Our ref:
PCS/113620/113879/
113742
Your ref:
Scottish Government
Energy Division
FAO Marian Deeney
If telephoning ask for:
Alasdair Milne
20 June 2011
By email only to: econsentsadmin@scotland.gsi.gov.uk
Dear Madam
Electricity Act 1989
The Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) (Scotland) Regulations
2000
Section 36 Application for the Proposed Blacklaw Windfarm Extension Phase 2,
2KM South of Allanton, North Lanarkshire
Thank you for your consultation letter of 10 May 2011 which SEPA received on 12 May 2011.
Advice for the Scottish Government
We object to this application until further information on flood risk (section 3) and peat
management (section 6) of the attached appendix is submitted and subsequently found to be
acceptable.
We also request that the planning conditions outlined in the appendix (section 4 on surface water
drainage, section 5 on an Integrated Management Plan and section 8 on Decommissioning and
Restoration) are attached to any consent granted. If these are not applied then please consider
this response an objection.
Where our conditions relate to submissions, we request that approval be by the determining
authority in consultation with SEPA (and other bodies as relevant). Please also note the
recommendations and advice provided.
Advice for the Developer
For general good practice advice we refer the applicant to the Good Practice during Wind Farm
Construction Guidance which is available on Scottish Natural Heritage’s website at
www.snh.org.uk/pdfs/strategy/renewables/Good%20practice%20during%20windfarm%20construct
ion.pdf
If you have any queries relating to this letter, please contact me by telephone on 01355 575665 or
e-mail at planning.ek@sepa.org.uk
Yours faithfully
Alasdair Milne
Senior Planning Officer
Planning Service
Copy to:
Scottish Power Renewables
Cathcart Business Park
Spean Street
Glasgow
G44 4BE
Ecopy:
McLennaghanE@northlan.gov.uk
eConsultation@northlan.gov.uk
APPENDIX – SEPA response to Blacklaw Windfarm Extension Phase 2 Section 36
Application
Detailed comments, recommendations and conditions
1.
General
1.1
We welcomed the opportunity to provide advice at the pre application stage of this proposal
to Scottish Power Renewables on 25 March 2010. We are pleased to note that many of
our comments were taken onboard and have been carried through to the application stage
via the detailed Environmental Statement (ES). We are of the opinion that the ES is
generally comprehensive and of high standard.
2.
The Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2011
2.1
Your consultation letter asks for specific comments relating to the protection of the water
environment, and specifically whether authorisation under the Regulations will be required
and, if so, whether we consider such authorisation likely based on the information we have
at this time.
2.2
We can confirm that there has been no CAR application received by us for any activities
associated with this windfarm. The proposed development involves the culverting of a
small water course (a tributary of the Auchter Water) and the upgrade of an existing culvert
(on the Darmead Linn). In addition, the removal of the existing culvert would also likely
require to be authorised by us (although this activity would be deemed an ‘environmental
service). These works will most likely be authorised by means of a “registration” under
CAR. There are other activities which will require to be licensed by us: point source
discharges from the proposed borrow pits as well as any proposed abstractions from
excavations.
2.3
On the basis of the information available, and without prejudice to the determination of any
corresponding applications for authorisation under CAR, we would expect the proposal to
fall into Category 1 - ‘capable’ of being authorised, although final details would have to be
determined as part of the application process.
3.
Flood Risk
3.1
We object to the proposed development on the grounds that it may place buildings and
persons at flood risk contrary to Scottish Planning Policy and PAN 69.
3.2
In the event that the planning authority proposes to grant planning permission contrary to
this advice on flood risk the application must be notified to the Scottish Ministers as per The
Town and Country Planning (Notification of Applications) (Scotland) Direction 2009.
Technical Report
3.3
The proposed development involves the culverting of a small watercourse (a tributary of the
Auchter Water) and the upgrade of an existing culvert (on the Darmead Linn).
3.4
We accept that the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) makes reference to our
position statement on culverting (section 12.2.1.3), but that these watercourse crossings
are essential to facilitate access to individual turbines.
3.5
The culvert on the Darmead Linn falls within the 1 in 200 year flood envelope on the
Indicative River & Coastal Flood Map (Scotland). Scottish Planning Policy (SPP) states that
development should not take place on the flood plain. However, as this culvert is already in
existence, is in a remote area and is essential for utilities infrastructure it could be classed
as an exception to SPP.
3.6
The reach of the Auchter Water tributary to be culverted is not covered by the Indicative
River & Coastal Flood Map (Scotland), as it has a catchment of less than 3km 2. Similarly to
the Darmead Linn culvert, the addition of a culvert on the tributary of the Auchter Water
could also be classed as an exception to SPP as it is essential for infrastructure and is in a
remote area.
3.7
We note that design flows have been worked out for each of the tributaries on site using the
IH124 method, which we find acceptable. A review of these calculations returned design
flows for the Darmead Linn within 20% of those in the EIA, which we accept. Design flows
calculated for the Auchter Water tributary are however significantly smaller than those in
the EIA. As the catchment characteristics used were not provided there may be some
discrepancy between those used in the EIA and those used for our calculation, however the
catchment area in the EIA is stated to be 0.848 km2, whilst our review found it to be 0.52
km2. Re-running the calculation with the larger catchment area however still returns a
design flow significantly lower than that in the EIA. To allow us to assess design flows we
request that catchment characteristics are provided, along with a map showing the
catchment for the Auchter Water tributary.
3.8
There is no mention in the EIA of the standard 20% increase in design flows to account for
climate change. We would strongly advise that design flows are revised to take this into
consideration.
3.9
The EIA makes reference to the effect of deforestation on flow for both catchments, and
adopts the forestry guideline of a 1.5 – 2% increase for every 10% of the catchment
cleared. We accept this and would advise that this is also used to inform culvert design.
3.10
In accordance with SPP culvert designs must maintain or improve current flow conditions.
In figure 4.12 (“Typical Details Of Watercourse Culvert”) reference is made to culverts being
designed to accommodate at least 1 in 50 year flows. Although there is no mention of 1 in
200 year design water levels within the EIA, we would recommend that these are calculated
for the two watercourses mentioned above and used to inform culvert design.
3.11
We appreciate the mitigation measures mentioned in 12.4.3.2 in terms of culvert design, for
example ensuring that culverts have no unnecessary bends or changes which could
encourage sediment deposition. We would recommend that these measures are carried
through as planning conditions.
Summary of Technical Points
3.12
In summary we would wish to receive clarification on the following points before we would
consider removing our objection to the proposed development:


A map showing the catchment of the Auchter Water tributary, and the catchment
characteristics used to calculate the design flows mentioned in the EIA.
We strongly advise the revision of design flows to make allowances for climate change.
Caveats & Additional Information for Applicant
3.13
The Indicative River & Coastal Flood Map (Scotland) has been produced following a
consistent, nationally-applied methodology for catchment areas equal to or greater than
3km2 using a Digital Terrain Model (DTM) to define river cross-sections and low-lying
coastal land. The outlines do not account for flooding arising from sources such as surface
water runoff, surcharged culverts or drainage systems. The methodology was not designed
to quantify the impacts of factors such as flood alleviation measures, buildings and
transport infrastructure on flood conveyance & storage. The Indicative River & Coastal
Flood Map (Scotland) is designed to be used as a national strategic assessment of flood
risk to support planning policy in Scotland.
For further information please visit
www.sepa.org.uk/flooding/flood_map.aspx.
3.14
We refer the applicant to the document entitled: “Technical Flood Risk Guidance for
Stakeholders”. This document provides generic requirements for undertaking Flood Risk
Assessments
and
can
be
downloaded
from
www.sepa.org.uk/flooding/flood_risk/planning__flooding.aspx.
Please note that this
document should be read in conjunction with Annex B in SEPA Policy 41: “Development at
Risk of Flooding, Advice and Consultation – a SEPA Planning Authority Protocol”, available
from www.sepa.org.uk/flooding/flood_risk.aspx.
3.15
Our Flood Risk Assessment checklist should be completed and attached within the front
cover of any flood risk assessments issued in support of a development proposal which
may be at risk of flooding. The document will take only a few minutes to complete and will
assist
our
review
process.
It
can
be
downloaded
from
www.sepa.org.uk/flooding/flood_risk/planning__flooding/fra_checklist.aspx
3.16
Please note that we are reliant on the accuracy and completeness of any information
supplied by the applicant in undertaking our review, and can take no responsibility for
incorrect data or interpretation made by the authors.
3.17
The advice contained in this letter is supplied to you by SEPA in terms of Section 72 (1) of
the Flood Risk Management (Scotland) Act 2009 on the basis of information held by SEPA
as at the date hereof. It is intended as advice solely to Scottish Government as Planning
Authority in terms of the said Section 72 (1). Our briefing note entitled: “Flood Risk
Management (Scotland) Act 2009: Flood risk advice to planning authorities” outlines the
transitional changes to the basis of our advice inline with the phases of this legislation and
can be downloaded from www.sepa.org.uk/flooding/flood_risk/planning__flooding.aspx.
4.
Protection of the Water Environment
4.1
Foul and Surface Water Drainage
4.1.1
We note that point 3 of section 4.5.4 of the ES makes reference to SUDS principals such
as swales, settlement lagoons & small ponds. We would advise the applicant makes use of
pre-earthworks drainage as laid out in section 9.4 of the ‘Good Practice during windfarm
construction’ guidance, which may help reduce the levels of contaminated water entering
the construction SUDS.
4.1.2
Disposal off-site of sewerage as outlined in point 15 of section 12.4.2 is acceptable, this
methodology being in accordance with Pollution Prevention Guideline 4.
4.1.3
The applicant should note that any discharge of water (ground or surface) (including that
from borrow pits) will require to be authorised under CAR, using either General Binding
Rules or a registration. The applicant should also consider the use of settlement lagoons
for any such discharges to negate the impact of silt.
4.1.4
We would request that a planning condition is attached to any consent requiring the
discharge of surface water to the water environment to be in accordance with the principles
of the SUDS (Sustainable Drainage Systems) Manual (C697) published by CIRIA.
4.1.5
Surface water drainage from the construction phase should also be dealt with by SUDS.
Such drainage should be in accordance with C648 and C649, both published by CIRIA. It
should be noted that oil interceptors are not considered SUDS in their own right but are
beneficial as part of the treatment train.
4.2
Watercourse crossings
4.2.1 Watercourse crossings must be designed following best practice, especially in relation to
fish passage; Point 2 of section 9.1 of the Good Practice Guide makes specific reference
to avoiding culverts of the nature being proposed. We would favour the use of bridging
solutions or bottomless arched culverts.
4.2.2 To ensure the water environment is left in its natural state with the proposed water
crossings we request that bridging solutions, or bottomless or arched culverts, be used for
all water crossings and these will be designed to leave the beds and banks of the
watercourse in a natural state.
4.2.3
The applicant should note that both culverts will require to be authorised by us under the
Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2011. This will likely be
in the form of a “registration” since the watercourses are both visible on a 1:50km
Ordnance Survey map. In addition, the removal of the existing culvert would also likely be
required to be authorised by us although since this activity would be deemed an
‘environmental service’, no fee would apply.
4.3
Groundwater
4.3.1
We are content with the details provided in the relevant sections of the Environmental
Statement documentation and believe that, should the development proceed with the
developers adhering to their proposals and their appropriately listed guidance, groundwater
is unlikely to impacted and the identified abstractions will not be at risk from the range of
activities associated with the windfarm development.
5.
Pollution prevention and environmental management
5.1
We note the intention (12.4.2 of the ES) to develop an Integrated Management Plan that
will incorporate environmental management measures and procedures such as a Pollution
Prevention Plan, Monitoring Plan and Method Statements to cover groundwater and
surface water protection. We also note the intention to prepare a Water Management Plan.
5.2
We request that a condition is imposed requiring that a site Integrated Management Plan
(IMP) and associated Construction Method Statement (CMS) be submitted for approval to
the determining authority (in consultation with SEPA and other agencies as appropriate) at
least two months prior to the proposed commencement of development and that all work
shall be carried out in accordance with the approved plan. This document should address
all pollution prevention issues and bring together all the mitigation measures detailed in the
ES. It must include the following mitigation measures or address the issues outlined:





A minimum buffer between all infrastructure, to include access tracks (but exclude
access tracks leading to watercourse crossings) to be set at 50 m;
The Ecological Clerk of Works, or equivalent is present on site at all times. It is
imperative that this be agreed at planning stage to ensure that any subsequent
tenders include this provision; (referred to in ES at section 12.5.2);
Environmental auditing and monitoring during, before and construction. We would
expect this to include the establishment of an environmental checklist to monitor
and plan construction activities. This must include weather forecasting and actions
to be taken in advance of adverse forecasts. Surface water monitoring and
groundwater monitoring should be included for before, during and after construction
to adequately assess any potential negative impacts on surface and groundwater;
Mechanisms to ensure that construction will not take place during periods of high
flow or high rainfall when pollution is going to be more likely or when ground
conditions are sufficiently poor as to make construction works present a risk of
pollution;
Inclusion of a Site Waste Management Plan (see section 10 for further advice on
this).
6.
Waste Management
6.1
We note the intention to prepare a Peat Management Plan (12.4.3.2). We strongly
recommended that the applicant provides a Peat Management Plan at the planning stage.
We require a plan to be submitted showing the estimated volume of peat to be extracted
and the proposed uses (waste management plan or restoration plan). In particular, the
storage methods and re-uses such that any relevant authorisations under the Waste
Management Licensing/PPC regulations are applied for where considered necessary.
6.2
In order for peat to be used as restoration material rather than being considered a waste,
we will require justification for its use and an illustration of areas/depths and volumes. This
is to ensure that the peat is not being "disposed of" via un-necessary overuse along roads
and tracks or into borrow pits. The methods of re-use will also be required to show that peat
turves are conserved to place on the top of deeper excavated peat.
6.3
It is noted in the ES that surplus peat/soil material will be used to restore road
verges/shoulders. It is considered good practice to reinstate peat turfs on track edges but
not to spread wet peat from deep excavations on track edges. Excavated peat should not
be used to create shoulders on floating roads or cut tracks, or spread on land adjacent to
tracks. Peat should only be used in these instances to finish off/reprofile the edges of tracks
and where construction has damaged the surface.
6.4
In developing a peat management plan we would expect the applicant to utilise the advice
currently available and consult with experts in this field. It is our opinion that no works
should commence on site until a peat management plan has been proposed and agreed by
all relevant parties. We would expect SNH to be consulted in this respect also. The
applicant must be aware that drainage of peat, excavation of peat, storage of peat,
compaction of peat and “re-use” of peat will all have an impact on the environment and
minimisation of these activities and mitigation measures must be fully investigated for the
entire site.
6.5
The peat management plan should include this information and also details of the volume
of peat to be excavated and how much of this peat it is proposed to re-use on site. This is
required to determine construction method and possible waste issues.
6.6
We therefore object until further information (in the form of a peat management plan) is
provided. The applicant is advised to consult SEPA’s Regulatory Position Statement on
Developments
on
peat
which
is
available
on
our
website
at
www.sepa.org.uk/planning/idoc.ashx?docid=c2030d4f-898f-479b-9f1c638a3d87f036&version=-1
6.7
Micrositing of turbines where the peat is 2m deep or more should be considered to prevent
the excavation of excess peat.
6.8
We do not currently have the expertise to comment on peat destabilisation. Best practice
should be used to assess and mitigate against risk. Best practice guidance is available
from the Scottish Government on their website.
6.9
The main environmental impacts associated with changes to the peat habitat are best
minimised through the location of components parts of the windfarm to areas of low
sensitivity.
7.
Disruption to peatlands
7.1
We are interested in the consequences of a peat-slide or bog burst as it can result in
severe environmental damage including the pollution of surface watercourses. We note the
intention to develop construction methodologies in consultation with us in light of the peat
depth survey (section 6.2 of Peat Stability Assessment refers). We request that the SEMP
referred to above outlines the pollution prevention measures to be taken to prevent a slide
and the mitigation measures to be put in place in the event of a slide taking place.
8.
Decommissioning and final site restoration
8.1
We request that a condition is applied seeking a Decommissioning and Restoration Plan.
The Plan should be submitted at least two years prior to the end of the design life of the
development for agreement by the determining authority, in consultation with the
appropriate regulatory authorities, and the plan should be based on the best practice
current at the time of submission.
9.
Caveats
9.1
Please note that we are reliant on the accuracy and completeness of the information
supplied to us in undertaking our review and can take no responsibility for incorrect data or
interpretation made by the authors.
9.2
This advice is also given without prejudice to any decision made on elements of the
proposal regulated by us. The decision may take into account factors not considered at the
planning stage.
This advice is given without prejudice to any decision made on elements of the proposal regulated
by us, which may take into account factors not considered at the planning stage.
Detailed advice for the applicant
10.
Site Waste Management Plan
10.1
Advice on how to prepare a site waste management plan is available on the Netregs
website and from Envirowise who also provide free advice on resource efficiency. Further
advice on the reuse of demolition and excavation materials is available from the Waste and
Resources Action programme. Further guidance can also be found at our website.
Information on waste prevention and waste minimisation is available on our waste
minimisation webpage at www.sepa.org.uk/waste/resource_efficiency.aspx
Regulatory advice
11.
The Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations 2011
11.1
From 1 April 2006 the above regulations replaced the Control of Pollution Act and
Groundwater Regulations. These regulations not only control discharges to watercourses
and land but also cover abstractions, impoundments and engineering works within and in
the vicinity of inland surface waters. This means that activities such as culverting, ditch
clearing, dredging, bridging and damming all require to be authorised under CAR.
11.2
We would re-iterate our policy against unnecessary culverting of watercourses. Where it is
considered that a culvert is essential it must be justified then it should be designed and
installed in accordance with the advice contained within CIRIA Report 168 “Culvert Design
Guide for Hydraulic Performance and Environmental/Aesthetic Considerations”. It should
be noted that the construction of culverts will require authorisation under CAR. The Water
Framework Directive (WFD) requires consideration of any aspect of river habitats, channel
structure and flow regimes that impact upon the biology of the water environment.
11.3
The publication ‘The Water Environment (Controlled Activities) (Scotland) Regulations
2005: A Practical Guide’ provides very useful advice on CAR and it is recommended that all
applicants consult this document which is available both from the website
(www.sepa.org.uk/wfd/index.htm) and from local SEPA offices.
12.
The Water Environment (Oil Storage) (Scotland) Regulations 2006
12.1
The Regulations apply to any kind of container which is being used and which is stored on
premises above ground, whether inside or outside a building. These include fixed tanks,
intermediate bulk containers, drums (oil drums or similar containers used for storing oil) or
mobile bowsers. The range of premises covered by the Regulations is wide including land
and mobile plant but does not include storage of oil in vehicles or vessels.
12.2
It is not necessary for storage facilities to be registered with SEPA however applicants
should ensure compliance with the Regulations. Full details of the requirements can be
found from SEPA’s website at: www.sepa.org.uk/regulation/oilstorage2006/index.htm.
13.
The Pollution Prevention and Control (Scotland) Regulations 2000 (PPC)
13.1
The above regulations are concerned with prevention or minimisation of emissions to air,
water and soil, as well as waste, from industrial and agricultural installations.
13.2
The applicant should note that the crushing of rock or grading or screening of rock or any
road stone coating process, except where they are unlikely to result in the release into the
air of particulate matter, are Part B prescribed processes under Section 3.5 of The Pollution
Prevention and Control (Scotland) Regulations 2000 (PPC).
13.3
The applicant should ensure that any mobile plant to screen or crush material from the
borrow pits has appropriate authorisation in terms of the Pollution Prevention and Control
(Scotland) Regulations 2000 (as amended).
13.4
The applicant should also ensure the material from the borrow pits is suitable for the
roadway construction and will not break up when subjected to construction traffic. This
could present a significant pollution risk, especially during periods of wet weather and
would be difficult to resolve.
14.
Waste Management Licensing (Scotland) Regulations 1994
14.1
We encourage waste minimisation whenever possible. Further details can be found on our
website. We similarly encourage the recovery and reuse of controlled waste, such as soils
from other sites provided that it is in accordance with the Waste Management Licensing
Regulations 1994. Any proposals for reuse or recycling of materials, such as soils from
other sites, may require to be registered with us under a Waste Management Exemption.
There are specific criteria which if met will constitute an exemption from licensing under
these Regulations (namely Paragraph 35 of Schedule 3 to the Regulations). These
exemptions are required to be registered by SEPA and the details must be forwarded to the
relevant SEPA office.
14.2
The Environmental Statement does not indicate whether the applicant intends to ‘mulch’
and spread woodchip over clearfelled peatland areas within the site. We are aware that
this has been done on the site previously but we would raise concerns regarding this
practice now and we have doubts of the likely success of the approach. We have refused
to register Waste Management Licensing exemptions for other wind farm sites with similar
proposals.
14.3
Details of regulatory requirements and good practice advice for the applicant can be found
on our website at www.sepa.org.uk/planning.aspx. If you are unable to find the advice you
need for a specific regulatory matter, please contact a member of the operations team in
your local SEPA office at:
North Lanarkshire Operations Team, East Kilbride Office, 5 Redwood Crescent, Peel
Park, East Kilbride, G74 5PP, tel 01355 574200