Supplementary memorandum submitted by
Greenpeace
ENERGY NATIONAL POLICY STATEMENTS—POTENTIAL
COMPLICATIONS AROUND THE SALE OF EdF LAND AND THE OUTCOME OF ANY
PLANNING PERMISSION FOR NEW BUILD AT A VARIETY OF SITES
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1 In its oral evidence to the Energy and
Climate Change Committee, Greenpeace mentioned the problem of
dealing with the many decisions, consultations and processes which
overlap or foreshadow crucial decisions in relation to proposed
new nuclear power stations. One such agreement which may have
implications for the proposed NPS and the remit of the IPC is
the government agreement reached with EdF when it took over British
Energy. In our view the agreement is clearly of relevance to a
national policy statement which is site specific. Greenpeace offered
to submit further evidence on this point to the Committee (evidence,
response to Q 243).
2. EDF GOVERNMENT
AGREEMENT DEAL
ON LAND
SALES
2.1 In September 2008 the Government agreed
to the takeover of British Energy (BE) by EdF. The agreement contained
undertakings on land sales by EdF. The undertakings were linked
to planning consent for two EPRs each at Sizewell and Hinkley.
The relationship between the EdF/government agreement, the NNPS
and the IPC's work has not been mentioned or discussed in the
NNPS or other relevant documents. There is no discussion on how
delays or refusals on applications for Sizewell and Hinkley may
have an impact on potential development at other proposed new
build sites because of the terms of the agreement. The most relevant
paragraph of deal between EdF and government is set out below1
(further paragraphs are set out at Appendix 1):
3.2.3
— In particular, EdF will only be obliged
to sell the land at Wylfa detailed in paragraph 3.2.1 if it is
reasonably satisfied that it will be able to build two EPRs at
each of Sizewell and Hinkley Point.
— EdF will be obliged to sell the land
at Bradwell detailed in paragraph 3.2.1 above only if it goes
on to secure planning consent for two EPRs at Sizewell.
— If EdF then goes on to secure planning
consent for two EPRs at Hinkley Point, it will be obliged to sell
land identified as potentially suitable for New Nuclear Build
at either Heysham or Dungeness (HM Government will select which
plot is to be sold) to a party chosen by EDF (provided that party
is a credible nuclear operator). (emphasis added)
2.2 Wylfa—Sizewell and Hinkley and Bradwell
2.2.1 From 3.2.3 above: In particular, EdF
will only be obliged to sell the land at Wylfa detailed in paragraph
3.2.1 if it is reasonably satisfied that it will be able to build
two EPRs at each of Sizewell and Hinkley Point.
2.2.2 It is not known what EdF considers
to be "reasonably satisfied"? Does its definition of
"reasonably satisfied" cover planning consent for EPRs
(and associated facilities eg spent fuel stores) at Sizewell and
Hinkley, or does it also extend to essential associated infrastructure
such as new transmission lines? For a map on this see New Civil
Engineer.2 It has been reported in a respected industry journal
(see Appendix 2) that the ownership of EdF land next to NDA land
is already causing delay in the NDA receiving monies from the
sale of its land—that's because the sale of the Wylfa land
is dependent on EdF getting permission to build two reactors at
Hinkley and Sizewell. The article also states the sale of Wylfa
is dependent on there been no legal challenges to the NPS covering
Sizewell, Hinkley and Bradwell.
2.3 Sizewell and Bradwell
2.3.1 From 3.2.3 above: EdF will be obliged
to sell the land at Bradwell detailed in paragraph 3.2.1 above
only if it goes on to secure planning consent for two EPRs at
Sizewell.
2.3.2 It is not known precisely what EdF
considers "secure planning consent" for two EPRs at
Sizewell (this is different from "reasonably satisfied"
as per the agreement on Wylfa). Questions arise as to whether,
even if the IPC gives planning permission for reactors at Sizewell,
if EdF will accept that as a firm basis for the sale of Bradwell
even if it might not have secured planning consent on associated
infrastructure eg for new grid transmission? EdF bought the NDA
land at Bradwell during the NDA's first round of land sales. It
now wholly owns the area for potential new build.
2.4 Hinkley—Heysham and Dungeness
2.4.1 From 3.2.3 above: If EdF then goes on
to secure planning consent for two EPRs at Hinkley Point, it will
be obliged to sell land identified as potentially suitable for
New Nuclear Build at either Heysham or Dungeness (HM Government
will select which plot is to be sold) to a party chosen by EdF
(provided that party is a credible nuclear operator).
2.4.2 This condition now no longer applies
as the EU Competition Commission, in clearing the BE/EdF deal,
has as one of its conditions that EdF is to "unconditionally
divest a site potentially suitable for building a new nuclear
power station located at either Dungeness or Heysham in the UK
at the purchaser's choice and to end one of the merged entity's
three grid connection agreements with the National Grid at Hinkley
Point in the UK."3 There are question marks over whether
Dungeness, not currently recommended as a new build site in the
draft list in the Nuclear NPS, has effectively been ruled out
as a site attractive to other potential new build developers.
3. IPC LIST OF
PROJECTS FOR
CONSIDERATION
3.1 The original IPC list of 12 projects
for consideration included only the applications for new nuclear
reactors at Sizewell and Hinkley. The original IPC list and its
granting of applications based on the Sizewell and Hinkley alone
may have allowed everything to run subsequently and "free
up" sites as per the EdF/government deal. However, the joint
RWE-E.On venture, Horizon Nuclear Power, has added Oldbury and
Wylfa to the list of projects the IPC might/should also begin
considering from the start of its operations on 1st March 2010.
The most recent IPC list of projects for submission of applications
shows that the timing of the applications for some of the reactors
looks to be delayed eg some may not happen until Nov 2011.4, 5
4. QUESTIONS
FOR THE
COMMITTEE TO
CONSIDER
— Has government had discussions with EdF
over the potential implication for any delays to its plans at
Sizewell and Hinkley and how these might impact on the sale of
land as per the agreement with EdF?
— Has government had discussions with Horizon
over the potential implications for any delays in planning consent
at Sizewell and Hinkley and how these might impact on its plans
at Wylfa?
— Does the EdF / government agreement effectively
pre-empt and possibly invalidate the whole NNPS and associated
NPSs (ie Overarching Energy and Electricity Networks)?
— Which government Minister will make the
decision on matters relating to the agreement with EdF?
— If changes are made to the IPC's powers,
and it is left to make recommendations to the Secretary of State,
who will then make final decisions on applications and what will
the position be if the Secretary of State has to:
— Designate the sites list (under the NNPS)?
— Make the final planning decisions on
sites?
— What are the likely knock-on effects
at other sites if Sizewell and/or Hinkley applications are not
granted?
— Given government policy on new build
and the potential direction from a designated NPS, what powers
will the IPC really have if it chooses to turn down an application
at Sizewell or Hinkley—particularly as there is already
an agreement for EPRs to be built at these sites?
— What is the potential impact on the government
if:
— The IPC decides against an application
for new build at Sizewell or Hinkley?
— If the relevant SECRETARY OF STATE decides
against an application for new build at Sizewell or Hinkley?
— How long can EdF delay in selling Heysham
or Dungeness and not fall foul of its obligations under the EU
Competition Commission clearance for its takeover of BE?
— Does the EdF/government agreement pre-empt
and override the powers of the regulators in forcing them to license
EPRs at Sizewell and Hinkley?
— What are the implications if, for some
reason, the regulators delay approving the EPR but sign off on
the AP1000?
— What if the AP1000 design is approved
ahead at other sites before the EPR is approved?
— If EdF cannot build EPRs is it still
obliged to undertake the land sales as per the agreement? Could
sites sales be held up because of the reactor technology failing
to be licensed in time?
January 2010
| 
