EIA and WFD for major infrastructure projectsSteve Anderton, Greg Whitfield and Mark Barnett

IAIA Symposium, Lincoln

1st Sept 2016

Presentation overview

► About us

► The Water Framework Directive in England and Wales

► WFD as a coherent framework for EIA of the water environment

► Application to nationally significant infrastructure projects (NSIPs)

► The Amec Foster Wheeler approach to water EIA for NSIPs

► Application of the approach

► Concluding comments

2

Amec Foster Wheeler and Water EIA

Key Sectors:

Technical areas:

3

Waste

Hydrology and surface

water quality

Hydrogeology and

groundwater quality

Hydroecology Flood risk assessment

Richborough Connection

► a 20km new overhead line in Kent;

► Construction access with multiple watercourse crossings in low-lying area with dense drainage networks.

North West Coastal Connections

► ~140km of new OHL/underground cable in Cumbria/Lancashire;

► Crosses many major watercourses, some of which are very sensitive receptors (SACs); Morecambe Bay tunnel.

Moorside Nuclear Power Station

► Major construction project across main site and multiple, dispersed AD sites;

► Sensitive groundwater, surface freshwater and marine receptors;

► Operational phase abstractions and discharges, most notably associated with cooling water system.

4

A selection of our NSIP projects…

“a comprehensive river basin management planning system to help protect and improve the ecological health of our rivers, lakes, estuaries and coastal and groundwaters."

► River Basin Management Plans for large scale River Basin Districts (2nd cycle 2015)

► ‘Water Bodies’ are the basic units for assessment of current environmental quality, and for definition of future objectives

► Surface water bodies - ‘discrete and significant elements’ – rivers, canals, lakes, estuaries or coastal waters.

► Ecological and chemical status reported => overall status

► Artificial or heavily modified water bodies –ecological potential reported

► Groundwater bodies – ‘distinct volume within one or more aquifers’.

► Quantitative and chemical status reported.

5

The WFD in the UK

► Water bodies are hydrologically

coherent geographical entities

covering all aspects of water

environment:

► Ideal basis for identification of

receptors for EIA

► Water body status provides a

holistic overview of the current

actual and predicted future state

of the water environment:

► Baseline overview

► Basis for assigning receptor

sensitivity

► Promotes consistency of

approach across large projects.

6

WFD waterbodies and EIA

Assessment of effects against three classes

of water environment receptor:

1. Aquatic environment

WFD water bodies

Other protected water-dependent environments

2. Water resources

Surface water abstractions and their

associated catchments

Groundwater abstractions and their associated

aquifers

3. Flood risk

Property

Infrastructure

7

Our approach to water EIA in a WFD framework

Infrastructure projects of strategic importance

at the national scale relating to energy,

transport, water, waste water and waste

(Planning Act 2008):

► Large spatial scale / spatially dispersed or

linear in nature;

► Major construction projects – potential for

significant construction-phase water

environment effects;

► Some types of NSIP (e.g. power stations; water

infrastructure) could have potentially significant

operational phase effects too.

8

NSIPs and water EIA

► Standard source-pathway-receptor approach to identifying potential effects

► Standard matrix-based approach:significance of effect = receptor sensitivity x magnitude of change

► Waterbodies are standard unit for aquatic environment receptor identification

► Receptor sensitivity is then determined as a function of relevant elements of WFD status/potential (current or future predicted), taking into account presence of water-dependent protected areas.

► Magnitude of change acting on receptors is evaluated on the basis of potential for deterioration of WFD status/potential or achievement of objectives, taking into account the following factors: spatial scale of water body versus project activity; proximity of project activity to WFD ‘blue line’; duration and reversibility of effect.

9

Assessment of effects within a WFD framework

► Compliance with WFD could be demonstrated via an ES that uses WFD as its basis for assessment of water environment effects;

► However, ESs are generally sub-divided into a number of discipline-based topics, which can make a coherent overall assessment of WFD compliance difficult to present.

► Also, assessment of issues that might prevent achievement of future WFD objectives difficult to evaluate in an EIA context.

► Hence the need for a standalone WFD compliance assessment.

► However, use of WFD as the basis for EIA facilitates production of the WFD compliance assessment and ensures consistency of approach and findings between both studies.

10

EIA and WFD Compliance Assessments

► Large scale projects – greater potential for deterioration that could be

justified at the water body scale – greater potential for A4.7 – greater

potential for impacts on one water body that could cause deterioration

in another (A4.8).

► Potential for investment in improvement works to offset/compensate for

WFD deterioration?

► Different situation to smaller developments that cover one or, at

maximum, a handful of water bodies.

► Most NSIPs cover river, estuarine, coastal, lake and ground water

bodies. Complex assessments! Connectivity between water body types

to consider?

► Current regulatory guidance is not sufficient to deal with projects at this

scale. Expert judgement is required, both from developers and

regulators, and care/caution is needed given the DCO process which

means that WFD conclusions may need to be defended legally.

11

NSIPs and WFD… A different picture

Concluding comments

► WFD offers a coherent and comprehensive framework for water EIA for

major infrastructure projects.

► Our approach has been developed on several NSIP projects and has

been looked on favourably by statutory consultees.

► Best-practice guidance on approach from regulatory or professional

bodies may be of benefit to all involved in DCO process.

12