Norbord Ltd - OSB3 Mill

July 2014

Environmental StatementVolume 1: Non-Technical Summary (NTS)

1Volume 1 - Non-Technical Summary

1 IntroductionAn Environmental Statement (ES) has been prepared to accompany a planning application by Norbord Ltd. (Norbord) (“the Applicant”) to re-develop and expand their existing manufacturing facilities at Dalcross, near Inverness. The ES reports on the potential for signifi cant environmental effects as a result of the Proposed Development.

This document provides a Non-Technical Summary (NTS) of the ES.

1.1 Purpose of the NTSThe aim of the NTS is to summarise the content and main fi ndings of the Environmental Statement (ES) in a clear and concise manner to assist the public in understanding the potential environmental effects of the Proposed Development. The full ES (Volume 2 Main Report; Volume 3 Figures; and Volume 4 Technical Appendices) provides a more detailed description of the Proposed Development and the fi ndings of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) process.

1.2 Viewing the NTSThe full ES, together with the application for planning consent and associated documents, will be available for viewing at the addresses below:

Location Opening TimesThe Highland CouncilInverness Planning and Building Standards Offi ce,2nd Floor,Kintail House,Beechwood Business Park,Inverness,IV2 3BW

Monday to Friday 9am-5pm

The Highland Council,HeadquartersGlenurquhart RoadInvernessIV3 5NX

Monday to Friday 9am-5pm

An electronic version of the planning submission documents, including the ES, will be available to download from The Highland Council’s (THC’s) online public access planning portal (http://www.highland.gov.uk/info/180/planning_-_applications_warrants_and_certifi cates/143/planning_permission/6).

Copies of this ES are available on CD at a cost of £10 by writing to ENVIRON, 7 Walker Street, Edinburgh, EH3 7JY or email UKEdinburghAdmin@environcorp.com. Paper copies of the ES are available at printing cost plus postage. Should you require a paper copy of the ES please contact ENVIRON at the above address to request a quote.

1.3 Commenting on the ApplicationIf you would like to comment on the application, comments can be made in writing to THC below:

Inverness Planning and Building Standards Offi ce, 2nd Floor, Kintail House, Beechwood Business Park, Inverness, IV2 3BW.

Comments can be made online through the planning portal at http://www.highland.gov.uk/info/180/planning_-_applications_warrants_and_certifi cates/143/planning_permission/6

The consultation period for the application will be open to written representations for a period of no less than four weeks. The timescales for representations will be advertised by The Highland Council in the local press.

1.4 About the ApplicantNorbord (the Applicant) is a leading global manufacturer of engineered wood-based panel products with assets of £590 million. Norbord operates in Canada, USA and Europe.

Norbord Europe operates from three locations in the UK; South Molton in Devon where it manufactures furniture; Cowie, near Stirling, which manufactures MDF and particle board; and Inverness, which manufactures oriented strand board (OSB).

The Applicant is the third largest producer of OSB in the world. It has been supplying products to Europe for over 40 years and has a strong customer base, built on a reputation for service and delivery, consistent quality and competitive pricing.

Volume 1 - Non-Technical Summary2

The Applicant’s Genk plant in Belgium also manufactures OSB.

The Applicant has approximately 2,030 employees globally of which approximately 900 are in Europe and approximately 150 of which are directly in employed at the existing Inverness facility.

In Europe, the Applicant produces in excess of 1.2 million m3 of wood panels annually with a turnover of circa £225 million.

1.5 The Planning ProcessThe Applicant has agreed a planning application strategy with THC in which two separate planning applications will be submitted for the Site;

An enabling works application (EWA) was submitted in early May 2014. The Enabling Works (EW) would comprise preparatory construction activities on the expansion area of the site (the area to the east of the existing mill) including partial clearance of existing structures that are present on the expansion site, and earthworks including; site levelling, initial landscaping, initial hardstandings, initial foundations, existing access road re-alignment and certain preliminary drainage works. The purpose of the EW is to prepare the Site for the main development proposals which will be covered under a separate planning application. Planning was granted for the EW on 24th June 20141 and works are due to commence on Site in August 2014.

The second application for planning consent for the re-development and expansion of the plant will be submitted in August 2014. This application covers the construction of new buildings and plant on the expansion area of the Site and the decommissioning of certain elements of the existing OSB production. The Applicant recognises that this planning application is an EIA application under the Environmental Impact Assessment (Scotland) Regulations 2011 (the Regulations) and will therefore be submitting an ES in support of this application.

1 Planning reference number: 14/01763/FUL

2 Site Location and SurroundingsThe application Site is located near Dalcross, approximately 6 km east of Inverness (Grid Reference: 275516, 849741). The Site covers an area of approximately 25.53 ha and comprises the existing OSB mill and the expansion area directly adjacent to the east of the existing mill (Refer to Figure 1: Site Location).

An artifi cial pond for irrigation purposes is located in the northeastern corner of the Site, artifi cial drainage ditches feed into it. As the pond is used primarily for drainage purposes there are no surface water discharge points. A second pond lies across the Site boundary adjacent to the fore mentioned artifi cial pond.

Primary access to the Site is from the south, where an access road approximately 150 m long is taken off the A96 to the existing mill Site entrance. It is proposed that access to the expansion Site would continue to be taken via this road and then via an existing local track requiring some extension, realignment and re-surfacing to be carried out as part of the EW. No alterations would be expected to be required to the primary access road or the junction with the A96 for the enabling works.

The surrounding area is predominantly fl at and low lying farmland with areas of improved and semi-improved grassland. Areas of mixed woodland are located to the north, east and south of the application Site.

Buildings of one or two houses located together are dispersed throughout the surrounding area. The nearest residential buildings are situated approximately 200 m south west of the existing Site boundary, on the A96. The small village of Tornagrain is the nearest larger settlement, located approximately 950 m east of the application Site boundary at its closest point. The Tornagrain masterplan2 has received planning consent and has been considered a receptor in the EIA process.

The Site is immediately bounded to the:

North by the Inverness to Elgrin railway line;

East by grass-covered farmland and a small pond;

South by grass-covered farmland; and

West by a single residential property and further grass covered farmland.

2 Planning Reference Number: 09/00038/OUTIN

Volume 1 - Non-Technical Summary 3Figure 1: Site Location

Expansion Area of Site

Site Boundary

Volume 1 - Non-Technical Summary4

3 Alternatives and DesignAs part of the EIA process alternatives to the fi nal Proposed Development have to be provided. In the case of this development the following alternatives were considered:

Alternative Sites – The Applicant considered alternative sites both within the UK and within the United States. These alternative sites were not taken forward for further consideration. Sites within the UK would not be cost effective and alternative UK locations with appropriate raw material and market links would be diffi cult to locate. Sites within the United States were not considered further as the OSB market within the UK is currently the strongest in the world, as such it makes business sense for the Applicant to keep their business where market forces are the strongest.

Alternative Layouts – During the Site design process alternative layouts for the Site were considered. Alternative layouts included the different siting of buildings and process plant closer to the southern Site boundary. This site layout option was not considered further to ensure reduced visual and noise impacts upon local sensitive receptors.

Alternative Plant – During the initial Site design process approximately 120 process plant suppliers were identifi ed to the Applicant. During the design process this number was reduced to approximately 20 for consideration. The plant chosen for fi nal design purposes is that which provides the lowest operational noise levels and the best environmental abatement technologies available to ensure the Site operates with the Best Available Technologies (BAT).

The fi nal alternative considered was the ‘do nothing’ scenario. The existing mill has already surpassed its 25 year design lifespan. It would therefore be expected that the existing mill would be likely to close within future years. The existing mill currently supports approximately 150 direct and 350 indirect jobs within the Highlands, these would therefore be lost if the mill were to close. This would not only have an impact upon the current Inverness mill, but also Norbord operations elsewhere within Scotland. The Applicant currently operates using an integrated distribution model that depends on production from both of its Scottish plants.

4 Description of the Proposed DevelopmentThe Proposed Development would double production capacity at Site, ultimately increasing production to approximately 750,000 m3/yr. The Proposed Development would be delivered in four phases as outlined below.

4.1 Timescales of CompletionDevelopment completion is expected to take between three and 10 years. For the purposes of the ES the ‘worst case’ timescale has been assumed as development completion in 2024.

Phase 1During Phase 1 the majority of OSB3 elements will be constructed including the following:

Conversion of the existing Scotbark building to accommodate a new wood room (debarking drums and fl akers);

Construction of a new heat plant (initially comprising a new thermal heat raising bicomass burner to raise thermal energy for the drier (hot air) and press (thermal oil);

One dryer, one new WESP3 and a new stack designed for the later addition of a second dryer/WESP;

New conveyors to transfer dried wood fl akes to the new screens which would be housed under a canopy;

Further conveyors to transfer the screened fl akes to the blender area;

Construction of two new buildings to house respectively: the blenders; a new forming line and continuous press. Adjacent to the press/forming hall would be a “lean-to” two-storey structure containing a control room, open plan offi ces, welfare facilities, thermal oil room, hydraulic room, switch room and other ancillary rooms; and

The fi nishing end will be installed in the existing production buildings in a phased approach as existing equipment is removed.

3 A WESP (Wet Electrostatic Precipitator) is a highly effi cient fi ltration device that removes fi ne particles, like dust and smoke and soluble organics (through the wet scrubber section), from a fl owing gas using the force of an induced electrostatic charge.

Volume 1 - Non-Technical Summary 5

Phase 2During Phase 2, the production and fi nishing end of production line 1 (OSB1) would be decommissioned and the production on production line 3 (OSB3) would increase. The existing wood preparation facilities, including the existing three dryers, would continue to be used for wood fl ake preparation and the existing three dryers would continue to discharge air emissions via the existing WESP and stack. During Phase 2 both the existing WESP and existing stack, and the new WESP and new combined stack operate in parallel.

Phase 3During Phase 3 a second new WESP would be installed and connected to the new combined stack. Air emissions from the existing three dryers would then be transferred by new pipe infrastructure to the second new WESP and combined stack for discharge. The existing WESP and existing stack would be decommissioned.

Phase 4During Phase 4, the original three dryers would be decommissioned and replaced by a second new heat raising plant and single dryer. A new fl aker would also be installed at this time. Subsequently production on OSB3 would continue to gradually increase year on year until a maximum production output of 750,000 m3/annum was achieved.

5 Construction and Operational Management

5.1 ConstructionThe construction period for the Proposed Development will be approximately 18 months (excluding the EW). The EW (site preparation activities) are expected to commence in August 2014. Planning permission for the EW was granted on 24th June 2014.

Construction work hours to accommodate the Proposed Development would be a matter for the construction contractor but would likely be from 08:00 to 19:00 Monday to Friday, 08:00 to 13:00 Saturday and no work on Sunday.

5.2 Environmental ManagementDuring construction the Site would operate under a Construction Environmental Management Plan (CEMP). The aim of which would be to provide working methods and best practice measures that would aid in avoiding, minimising and controlling potential signifi cant adverse effects on the environment.

5.3 Construction TransportThe existing Site is accessed via a priority junction with the A96 which is provided with a ghost island right turning lane.

There will be a short term temporary increase in HGV movements during the construction period. Construction traffi c will be managed under a Construction Traffi c Management Plan (CTMP), this will set out key routes and procedures that all construction traffi c must adhere to, to minimise an impact from construction traffi c. The CTMP will be agreed in consultation with THC and the local roads authority and implemented by the lead contractor.

5.4 Operations ManagementThe Site currently operates under a PPC Permit which controls emissions including air, noise water and waste. The new plant will continue to operate under a PPC permit. This will be via a series of variations. The Site operates under an internal Environmental Management System (EMS).

OSB Final Product

Volume 1 - Non-Technical Summary6

6 Potential Environmental EffectsThe design of the Proposed Development has been considered carefully to avoid key areas of environmental sensitivity and impact. This NTS presents a summary of the key potential environmental impacts.

6.1 Air QualityAn air quality assessment was required to be undertaken for the Proposed Development as a new stack (which will be an equivalent height to the existing stack) would be included within development proposals. The new stack will operate in parallel with the existing stack for a short interim period (the ‘worst-case’ operating scenario), until such time as the existing stack is decommissioned. Prior to discharge via the stack, the exhaust gases from the process would pass through a fi ltration device called a wet electrostatic precipitator (WESP) to remove fi ne particles, like dust and smoke.

The air quality assessment considered impacts at sensitive receptors, particularly residential properties within a 2 km radius of the Proposed Development. All residential settlements between a 2 and 5 km radius of the Proposed Development and at all ecological receptors within a 10 km radius of the proposed Site were considered for assessment. This included 28 residential receptors and 22 ecological receptors.

The following are the pollutants of concern for assessment as these are considered to be the main pollutants released from the Proposed Development:

Oxides of Nitrogen;

Particulates, including PM10 and PM2.5; and

Formaldehyde.

The pollutants were assessed against the objective limits as set out within the Air Quality (Scotland) Regulations 2010.

The modelled environmental concentrations are predicted to meet the relevant air quality objectives or environmental assessment levels at all human health receptors.

The potential for signifi cant odour effects to arise is considered negligible.

The potential for the Proposed Development to give rise to signifi cant effects at ecological receptors is also considered negligible.

There are no signifi cant residual effects from the operational phase of the Proposed Development.

6.2 NoiseA baseline noise survey was carried out at eight receptors within a 1 km radius of the Proposed Development. These receptors represented the reasonable worst case exposure to noise impacts. The location of these receptors is shown in Figure 2.1.

Figure 2.1: Noise Receptor Locations

Volume 1 - Non-Technical Summary 7

The predicted noise emissions were modelled and compared to existing noise emissions. Currently, the surrounding roads, railway line and airport add noise emissions. The site has operated without a noise complaint since 2000. Noise monitoring equipment at Receptors 2 and 8 are shown in Figures 2.2 and 2.3.

It was found that predicted noise levels would be considered acceptable provided sound reduction measures were applied to the Woodroom and Production Hall.

6.3 Water ResourcesThe water resources assessment considered the potential impacts of the Proposed Development on hydrogeology and hydrology within a 1 km radius of the Site boundary.

This assessment was informed by a combination of desk-based analysis and a Site visit and was supported by a Flood Risk Assessment (FRA) and a Drainage Impact Assessment (DIA).

The closest watercourse to the Site is the Rough Burn, located adjacent to the western Site boundary and approximately 500 m southwest of the expansion area of the Site (where the new process buildings and plant will be located). There are two small unnamed watercourses to the northeast and east of the Site. Two artifi cial drainage channels feed into an artifi cial pond for irrigation purposes which is located in the northeast of the Site. A second pond lies on the eastern boundary of the Site, with the majority of the pond located off-site as shown in Figure 3.

Figure 2.2: Noise Monitoring Photo 1 Figure 2.3: Noise Monitoring Photo 2

Volume 1 - Non-Technical Summary8

The FRA established that no fl ood risks are predicted for the site.

The EW would include the establishment of drainage systems to ensure runoff from the expansion area of the Site would avoid adverse impacts on water resources. The proposed log yard would drain to a three stage drainage system which would remove large particles, oily residues, fi ne grit and sediment from the runoff. The new and re-aligned roads would incorporate road side drains to manage runoff before it infi ltrates to ground. Roof drainage from the buildings will collect in gutters and infi ltrate directly to ground as currently occurs from existing buildings on Site. Foul drainage will drain to two septic tanks which would be located within the expansion area of the Proposed Development.

During construction, the CEMP would be used to avoid impacts on the water environment. During operation, the designed drainage system and implementation of the PPC permit would prevent impacts to the water environment. As such no signifi cant effects are predicted.

6.4 Landscape and VisualThe Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment (LVIA) assessed the potential effects of the Proposed Development on landscape and views within a 10 km radius from the boundary of the Site.

The assessment has been informed by a combination of desk-based analysis, fi eld surveys and viewpoint analysis.

The Site is located in undulating coastal hinterland. The key hydrological features of the study include the Moray Firth sea loch and the River Nairn. The coastline comprises of open water, mudfl ats, salt marshes, grasslands, scrub and coniferous trees. Tourist and recreational uses include Fort George and Castle Stuart Golf Course. The Site itself forms an extension to an existing industrial Site where large scale site infrastructure are established.

The LVIA identifi ed signifi cant effects in relation to:

Landscape character of Coastal Lowlands;

Visual amenity at:

- Minor Road by Wester Dalziel;

- A96, west of Tornagrain; and

- Castle Stuart Golf Links.

Inverness to Dundee railway between Newton and Tornagrain Wood;

A96 between Newton and Tornagrain; and

B9039 between Newton, and Dalcross Industrial Estate

However, these effects would reduce to non-signifi cant once the Proposed Development reached Phase 3 and the existing stack was decommissioned.

Figure 4 shows the existing view of the Site from the A96 east Newton looking northeast. Figure 5 shows the predicted view of the Proposed Development from A96 east Newton looking west.

Figure 3: Ponds located on and adjacent to the Site

Volume 1 - Non-Technical Summary 9

Figure 4: Existing view of the Site from A96 east Newton looking west

Figure 5: Visualisation of proposal from A96 east Newton looking west**Colour blocks represents building envelopes - as illustrated in the Parameter Plan within the ES

Volume 1 - Non-Technical Summary10

6.5 Cultural Heritage The Cultural Heritage assessment evaluated the likely indirect impacts of the Proposed Development on the settings of heritage assets within a 3 km viewshed of the Proposed Development Site.

The assessment was informed by a combination of desk-based analysis, fi eld surveys and consultation.

No sites of archaeological or cultural heritage importance were recorded within the Proposed Development Site, however, signifi cant archaeological remains are recorded in the wider area. Within 3 km of the Site there are:

Nine Scheduled Monuments

11 Listed Buildings

One Inventory status Garden and Designed Landscape.

The closest Scheduled Monument is Kerrowaird which lies 500 m to the east of the Site. The closest Listed Buildings to the Site are one category B listed farmhouse and three category C Listed Buildings, each approximately 1 km from the Site boundary. The nearest category A Listed Building is Castle Stuart which lies approximately 1.5 km to the west of the Site. Existing and predicted views of the Site and Proposed Development are shown in Figures 6 and 7.

No signifi cant effects on the setting of cultural heritage assets are predicted.

Figure 6: Photomontage: Castle Stuart viewed from Old Petty (Existing View)

Volume 1 - Non-Technical Summary 11

6.6 Traffi c and TransportThe assessment considered the likely signifi cant effects on traffi c and transport associated with the construction and operation of the Proposed Development.

The assessment has been informed by desktop studies and surveys and consultation with Transport Scotland and THC.

The study focussed on the A96 between its junction with the A9 in the west and the link to the east of Tornagrain Roundabout, the Site access junction and Tornagrain Roundabout.

Traffi c surveys were undertaken during May 2014 to help inform the Traffi c Assessment (TA) which included:

12 hour traffi c counts at the A96/site access junction and the Tornagrain Roundabout.

A week-long Automated Traffi c Count (ATC) survey of the A96 west of the site access junction which collected count and speed data.

Annual average daily traffi c (AADT) fl ow data was obtained for fi ve links on the A96 between its junction with the A9 and Gollanfi eld.

The peak period of construction is estimated to occur during 2015. To assess the likely impacts during the construction phase, future baseline traffi c fl ows were developed to estimate 2015 background traffi c fl ows. To assess the likely impacts during the operational phase, 2020 background traffi c fl ows were developed.

The likely signifi cant effects resulting during construction and operation would be caused by the increase in traffi c, both light vehicles (cars and vans) and HGVs from deliveries and fi nished products.

Mitigation measures to reduce impacts and avoid signifi cant effects from increases in traffi c would be introduced during the construction period of the Proposed Development and some measures would continue through to the operational stage as appropriate. Such measures would include:

During the construction period a website containing the latest information relating

Figure 7: Photomontage: Castle Stuart viewed from Old Petty (Visualisation of Proposal)*

*Colour blocks represents building envelopes - as illustrated in the Parameter Plan within the ES

Volume 1 - Non-Technical Summary12

to traffi c movements associated with vehicles accessing the development site will be maintained but the Applicant and contractor.

To ensure road safety for all road users during the construction phase, a Construction Traffi c Management Plan (CTMP) would be developed in consultation with the police and road authorities and agreed before deliveries commence to site.

To reduce the numbers of single occupancy trips by private staff cars to and from the Site a Traffi c Plan would be introduced.

Through the use of the above mitigation measures there will be no signifi cant effects upon sensitive receptors as a results of traffi c increases from the proposed development.

6.7 AviationThe effect of the Proposed Development on aviation was assessed through a desk based study of an area 15 km radius around the Site and consultation with Highlands and Islands Airports Ltd (HIAL).

Inverness Airport is located approximately 2 km north east of the Site. It is a licenced aerodrome owned and operated by HIAL. The airport has a series of Obstacle Limitation Surfaces (OLS) around it. These limit the height of structures that could pose a hazard to aircrafts landing at and taking off from the airport.

During both the construction and operational phases of the Proposed Development, it will be necessary to operate mobile cranes for temporary periods. The likely signifi cant effect of this is that the cranes may infringe one or more of the OLSs.

In terms of residual effects, it was found that the permanent structures of the Proposed Development wou ld not infringe any of Inverness Airport’s OLSs. Therefore there would not be any signifi cant residual effects from the Proposed Development from its fi xed structures. The proposed stack does not exceed the elevation limit of 51.4 m that would pose a hazard to aircraft. Operation of mobile cranes during the construction, and maintenance of the Proposed Development will have a minor effect. This will be mitigated by notifying pilots through a Notice to Airmen (NOTAM).