iaqm minerals guidance launch introduction - claire holman

AGENDA

• Introduction - Claire Holman, Brook Cottage Consultants

• Source-pathway-receptor approach Jon Pullen, RPS

• Site conditions Hugh Datson, Dustscan

• PM10 and dust reduction with distance Ian Stone, Advance

Environmental

• Determining ‘Residual Source Emissions’ Srinivas Srimath,

RSK

• Planning inquiry decisions Mark Dawson, Wardell

Armstrong

• Closing remarks

Brook Cottage Consultants 1

IAQM Mineral Planning Guidance

Dr Claire Holman

Chair: IAQM Minerals Working Group

IAQM Meeting

24 May 2016

London

2Brook Cottage Consultants

New IAQM guidance


Scope

• Sites extracting solid minerals

• May include secondary aggregate processing

• Specifically for planning not environmental permit

applications

• Primarily for England


Photo: Rachel McHale. SLR

Consulting Ltd

Approach

• Aims to:

– promote good quality assessments provide framework

– fill gap left by withdrawal of MP2

– supplement advice given in national Planning Practice Guidance

• To use the Source-pathway-receptor relationship

• Otherwise non prescriptive


Assessing impacts

Mineral impacts

• Difficult to quantify

• Little robust data of

impacts

• Requires knowledge of

site operations &

effectiveness of mitigation

measures


Photo: Ian Stone, Advance Environmental

nPPG - Key stages to a dust

assessment

1. Establish baseline conditions of the existing dust climate around the site of the proposed operations;

2. identify site activities that could lead to dust emissions without mitigation;

3. identify site parameters which may increase potential impacts from dust;

4. recommend mitigation measures, including modification of site design;

5. make proposals to monitor and report dust emissions to ensure compliance with appropriate environmental standards and to enable an effective response to complaints.


IAQM approach

• Assessments to use

Source – pathway – receptor model

• Screening: Where there are no receptors near to a mineral site there

will be no significant effect.

– Distance based screening criteria for dust disamenity

– Distance + background for PM10

• Assessment approach not prescriptive

• Example provided evolved from Alex Grant’s approach

• Modelling not generally required


Screening – dust disamenity


Screening - PM10

National Planning Practice Guidance IAQM

• Where receptors within 1 km and background PM10

concentration is less than 17 µg/m3


Figure 1: Site Assessment Flow Chart[1]

Paragraph: 032 Reference ID: 27-032-20140306

http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/minerals1_033.jpg

http://planningguidance.planningportal.gov.uk/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/minerals1_033.jpg

Minerals dust assessment -

Content

• Existing PM10 concentration and dust deposition rates (where available)

• Location of receptors and sensitivities to PM10 / dust

• Dust sources associated with the proposed development

• Control/mitigation measures

• A prediction of the likely PM10 and dust impacts and resulting effects (on health, amenity, and/or ecology) at relevant sensitive receptors:

– likely magnitude of dust emissions (after mitigation)

– meteorological characteristics at the site;

– dispersion and dilution to the receptors, taking into account distance, orientation, local terrain and features, and other relevant factors;

– the sensitivity of the receptors to disamenity, health and/or ecology effects; and

– any likely cumulative interactions


Dust disamenity assessment steps

Step 1: Describe site characteristics and baseline conditions

Step 2: Estimate dust impact risk (with mitigation)

Step 3: Estimate likely magnitude of effect


Photo: Ian Stone, Advance Environmental

Assessment conclusion

• Assessment provides overall disamenity and, where required, the

ecological and health effects, at individual receptors

• Conclusion must be drawn of overall effect Judgement must be

used to determine effect is either “significant” or “not significant”


Photo: Hugh Datson, DustScan Ltd

Consultation: substantive

comments


Issue Response

Short term PM10 not included Lack of data available

PM2.5 not included Mineral site generally produce coarse

PM > PM2.5

The graphs will be used as a proxy for

an assessmentClearly stated this is not to be done

Ecological receptors not the same as in

the IAQM construction guidance

background PM10 screening criteria

Now consistent

Unclear how to estimate PM10 process

contributionNow referred to Appendix 5

Review

• Guidance will be reviewed in 12-18 months in

light of the experience of using it

• IAQM members will be asked to comment


Working group members

• Hugh Datson, DustScan

• Mark Dawson, Wardell Armstrong

• Claire Holman, Brook Cottage Consultants (Chair)

• Rachel McHale, SLR

• Jon Pullen, RPS

• Srinivas Srimath, RSK

• Matt Stoaling, Isopleth

• Ian Stone, Advance Environmental

• Penny Wilson, Air Quality Consultants


AGENDA

• Introduction - Claire Holman, Brook Cottage Consultants

• Source-pathway-receptor approach Jon Pullen, RPS

• Site conditions Hugh Datson, Dustscan

• PM10 and dust reduction with distance Ian Stone, Advance

Environmental

• Determining ‘Residual Source Emissions’ Srinivas Srimath,

RSK

• Planning inquiry decisions Mark Dawson, Wardell

Armstrong

• Closing remarks
