1. Paper Mill CCGT Proposal Robert Upton – Pre Application Commissioner Katherine Chapman – Case Leader Nik Perepelov – Assistant Case Officer 25 January 2011

2. independent, impartial, inclusive Structure of Presentation 1.Overview 2.The IPC’s role 3.The Process 4.Local Authorities’ role

3. independent, impartial, inclusive A better planning process for national infrastructure projects –A simpler process –Faster decisions –A fairer approach –Including people and communities –Independent professional judgement –Cutting costs –Democratic and accountable

4. independent, impartial, inclusive On-going Reform Localism Bill –Retains efficient and democratically accountable fast-track process –New Major Infrastructure Planning Unit as part of the Planning Inspectorate (Q2 2012) –Secretary of State to make decisions –Existing procedures remain during transition –NPSs approved by Parliament

5. independent, impartial, inclusive National Policy Statements (NPSs) – Overall energy policy (CD) – Renewables (CD) – Fossil (CD) – Electricity networks (CD) – Oil and gas (CD) – Nuclear (CD) – Ports (D) – National networks – Water supply (?) – Waste water (CD) – Hazardous waste https://www.energynpsconsultation.decc.gov.uk/ Consultation close: 24 January 2011

6. independent, impartial, inclusive Proposals Energy (other) e.g. biomass, electric lines, gas pipelines, waste to energy etc Waste water Nuclear Wind farm Transport e.g. railway, road improvements See full list of projects at: www.independent.gov.uk/infrastructure

7. independent, impartial, inclusive The size of the challenge 0 510 12 6 4 4 3 2 1 6 1 1 Energy (40) Transport (9) 4 5 Waste Water (1) 1 Offshore wind farms Onshore wind farms Nuclear power stations Biomass power stations Gas fired power stations Energy from Waste plants Tidal power Electricity lines Gas pipeline Gas storage Road Rail 01530 30.5 0.3 15 1 3.9 0.14 1 Number of projects Energy output (gigawatts)

8. independent, impartial, inclusive The role of the IPC Pre-application –Advice to all parties –Screening and scoping Acceptance Examination –Preliminary meeting –Emphasis on written representations –Hearings: Specific Issues, Open and Compulsory Purchase –Inquisitorial style Decision/Recommendation –Report of justification

9. independent, impartial, inclusive Five commitments 1.Engagement 2.Openness 3.Consensus 4.Sustainability 5.Independent decisions

10. independent, impartial, inclusive The Process 1 2 3 4 5 6 Pre Application IPC Acceptance Pre- Examination Examination Decision Post Decision 28 days3 months 6 months3 months

11. independent, impartial, inclusive Stage 1 Pre-app Stage 2 Acceptance Stage 3 Pre-exam Stage 4 Examination Stage 5 Decision Stage 6 Post decision developer other organisations general public potential interested parties statutory consultees government depts & NPSs local authorities land owners & neighbours IPC professional and administrative services

12. independent, impartial, inclusive Statement of Community Consultation (SOCC) –Developer must consult LA on draft SoCC –Publish it in the local press –Developers must do what they say in the SOCC! –LA comments to IPC on adequacy of consultation Stage 1 Pre-app Stage 2 Acceptance Stage 3 Pre-exam Stage 4 Examination Stage 5 Decision Stage 6 Post decision

13. independent, impartial, inclusive –Driven by developer –Engagement with communities and LAs –Comprehensive EIA/ES –SoCC –Development of DCO –Limited scope for amending applications Total application preparation: No surprises Stage 1 Pre-app Stage 2 Acceptance Stage 3 Pre-exam Stage 4 Examination Stage 5 Decision Stage 6 Post decision

14. independent, impartial, inclusive IPC Commissioners other organisations potential interested parties statutory consultees government depts & NPSs local authorities land owners & neighbours general public developer IPC professional and administrative services Stage 1 Pre-app Stage 2 Acceptance Stage 3 Pre-exam Stage 4 Examination Stage 5 Decision Stage 6 Post decision

15. independent, impartial, inclusive Has the developer met its pre- application obligations? –Does the Consultation Report demonstrate that consultation fulfilled legal requirements? –LAs comment on adequacy of consultation Is the application in the correct form, including necessary documentation? –Has guidance been followed, if not, why not? Stage 1 Pre-app Stage 2 Acceptance Stage 3 Pre-exam Stage 4 Examination Stage 5 Decision Stage 6 Post decision

16. independent, impartial, inclusive –Developer required to publicise an accepted application –Registering to have your say –Appointment of Examining Authority –IPC makes its initial assessment of principal issues –Preliminary meeting –Procedural decision –Timetable for examination Stage 1 Pre-app Stage 2 Acceptance Stage 3 Pre-exam Stage 4 Examination Stage 5 Decision Stage 6 Post decision

17. independent, impartial, inclusive –Written representations –Examination to be inquisitorial rather than adversarial –Hearings –Open floor –Specific issue –Compulsory purchase –IPC may appoint an assessor –Statements of common ground –LA produces Local Impact Report Stage 1 Pre-app Stage 2 Acceptance Stage 3 Pre-exam Stage 4 Examination Stage 5 Decision Stage 6 Post decision

18. independent, impartial, inclusive The influential position of local authorities –Statutory Consultee –Planning Performance Agreements –Statement of Community Consultation – supporting developer –Comment on adequacy of consultation –Local Impact Report –Statement of common ground –Section 174 Obligations –Enforcement of Development Consent Order

19. independent, impartial, inclusive Contact us Case specific inquiries: Katherine Chapman – tel. 0303 444 5078 or email Katherine.chapman@infrastructure.gsi.gov.uk Katherine.chapman@infrastructure.gsi.gov.uk General inquiries: Infrastructure Planning Commission (IPC) Temple Quay House Temple Quay Bristol BS1 6PN 0303 444 5000 ipcenquiries@infrastructure.gsi.gov.uk www.independent.gov.uk/infrastructure