Kings Lynn B SoS Decision Letter. The Proposed Palm Paper CCGT 3 Order. Proposed Combined Cycle Gas Turbine by Palm Paper Ltd

Transcription

1 Proposed Combined Cycle Gas Turbine by Palm Paper Ltd The Proposed Palm Paper CCGT 3 Order Palm Paper Mill, Saddlebow Industrial Estate, King s Lynn PINS Ref: EN Document Ref: Kings Lynn B SoS Decision Letter Deadline 5 - May 2015

2 Room Victoria Street Mr Richard Wearmouth London SW1H 0ET Environmental Engineer PB Power Direct line: Amber Court Fax: William Armstrong Drive Our ref: /124C Newcastle upon Tyne Your ref: NE4 7YQ Date: 5 February 2009 Dear Sir ELECTRICITY ACT 1989 ( the Act ) TOWN AND COUNTRY PLANNING ACT 1990 ( the TCPA ) APPLICATION FOR CONSENT TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A COMBINED CYCLE GAS TURBINE GENERATING STATION AT KING S LYNN, NORFOLK I. THE APPLICATION 1.1 I am directed by the Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change ( the Secretary of State ) to refer to the application dated 23 April 2008 ( the Application ) on behalf of Centrica Leasing (KL) Limited ( the Company ), for both the consent of the Secretary of State under section 36 the Act ( section 36 consent ) to the construction and operation of an 1,020 MW combined cycle gas turbine generating station at King s Lynn, Norfolk ( the Development ), and for a direction under section 90(2) of the TCPA ( section 90 direction ) that planning permission for the Development be deemed to be granted. 1.2 The application for section 36 consent was published in accordance with the Electricity (Applications for Consent) Regulations 1990 ( the Applications Regulations ) and served on the relevant persons. 1.3 In accordance with the Electricity Works (Environmental Impact Assessment)(England and Wales) Regulations 2000 ( the 2000 Regulations ) the Company also submitted on 23 April 2008 a document, entitled Environmental Statement. A further document entitled Environmental Impact Assessment Supplementary Information was submitted in June A further document entitled Bat Activity Survey Report of King s Lynn

3 Power Station at Saddlebow, King s Lynn, Norfolk was submitted in August Further documents entitled, Bird Mitigation Strategy King s Lynn Power Station at Saddlebow, King s Lynn, Norfolk, Reptile Mitigation Strategy King s Lynn Power Station at Saddlebow, King s Lynn, Norfolk and King s Lynn B CCGT Power Station Water Vole Mitigation Strategy Overview were submitted in September The documents describe the Development and give an analysis of its environmental effects. The document is hereafter referred to in this letter as the Environmental Statement. The Environmental Statement was advertised and placed in the public domain and an opportunity given to those who wished to comment on it to do so. 1.4 King s Lynn and West Norfolk Borough Council ( the relevant planning authority ) entered into discussions with the Company over terms on which it would be content for the Development to proceed. As a result of these discussions: (i) (ii) 48 conditions ( the Planning Conditions ) to be attached to any section 90 direction were agreed between the Company and the relevant planning authority; and the Company and the relevant planning authority entered into an agreement under section 106 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, dated 16 January In view of the successful conclusion of these discussions the relevant planning authority has not maintained any objection to the Application provided that the Planning Conditions are imposed should the Secretary of State be minded to grant section 36 consent and issue a section 90 direction in respect of the Development. II. SECRETARY OF STATE S CONSIDERATION OF THE PLANNING CONDITIONS 2. The Secretary of State has considered the Planning Conditions carefully. He agrees that they are suitable for inclusion in any section 90 direction which he may give. III. SECRETARY OF STATE'S DECISION ON THE HOLDING OF A PUBLIC INQUIRY 3.1 As stated in paragraph 1.5 above, the relevant planning authority has not maintained any objection to the Application, and the Secretary of State is not therefore obliged under paragraph 2(2) of Schedule 8 to the Act to cause a public inquiry to be held. 3.2 Paragraph 3(2) of Schedule 8 to the Act, however, requires the Secretary of State to consider all objections that he has received pursuant to the Applications Regulations, together with all other material considerations,

4 in order to determine whether it would nevertheless be appropriate to hold a public inquiry. 3.3 The Secretary of State received one objection from a local resident to the Application made under the Applications Regulations. 3.4 The objection, in summary, was: (a) (b) (c) (d) (e) noise from the existing power station already causes concern, the new station would make the existing situation worse; no new jobs will be created as the power station would be automated, therefore no benefits would accrue to the local community; the residents of Saddlebow are being asked to take more than their fair share of power generation as there is an existing King s Lynn station and another along the road at Sutton Bridge; gas is expensive and should not be used as the fuel for the new power station; and a new gas fired station does not accord with the aims for providing green energy. 3.5 The Secretary of State has carefully considered the objection which has been made and comments as follows: (a) (b) Planning Conditions (19) and (20) cover operational noise emanating from the proposed development. The Environmental Statement indicates that noise levels will not cause existing background levels to be increased. In addition he is aware that the relevant planning authority has not indicated that noise levels from the existing power station are excessive or have caused ground for complaint. He is aware that Planning Condition (21) requires the establishment of a noise complaints procedure which specifies that remedial work has to be undertaken should a local resident have justified cause to complain. All new gas-fired power stations are highly automated and employ far less people than coal and nuclear power stations. In this instance the Company indicates that full time employment would be in the region of 30-40, which is considered comparable with the staffing levels of other gasfired stations. The Environmental Statement gives details of the benefits expected to accrue to the local community during the construction and operation of the proposed development.

5 (c) The relevant planning authority has confirmed that the site is acceptable and in accordance with the saved policies of Norfolk Structure Plan and the King s Lynn and West Norfolk Local Plan. The Sutton Bridge power station is some 16 kilometres (10 miles) east of King s Lynn and therefore at a sufficient distance so that there is no interaction between that station and the proposed development. Conclusion (d) & The Government s policy on energy is set out in the Energy (e) White Paper Meeting the Energy Challenge May The White Paper makes clear that using gas as the fuel is an acceptable means to generate electricity as such generation contributes to diversity and security of supply and contributes to reducing carbon which is a main contributor to the greenhouse effect. 3.6 The Secretary of State has carefully considered the views of the relevant planning authority, the comments of the objector, the matters set out above and all other material considerations. He takes the view that it would not be appropriate to cause a public inquiry to be held into the Application. IV. SECRETARY OF STATE'S CONSIDERATION OF POSSIBLE EFFECTS ON A EUROPEAN SITE OR SPECIES 4.1 Regulation 48 of the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c) Regulations 1994 ( the 1994 Regulations ) requires the Secretary of State to consider whether the Development would be likely to have a significant effect on a European Site, as defined in the 1994 Regulations. In the event of such an effect he must undertake an appropriate assessment of the implications for the European Site in view of its conservation objectives. 4.2 The Secretary of State has been informed that there are no European Sites within 7km of the application site. He has however been informed by Natural England that the Development could have an impact on European protected species and requested that further surveys and mitigation measures be undertaken. The further information was supplied during August and September As a result of this further information Natural England informed the Secretary of State on 24 September 2008 that it did not object to section 36 consent being granted provided conditions were included to safeguard the protected species that are present on the site of the Development. The Secretary of State has noted that Planning Conditions (37) (42) now require mitigation to be undertaken for bats, birds, reptiles and water voles. Natural England has confirmed that with these mitigation measures the Development is not likely to have an adverse effect on protected species. Accordingly, in view of this advice, it is concluded that no appropriate assessment pursuant to the 1994 Regulations is required. These Regulations therefore have no further bearing upon the Application.

6 V. SECRETARY OF STATE'S CONSIDERATION OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION 5.1 Regulation 3 of the 2000 Regulations prohibits the Secretary of State from granting section 36 consent unless he has first taken into consideration the environmental information, as defined in those Regulations. 5.2 The Secretary of State is satisfied that the Environmental Statement is sufficient to allow him to make a determination on the Application and that the Company has followed the applicable procedures in the 2000 Regulations. 5.3 The Secretary of State has considered the environmental information carefully; in addition to the Environmental Statement, he has considered the comments made by the relevant planning authority and those designated as statutory consultees under regulation 2 of the 2000 Regulations. 5.4 Taking into account the extent to which any environmental effects will be modified and mitigated by measures the Company has agreed to take or will be required to take either under the Planning Conditions or by regulatory authorities, including the Environment Agency, the Secretary of State believes that any remaining environmental effects will not be such that it would be appropriate to refuse section 36 consent for the Development. VI. SECRETARY OF STATE S CONSIDERATION OF COMBINED HEAT AND POWER 6.1 The Energy White Paper 2007 ( Meeting the Energy Challenge ) makes clear that the Government strongly support combined heat and power ( CHP ). The Application is covered by the Departmental published guidance 1 for all fossil fuelled power station proposals, requiring developers to demonstrate that opportunities for CHP have been seriously explored before section 36 consent can be granted. 6.2 The Secretary of State is satisfied that the Company has complied with those requirements. The Company has indicated that there is one potential user of heat, a paper mill, in proximity to the proposed development but that the timing of the construction of the Development would not support the initial supply of steam, but a long term supply could be integrated into the design. This would allow for the paper mill s gas fired boilers to be relegated to back up duty and the operation of the proposed development as a CHP power station. After consideration of the information provided, the Secretary of State accepts that there are no significant existing industrial or commercial users of heat which could justify the Development being subject to a requirement to supply CHP. However he is aware that there is a possibility to supply high grade heat in the future and in order not to lose the opportunity to exploit potential heat demand which may arise has decided to require the Company to construct the proposed Development in such a manner to as to allow for the abstraction of high pressure steam from the electricity generating cycle should such a heat demand arise (the Heat Requirement ).

7 Conclusion 6.3 The Secretary of State is of the view that the Company has seriously explored the possibility of CHP and takes the view that the inclusion of the Heat Requirement will allow for any potential heat use which results from the ongoing discussions to be utilised but does not believe the Application should be refused on the ground that it is not CHP. VII. SECRETARY OF STATE S DECISION ON CARBON CAPTURE READINESS 7.1 The 2007 Energy White Paper (paragraph ) committed HM Government to consult on what power station consents policy should be with regard to carbon capture readiness (CCR). The consultation on CCR (Towards Carbon Capture and Storage) was published on 30 June 2008 and lasted for 12 weeks. The Secretary of State has agreed that the Government will continue to process power station applications and take decisions under section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 pending the outcome of the consultation. In doing so it should be understood that this in no way pre-empts the outcome of the CCR consultation. It simply reflects the Secretary of State s view that it would be appropriate to determine applications for his consent before the outcome of the consultation in the recognition that new generating capacity will be required to replace the capacity of existing stations which are due to close and the time it takes to construct and commission a new power station The Secretary of State notes that the developer has allocated an area of land for carbon capture and export and that the gas turbines and heat recovery steam generators will be positioned to allow for the Development to be retrofitted with carbon capture plant should it become technically and economically viable. The Secretary of State is aware that a key element of facilitating any retrofit is the provision of the necessary land. As with other recent decisions to consent to new CCGT power stations, the Secretary of State has, therefore, decided it would be appropriate to include, in any section 36 he may grant, a condition that the necessary space remains available at the site so as to allow for the future installation of any carbon capture plant ( the CCR Condition ). VIII. SECRETARY OF STATE'S DECISION ON THE APPLICATION 8.1 The Secretary of State considers the following issues material to the merits of the section 36 consent application: (a) (b) adequate environmental information has been provided for the Secretary of State to judge its impact; the Company has identified what can be done to mitigate the impact of the proposed Development; 1. This application is covered by DTI guidance relating to CHP guidance dated December 2006 (URN/06/2138).

8 c) the matters specified in paragraph 1(2) of Schedule 9 to the 1989 Act have been adequately addressed by means of the Environmental Statement and the Secretary of State has judged that the likely environmental impacts are acceptable; d) the fact that the legal procedures for considering a generating station application have been properly followed; e) the views of the relevant planning authority, the views of statutory consultees under the 1994 Regulations, the views of the objector, the environmental information and all other relevant matters and been considered; and f) the proposed Development is consistent with Government s energy policy as set out in the Energy White Paper 2007, ( Meeting the Energy Challenge ) released on 23 May 2007 in respect of meeting diversity and security of supply for power generation. 8.2 The Secretary of State having regard to the matters specified in paragraph 8.1 above, has decided to grant consent for the Development pursuant to section 36, subject to: (i) (ii) (iii) (iv) a condition that the Development shall be in accordance with the particulars submitted with the Application; a condition that the necessary additional space is available at the Development site which allows for the future installation of any carbon capture plant; a condition as to time within which the Development must commence; and that the Development shall be constructed with the capability for extracting high pressure steam. 8.3 The Secretary of State believes that the Planning Conditions form a sufficient basis on which the Development might proceed, and therefore he has decided to issue a section 90 direction that planning permission be deemed to be granted subject to the Planning Conditions. 8.4 I accordingly enclose the Secretary of State's consent under section 36 of the Electricity Act 1989 and a direction under section 90 of the Town and Country Planning Act IX. GENERAL GUIDANCE 9.1 The validity of the Secretary of State s decision may be challenged by making an application to the High Court for leave to seek a judicial review. Such application must be made as soon as possible and in any event not later

9 than three months after the date of the decision. Parties seeking further information as to how to proceed should seek independent legal advice from a solicitor or legal adviser, or alternatively may contact the Administrative Court at the Royal Courts of Justice, Strand, London WC2 2LL (General Enquiries ). 9.2 This decision does not convey any approval or consent that may be required under any enactment, by-law, order or regulation other than section 36 and Schedule 8 to the Electricity Act 1989 and section 90 of the Town and Country Planning Act Yours faithfully Richard Mellish Head of Development Consents and Planning Reform