DM2: Water Resources and Flood Risk

RE: Nottinghamshire Minerals Local Plan - consultation
UKOOG is the representative body for the UK onshore oil and gas industry, including exploration and
production.
We support the process of local plan making and want to ensure that any proposed plan with respect
to onshore oil and gas is sound and meets with the criteria and policies outlined by Government in the
NPPF, Planning Practice Guidance and related Written Ministerial Statements. In our view, minerals
plans should establish clear criteria-based policies against which proposals can be transparently
assessed on a case by case basis.
The planning process for onshore oil and gas is one of five regulatory processes that are required
under the current policy framework set by government. Our view is that minerals plans should include
a review of each regulatory function and identify those areas which fall outside of the planning
process. PPG 012 and PPG 112 make clear that planning authorities are not responsible for matters
covered by other regulatory regimes. MPAs "should assume that these regimes will operate effectively.
Whilst these issues may be put before mineral planning authorities, they should not need to carry out
their own assessment as they can rely on the assessment of other regulatory bodies." This planning
policy principle has been re-confirmed in a number of legal cases including; Frack Free Balcombe
Residents Association v West Sussex CC 2014.
Our comments on draft plan are as follows:
Vision
UKOOG Response:
We support the vision for the minerals local plan, in that it recognises that, ‘minerals are a valuable
natural resource and should be worked and used in a sustainable manner and where possible reused
to minimise waste’ and we agree that, ‘Mineral development will be designed, located, operated and
restored to ensure that environmental harm and impacts on climate change are minimised’.
Specific Policies
SP2: Biodiversity-Led Restoration
UKOOG Response:
UKOOG supports the approach outlined in Policy SP2 with regard to restoration of sites, which states,
‘Restoration schemes that seek to maximise biodiversity gains in accordance with the targets and
opportunities identified within the Nottinghamshire Local Biodiversity Action Plan will be supported’.
The onshore industry supports biodiversity net-gain principles, but also recognises that for small shortterm
exploration sites options for biodiversity enhancement might be more limited. For production
sites there will be greater opportunity for biodiversity net-gain to be achieved.
SP3: Climate Change
UKOOG Response:
UKOOG is supportive of the approach outlined in Policy SP3 that, ‘All new development, including
minerals extraction, should therefore seek to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and avoid increased
vulnerability to the impacts of climate change’, but we would like to point out that emissions
associated with the extraction of oil and gas, including the flaring of waste gasses, are regulated by
the Environment Agency through environmental permitting, which requires operators to use BAT
(Best Available Techniques) to control emissions during operations. We note that the justification text
in 3.31 states that, ‘All new development, including minerals extraction, should therefore seek to
reduce greenhouse gas emissions and avoid increased vulnerability to the impacts of climate change,
including flooding, where practicable’. This contradicts the wording of the policy itself, which uses the
term ‘minimise’. For consistency we believe that the term ‘minimise’ should be used in both the policy
and the justification text.
We support the statement that, ‘This policy does not presume against the future extraction of energy
minerals. Indigenous mineral extraction has potential benefits in environmental and climate change
terms’, but for clarification the combustion or use of the final product (oil or gas) is not a consideration
for assessing extraction focussed planning applications.
SP4: Sustainable Transport
UKOOG Response:
UKOOG recognise the importance of minimising traffic movement and utilising existing infrastructure
where it is feasible to do so, and the onshore industry aims to maximise the reuse and recycling of
materials and waste products from its operations to reduce transport movements.
In our view there would be merit in including a comment in the justification text that minerals,
including oil and gas, can only be worked where they are found, as meeting the test in part 2 of the
policy, ‘…. all new mineral working and mineral related development should be located as follows: b)
within close proximity to the County’s main highway network and existing transport routes in order to
avoid residential areas, minor roads, and minimise the impact of road transportation’, may not be
feasible to meet.
SP5: The Built, Historic and Natural Environment
UKOOG Response:
Onshore oil and gas sites are temporary in nature and do provide a good opportunity, post
decommissioning, to be restored to an enhanced environmental condition that maximises habitat
creation and an overall net gain in biodiversity, which should be considered at application stage. Under
UK regulation, oil and gas developments for the extraction of shale gas with the use of hydraulic
fracturing is prohibited from Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), Areas of Outstanding Natural Beauty (AONB) and National Parks, other onshore oil and gas development proposals should be
considered on a case by case basis, which aligns with the NPPF, Planning Practice Guidance and the
WMS 2018.
MP12: Hydrocarbons
UKOOG Response:
UKOOG are supportive of policy MP12, which states;
‘1. Exploration and appraisal of oil and gas will be supported, provided the site and equipment:
a. Are not located in a protected area other than in exceptional circumstances where this does
not compromise the reasons for the designation and the need for development can be
demonstrated; and
b. Are located where this will not have an unacceptable environmental impact.
2. The commercial production of oil and gas will be supported, provided the site and
equipment:
a. Are not located in a protected area other than in exceptional circumstances where this does
not compromise the reasons for the designation and the need for development can be
demonstrated; and
b. Are located at the least sensitive location taking account of environmental, geological and
technical factors.
3. Proposals at each stage must provide for the restoration and subsequent aftercare of the
site, whether or not oil or gas is found’.
There is inconsistency between the terms used in ‘part 1 b’ for exploration and appraisal and ‘part 2
b’ for commercial production. In ‘part 1 b’ the term ‘unacceptable environmental impact’ is used, but
in ‘part 2 b’ the term ‘least sensitive location’ is used. In our view the terms should be the same
regardless of whether it is exploration or commercial production, the tests should be equally relevant.
Furthermore the term ‘least sensitive location’ is subjective and therefore should be replaced with the
term ‘will not have an unacceptable impact’.
Policy DM2: Water Resources and Flood Risk
UKOOG Response:
UKOOG recognise the importance of managing the water environment, but we would like to remind
the council that the Environment Agency (EA) regulate many of aspects stated in Policy DM2 and
supporting text, in particular the EA regulate groundwater activities through the Environmental
Permitting Regulations.
Please do not hesitate to contact us if you have any questions.

Policy DM2 as drafted refers to making efficient use of water resources and that SUDs is the preferred method for surface water disposal which is welcomed.

It is noted that reference is made in the supporting text of Policy DM2 (para 5.24) to the submission of hydrological/ hydrogeological investigation being required where necessary. However Policy DM2 does not specify what would constitute sufficient technical detail to satisfy the requirements of the policy to protect existing water resources which are used for the supply of potable water.

(Continue on a separate sheet/expand box if necessary)

To be effective it proposed that Policy DM2 be amended as follows:

; 1. Proposals for all stages of minerals development will be supported where it can be demonstrated in a hydrogeological/water quality risk assessment that there are no unacceptable impacts on surface water quality
and flows or groundwater quality and levels at or in the vicinity of the site

Anglian Water is identified as a statutory consultee through Schedule 4
(zf) of the Town and Country Planning (Development Management Procedure)
(England) Order 2015 in relation to development involving the boring for or getting of oil and natural gas from shale.

It is noted that the Submission Draft Local Plan includes a specific policy relating to hydrocarbon minerals including the proposals relating to the extraction of shale gas.

Reference is made to exploration proposals ensuring that it would not have an unacceptable impact on the environment or residential amenity. However no further guidance is provided in terms of what would constitute an unacceptable impact in this context or what is the required at each stage identified in Policy MP12: Hydrocarbons Minerals.

The policy relating to hydrocarbon extraction should specifically refer to water resources/environment and require applicants to demonstrate that there proposals would not have an adverse impact on potable water sources in the ownership of Anglian Water. This would include providing sufficient technical detail at the planning application stage about how any risks to potable water resources will be addressed.

It is therefore proposed that Policy MP12 is amended as follows:

‘3. Proposals at each stage must provide for the restoration and subsequent
aftercare of the site, whether or not oil or gas is found.

4. Proposals at each stage must provide appropriate evidence to demonstrate that there will be no unacceptable impacts on surface and groundwater quality.’

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on your consultation. Severn Trent are generally supportive of Polices to protect the environment and water resources, and agree with the principles outlined within the minerals plan to protect ground and surface water from the impacts of mineral extraction, to help to deliver Water Framework Directives, to mitigate the impacts of climate change and flooding, where possible.
There are a number of sites that are indicated to be located in close proximity or intersect with Severn Trent assets:
Potential Mineral Allocation Sites:
 MP2k (Bawtry Road West) – This site falls within a groundwater Source Protection Zone (SPZ) 3 therefore it may pose a risk to groundwater assets. This site is located within the Idle and Torne EA CAMS (Environment Agency Catchment Abstraction Management Strategies) area and is also situated within a sub-area designated as ‘Water Not Available for Licensing” (See Note1 below).
 MP2l (Scrooby Thompson Land) - The site falls within a groundwater SPZ 3 therefore it may pose a risk to groundwater assets. This site is located within the Idle and Torne EA CAMS area and is also situated within a sub-area designated as ‘Water Not Available for Licensing” (See Note1 below).
 MP2m (Scrooby North) - The site falls within a groundwater SPZ 3 therefore it may pose a risk to groundwater assets. This site is located within the Idle and Torne EA CAMS area and is also situated within a sub-area designated as ‘Water Not Available for Licensing” (See Note1 below).
 MP3 (Scrooby Top North) - The site falls within a groundwater SPZ 3 therefore it may pose a risk to groundwater assets. This site is located within the Idle and Torne EA CAMS area and is also situated within a sub-area designated as ‘Water Not Available for Licensing” (See Note1 below).
 MP2n (Langford Lowfield North) – The site does not fall in a groundwater asset Source Protection Zone therefore it is unlikely to pose a risk to groundwater assets. No CAMS data is available from the EA for this site.
 MP2o (Besthorpe East) - The site does not fall in a groundwater asset Source Protection Zone therefore it is unlikely to pose a risk to groundwater assets. No CAMS data is available from the EA for this site.
2
 MP7c (Bantycock Quarry South) - the site is indicated to be in close proximity to Severn
Trent surface water assets therefore it may be necessary to have discussions concerning
extraction, to ensure that Severn Trent assets are not adversely effected by operations. The
site does not fall in a groundwater asset Source Protection Zone therefore it is unlikely to
pose a risk to groundwater assets. No CAMS data is available from the EA for this site.
 MP3d (Bestwood 2 North) - The site falls within a groundwater SPZ 3 therefore it may pose
a risk to groundwater assets. This site falls within the Lower Trent & Erewash EA CAMS
area and is also situated within a sub-area designated as ‘Water Not Available for Licensing”
(See Note1 below).
 MP2p Mill Hill (near Barton in Fabis) – This minerals extraction site is indicated to be
intersected by Severn Trent surface water assets, therefore discussions with Severn Trent
should be held to ensure that impacts on Severn Trent are appropriately mitigated. The site
does not fall in a groundwater asset Source Protection Zone therefore it is unlikely to pose a
risk to groundwater assets. CAMS data are not available from the EA for this site.
All Permitted Sites April 2019:
 MP2g (Girton) – The site does not fall in a groundwater asset Source Protection Zone
therefore it is unlikely to pose a risk to groundwater assets. CAMS data are not available
from the EA for this site.
 MP2h (Langford Lowfields) – Indicated to be in close proximity to Severn Trent Surface
Water assets. The site does not fall in a groundwater asset Source Protection Zone
therefore it is unlikely to pose a risk to groundwater assets. CAMS data are not available
from the EA for this site.
 MP2f (Besthorpe) - Indicated to be in close proximity to Severn Trent Surface Water assets.
The site does not fall in a groundwater asset Source Protection Zone therefore it is unlikely
to pose a risk to groundwater assets. CAMS data are not available from the EA for this site.
 MP2c (Sturton Le Steeple) - The site does not fall in a groundwater asset Source
Protection Zone therefore it is unlikely to pose a risk to groundwater assets. CAMS data are
not available from the EA for this site.
 MP2a (Newington South) - The site falls within a groundwater SPZ 3 therefore it may pose
a risk to groundwater assets. This site is located within the Idle and Torne EA CAMS area
and is also situated within a sub-area designated as ‘Water Not Available for Licensing” (See
Note1 below).
 MP4a (Nether Langwith) - The site does not fall in a groundwater asset Source Protection
Zone therefore it is unlikely to pose a risk to groundwater assets. This site falls within the Idle
& Torne EA CAMS area and is also situated within a sub-area designated as ‘Water Not
Available for Licensing” (See Note1 below).
 MP7b (Bantycock Quarry) - the site is indicated to be in close proximity to Severn Trent
assets it may be necessary to have discussions around the extraction, to ensure that Severn
Trent assets are not adversely effected by operations. The site does not fall in a
groundwater asset Source Protection Zone therefore it is unlikely to pose a risk to
groundwater assets. CAMS data are not available from the EA for this site.
 MP6b (Dorket Head – part a) - the site is bounded by Severn Trent assets; we strongly
advise that Severn Trent Water is consulted during permitting to ensure that Severn Trent
assets are not adversely effected by operations. The site does not fall in a groundwater
3
asset Source Protection Zone therefore it is unlikely to pose a risk to groundwater assets.
CAMS data are not available from the EA for this site.
 MP3a (Burnstump) - the site is indicated to be intersected by Severn Trent assets, it is vital
that discussions are held with Severn Trent to ensure that any impacts on Severn Trent
assets are managed appropriately. The site falls within a groundwater SPZ 3 and is
approximately 60 m from an SPZ 2 therefore there is a moderate chance it may pose a risk
to groundwater assets. This site falls within the Lower Trent & Erewash EA CAMS area and
is also situated within a sub-area designated as ‘Water Not Available for Licensing” (See
Note1 below).
 MP6b (Dorket Head – part b) - the site is indicated to be intersected by Severn Trent
assets, it is vital that discussions are held with Severn Trent to ensure that any impacts on
Severn Trent assets are managed appropriately. The site does not fall in a groundwater
asset Source Protection Zone therefore it is unlikely to pose a risk to groundwater assets.
CAMS data are not available from the EA for this site.
 MP7a (Marlaegis Mine) – the site is located in close proximity to Severn Trent assets it may
be necessary to discuss these assets to prevent any detrimental impacts to the Severn Trent
network. The site does not fall in a groundwater asset SPZ therefore it is unlikely to pose a
risk to groundwater assets. CAMS data are not available from the EA for this site.
 MP8a (Two Oaks Farm) - the site is indicated to be bounded by Severn Trent assets, it may
be necessary to discuss the site with Severn Trent to ensure that the development of the site
does not have an adverse impact on Severn Trent assets. The site falls within a groundwater
SPZ 3 therefore it may pose a risk to groundwater assets. This site is also located within the
Idle & Torne EA CAMS area and is designated as ‘Water Not Available for Licensing” (See
Note1 below).
 MP10a (Yellowstone Quarry) - The site does not fall in a groundwater asset Source
Protection Zone therefore it is unlikely to pose a risk to groundwater assets. This site falls
within Lower Trent & Erewash EA CAMS area and is also situated within a sub-area
designated as ‘Restricted Water Available for Licensing” (See Note1 below).
 MP3b (Bestwood 2) - The site is indicated to be bounded by Severn Trent Assets,
discussion We strongly recommend that you contact Severn Trent to ensure that Severn
Trent assets are not adversely effected. The site falls within a groundwater SPZ 3 therefore
it may pose a risk to groundwater assets. This site falls within Lower Trent & Erewash EA
CAMS area and is also situated within a sub-area designated as ‘Water Not Available for
Licensing” (See Note1 below).
 MP2i (East Leake) - the site is located in close proximity to Severn Trent assets it may be
necessary to discuss these assets to prevent any detrimental impacts to the Severn Trent
network. The site does not fall in a groundwater asset Source Protection Zone therefore it is
unlikely to pose a risk to groundwater assets. CAMS data are not available from the EA for
this site.
 MP2e (Cromwell) – This site is indicated to be in close proximity to Severn Trent surface
water assets. The site does not fall in a groundwater asset Source Protection Zone therefore
it is unlikely to pose a risk to groundwater assets. CAMS data are not available from the EA
for this site.
 MP3c (Scrooby Top) - The site falls within a groundwater SPZ 3 therefore it may pose a
risk to groundwater assets. This site falls within the Idle & Torne EA CAMS area and is also
situated within a sub-area designated as ‘Water Not Available for Licensing” (See Note1
below).
4
 MP2j (Scrooby) - The site falls within a groundwater SPZ 3 therefore it may pose a risk to
groundwater assets. This site falls within the Idle & Torne EA CAMS area and is also
situated within a sub-area designated as ‘Water Not Available for Licensing” (See Note1
below).
 MP2b (Finningley) - The site is located within a groundwater SPZ 3 therefore it may pose a
risk to groundwater assets. This site falls within the Idle & Torne EA CAMS area and is also
situated within a sub-area designated as ‘Water Not Available for Licensing” (See Note1
below).
 MP2d (Bawtry Road) - The site falls within a groundwater SPZ 3 therefore it may pose a
risk to groundwater assets. This site falls within the Idle & Torne EA CAMS area and is also
situated within a sub-area designated as ‘Water Not Available for Licensing” (See Note1
below).
 MP6a (Kirton) - The site falls within a groundwater SPZ 3 therefore it may pose a risk to
groundwater assets. This site falls within the Idle & Torne EA CAMS area and is also
situated within a sub-area designated as ‘Water Not Available for Licensing” (See Note1
below).
South Muskham Archaeological Centre:
 DM6 – The allocation around South Muskham is indicated to be in close proximity to Severn
Trent surface water assets. The site does not fall in a groundwater asset Source Protection
Zone therefore it is unlikely to pose a risk to groundwater assets. CAMS data are not
available from the EA for this site.
Note1 – The specific quarry sites designated above fall within an Environment Agency CAMS subareas
which are marked as either “(Ground) Water Not Available for Licensing” or “Restricted
(Ground) Water Available”. In such areas the EA is unlikely to grant new consumptive abstraction
licences. Even in “(Ground) Water Available for Licensing” areas the EA would request that the
WFD ‘No-Deterioration” principles are followed.
Please keep us informed when your plans are further developed when we will be able to offer more
detailed comments and advice.
For your information we have set out some general guidelines that may be useful to you.
Position Statement
As a water company we have an obligation to provide water supplies and sewage treatment
capacity for domestic flows from future development. It is important for us to work collaboratively
with Local Planning Authorities to provide relevant assessments of the impacts of future
developments. For outline proposals we are able to provide general comments. Once detailed
developments and site specific locations are confirmed by local councils, we are able to provide
more specific comments and modelling of the network if required. For most developments we do not
foresee any particular issues that would prevent the supply of water or sewerage. Where we
consider there may be an issue we would discuss in further detail with the Local Planning Authority.
Where quarries are proposed to be developed or extended, we do not anticipate there will be any
significant need to supply water or sewerage due to the nature of development. If however you
anticipate that there will be a requirement for Severn Trent to provide these services it is strongly
advised that you contact us to ensure that capacity can be made available at the appropriate time.
5
Sewage Strategy
Once detailed plans are available and we have modelled the additional capacity, in areas where sufficient capacity is not currently available and we have sufficient confidence that developments will be built, we will complete necessary improvements to provide the capacity. We will ensure that our assets have no adverse effect on the environment and that we provide appropriate levels of treatment at each of our sewage treatment works.
Surface Water and Sewer Flooding
Whilst we do not anticipate a significant increase in impermeable area, it may be necessary to pump water out of the minerals working area. Severn Trent would anticipate that this will be managed appropriately onsite and discharged through sustainable outfall, without the need to utilise public sewerage network. It is however anticipated that sewerage connections may be required for site offices and welfare facilities.
Groundwater
While most of the proposed locations do not appear to constitute a significant risk to water quality of our assets, there are a few that may constitute risks to groundwater assets. Severn Trent strongly recommends that all appropriate EA guidance is followed with reference to site management and any future abstraction of water to ensure the WFD ‘No-Deterioration’ Principles are followed.
Water Quality
Good quality river water and groundwater is vital for provision of good quality drinking water. We work closely with the Environment Agency and local farmers to ensure that water quality of supplies are not impacted by our or others operations. The Environment Agency’s Source Protection Zone (SPZ) and Safe Guarding Zone policy should provide guidance on development. Any proposals should take into account the principles of the Water Framework Directive and River Basin Management Plan for the Severn River basin unit as prepared by the Environment Agency.
Water Supply
Whilst it is not anticipated that water supply will be required for quarrying operations, we do anticipate some water supply needs for domestic activities associated with site offices and welfare facilities.
We would not anticipate capacity problems within the urban areas of our network, any issues can be addressed through reinforcing our network. However, the ability to support significant development in the rural areas is likely to have a greater impact and require greater reinforcement to accommodate greater demands.
We hope this information has been useful to you and we look forward in hearing from you in the near future.

Publication Version of the Nottinghamshire Mineral Plan

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Publication version of the
Nottinghamshire Minerals Local Plan.

The Environment Agency supports the publication of this Local Plan.

The Environment Agency is satisfied that the Local Plan is legally complaint.

The Environment Agency is satisfied that the Local Plan is sound.

We welcome the comments made in the responses from the council to the draft mineral plan about the changes between minimised and mitigated. We accept the reason that minimised has been kept within the wording.

SP3 Climate Change
We welcome this policy inclusion within the Mineral Plan and the requirements for minimising the risks upon climate change. We had previously asked that all mineral development should reduce, or as a minimum, cause no increases in their impact on the causes of climate change in our response to the draft mineral plan and would reiterate this for inclusion.

We also asked that water resources and water quality are added into part c) of the policy as restoration could offer future opportunities to so support the adaptation to climate change.

SP5 – The Built, Historic and Natural Environment
We previously highlighted the change of date for the Water Framework Directive (WFD), to 2027. We note that this wording doesn’t appear to be mentioned now within the document.

Water Resources Information
We have previously highlighted the changes to water abstraction regulations (new authorisations) that now requires abstractions, such as dewatering, that were previously exempt from permitting, to be brought into the permitting process, and now require an abstraction licence.

We reiterate this point and highlight that a number of sites previously mentioned will have difficulties obtaining new abstraction licences for water due to these changes, which could impact upon the viability of the sites. We wish to reiterate this non planning matter to the Local Planning Authority (LPA) for their consideration. Recent mineral applicants within these closed catchemnts, where planning permission has been granted, have subsequently come to the Environment Agency to discuss the requirements for a permit application. The Environment Agency permitting team have started the process of advising on the environmental permit process highlighting than an abstraction licence would be unlikely to be granted, however the EA have advised that some options, including neutral water balance options such as water reinjection or trading the rights to abstract groundwater should be considered.

Policy MP6: Brick Clay Provision
We note that the site area previously identified in the draft has now been removed.

Policy DM2: Water Resources and Flood Risk
We previously made comments about the layout and the wording of this particular policy. For information we reiterated that consideration was needed to whether the policy should be split up into separate ones, one for water resources, and the other for flooding. We also mentioned that as water quality is mentioned within the policy, then water quality should be included in the title of this policy.

In section 5.31 we previously mentioned that we would query that mineral extraction can increase flood risk elsewhere. We would reiterate that no development, no matter how temporary should not increase flood risk elsewhere as per the requirements of the National Planning Policy Framework.

Policy DM3: Agricultural land and soil quality
We welcome the inclusion of this policy.

Policy DM4: Protection and Enhancement of Biodiversity and Geodiversity
We welcome point 3 of this policy stating that biodiversity will be enhanced. Biodiversity net gain is a key matter to consider for any future mineral developments.

Policy DM12: Restoration, aftercare and after-use
We did ask that detailed information for flood risk and possible reductions in flood risk are included where full restoration plans are not provided.

Site Allocations
We have previously highlighted our comments on the proposed sites within the Mineral Plan. As per our comments relating to water resources and the new authorisations we would reiterate that a number of these sites will find it unlikely that any application for an abstraction licence will be approved. This risk needs to be understood by the Mineral Planning Authority and quarry operators and the permit requirements for each site need to be understood at the same time as, or before planning is applied for. We would reiterate that at the very least parallel tracking of both the planning and permitting processes should be undertaken, or even the permitting process be undertaken beforehand. This requirement should be added into the site briefs.

Yours sincerely

See attachment