecom.com

Ü

Regulation:

A3

Project:

Title:

0 1,000 Metres

NATURE CONSERVATION SITES, HABITATS AND DIVERSITY FEATURES

GM5(2)(l)

CM

AUGUST 20142.07.1 - Conservation Sites

KEY:National Nature ReserveSpecial Areas of ConservationSite of Special Scientific InterestLocal Nature ReservesAncient WoodlandWoodlandSurface WaterOrder Limits

1:25,000Client:


the port talbot steelworks (power generation … port talbot steelworks (power generation...

Documents