Guidance

Planning Act 2008: Examination stage for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects

Guidance on the examination stage for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects.

• From: Department for Levelling Up, Housing and Communities
• Published: 30 April 2024

Applies to England

Examination of applications for development consent

The purpose of this guidance

This National Infrastructure Planning Guidance (“guidance”) sets out the requirements and expectations during the examination stage for Nationally Significant Infrastructure Projects (NSIP).

The key aims of this guidance are to enable consistent examination procedures and support the delivery of examinations that are proportionate to the complexity and nature of the project.

The particular aspects of the examination process for applications progressing through the fast-track process are detailed in the fast-track guidance.

Paragraph 001 Reference ID 07-001-20240430

Published: 30/04/2024

The examination process

What is the Examining Authority?

The examination of accepted applications for development consent under the Planning Act 2008 (as amended) (“the Planning Act”) is undertaken by an Examining Authority appointed by the Planning Inspectorate who carry out this function, and other functions, on behalf of the Secretary of State. The Examining Authority will be either a single appointed person under section 78 of the Planning Act or a panel of up to 5 inspectors under sections 64 and 65.

The Infrastructure Planning (Miscellaneous Provisions) Regulations 2024 amend the APFP Regulations 2009 by removing Regulation 11(3) which means that an Examining Inspector involved in giving pre-application advice under section 51 of the Planning Act to the applicant during the preparation of an application can be appointed to the Examining Authority.

In all circumstances deciding which Examining Inspectors are appointed to an Examining Authority requires the Planning Inspectorate to consider propriety issues and avoid any conflicts of interest.  

Section 87 of the Planning Act provides that it is for the Examining Authority to decide how an application for development consent for a NSIP is to be examined, within the requirements set out in Chapter 4 of the Planning Act and the detailed framework provided by the Infrastructure Planning (Examination Procedure) Rules 2010 (as amended) (“the EPR 2010”).  

Paragraph 002 Reference ID 07-002-20240430

Published: 30/04/2024

How is the application examined?  

The overriding aim of an examination is to ensure that issues are proportionately, and reasonably, considered. As noted in the pre-examination guidance, the first task of the Examining Authority under section 88 of the Planning Act and Rule 5 of the EPR 2010 is to prepare its initial assessment of principal issues, which identifies the critical matters upon which the examination should focus.

Section 98(1) of the Planning Act places the Examining Authority under a duty to complete the examination of the application within 6 months. The Secretary of State may extend this deadline under section 98(4) of the Planning Act, which has happened in only exceptional circumstances, and section 98(4A) of the Planning Act enables the Planning Inspectorate (on behalf of the Secretary of State) to set a deadline for completion of the examination which is earlier than the 6 month period.

This will enable a shorter statutory maximum examination timescale to be set for those projects progressing through the fast-track process. There are additional functions of the Examining Authority in relation to advising whether a fast-track examination of an application should be carried out, as explained in the fast-track guidance.

The examination of applications is principally on the basis of written submissions (section 90 of the Planning Act) supplemented where necessary by hearings held in public, either in-person, virtually or a blend of the two. The one exception to hearings being in public is where, under section 95A of the Planning Act, the Secretary of State intervenes in an application in the interests of defence or national security and where the public disclosure of information would be contrary to the national interest.

Paragraph 003 Reference ID 07-003-20240430

Published: 30/04/2024

What is the preliminary meeting?

Although it is not part of the formal examination period of an application itself, the preliminary meeting required by section 88 of the Planning Act triggers the calculation of the timetable for examining the application under section 98 of the Planning Act.

There is not a specified timeframe for when the preliminary meeting is to be held, and in very exceptional circumstances, applicants may wish to delay the start of the examination of an accepted application. However, the expectation in this guidance is that the preliminary meeting should normally take place within 8 weeks from receipt of the relevant representations by the Examining Authority during the pre-examination stage.

The Examining Authority is required by Rule 6 of the EPR 2010 to fix a date, time and place for the preliminary meeting and give no less than 21 days’ notice to all interested parties, statutory parties and relevant local authorities required by section 88 of the Planning Act to be invited. In advance of the preliminary meeting, the Examining Authority will prepare a draft of the proposed examination timetable setting out the key stages and milestones, deadlines for receipt of written representations and other requirements. These include Local Impact Reports (LIR) invited from local authorities, receipt of Statements of Common Ground (SoCG), and where the Examining Authority proposes to hold hearings the provisional dates for doing so. Invitees to the preliminary meeting will be notified of an agenda of topics to be discussed, normally including the Examining Authority’s initial assessment of principal issues and this draft of the proposed examination timetable.

The preliminary meeting is a procedural event and the conduct of it is governed by Rule 7 of the EPR 2010. The purpose of the preliminary meeting is to enable invitees to make representations to the Examining Authority about how the application should be examined. The preliminary meeting is not to be used to discuss the merits of the application or to hold a substantive discussion on a particular issue as these are matters that will be dealt with during the examination itself.  

The Planning Inspectorate has developed different approaches to conducting preliminary meetings, tailored to the circumstances of each DCO application, including, holding such meetings virtually, or a blend of in-person and virtually, and arranged over a number of sessions. Such flexibilities are very helpful in making participation for attendees as easy as possible. In all cases, the objective should be for the Examining Authority to identify clearly the key topics for the examination and convey these to all interested parties.  

Paragraph 004 Reference ID 07-004-20240430

Published: 30/04/2024

What happens at the end of a preliminary meeting?

Either at, or shortly after the end of a preliminary meeting, the Examining Authority is required by section 89 of the Planning Act and Rule 8 of the EPR 2010 to confirm its decisions about how the application is to be examined and the timetable for doing so. It must notify all interested parties and any other person the Examining Authority invited to attend the preliminary meeting of the timetable it has set.

This notification will include all the matters required by deadlines the Examining Authority has determined and any procedural decisions relating to the process for examination of the application. The examination proceeds according to the timetable set by the Examining Authority who will keep it under review. If the timetable needs to be altered then the Examining Authority must prepare a revised examination timetable and notify all interested parties, and any other persons invited to the preliminary meeting, of the changes made.

Paragraph 005 Reference ID 07-005-20240430

Published: 30/04/2024

What is a Local Impact Report and what role does it have in the examination of an application?

Once an application has been accepted for examination, the local authority in whose area a proposed project is located (and any authority adjoining the host authority) will be invited by the Examining Authority at a very early stage in the examination to submit a Local Impact Report (LIR), as defined in section 60 of the Planning Act. The LIR is a written report submitted by an affected local authority detailing the likely impact of the proposed development on any part of the local authority’s area and community. The LIR is based on the local authority’s existing body of local knowledge and robust evidence of local issues, including an appraisal of the proposed development’s compliance with local policy and guidance.

The LIR document has a special status in the examination of an application. Whilst local authorities are not compelled to prepare and submit one, the obligations of sections 104 and 105 of the Planning Act mean that the Secretary of State must have particular regard to a LIR in reaching a decision. Local authorities are therefore strongly encouraged to prepare an LIR as part of their submissions.   

Local authorities are likely to have developed a range of information as part of their Local Plan preparation and more generally across their functions and responsibilities. Where these sources are up-to-date and relevant to the NSIP proposal, local authorities should use these to inform the preparation of the LIR. However, it is important that the LIR is not simply a restatement of the planning issues or the local authority’s separate representations about the application. The LIR has a wider purpose in bringing to the attention of the Examining Authority and the Secretary of State those matters both positive and negative affecting the local communities during construction, once operational and during decommissioning, should the proposed NSIP receive development consent.

Local authorities need to work on the basis that their LIR will be requested at the beginning of the examination and therefore need to programme its preparation accordingly, especially where there are internal approval and committee deadlines for the local authority. Where appropriate, local authorities are encouraged to produce a joint LIR to build on shared resources and capabilities to deliver this important element of the process. The deadline for a LIR to be submitted to the Examining Authority will be set out in the examination timetable, together with the opportunity for interested parties to submit comments about its content and matters raised.

Paragraph 006 Reference ID 07-006-20240430

Published: 30/04/2024

What is a Statement of Common Ground (SoCG) and a Principal Areas of Disagreement Summary Statement (PADSS) what role do they have in the examination of an application?

A Statement of Common Ground (SoCG) is a written statement prepared jointly by the applicant and another party or parties, setting out any matters on which they agree, or indeed disagree. A SoCG helps to ensure that the evidence at the examination focuses on the material differences between the main parties and therefore makes best use of the lines of questioning pursued by the Examining Authority.

A Principal Areas of Disagreement Summary Statement (PADSS) takes the approach of the SoCG a stage further by an interested party setting out not just the key areas of disagreement, but also a statement as to what precise change to the draft Development Consent Order (DCO) is sought to resolve the issues. A PADSS may be prepared by an interested party during the pre-application stage and submitted as part of its relevant representations, or by the applicant as part of the application documents. The Examining Authority may request the preparation of PADSS from specific interested parties as part of its procedural decisions before or during the examination. Although PADSS may be submitted as part of any application they are a specific requirement of an application proposed for the fast-track route.

The Examining Authority will normally set out in the notification of the examination timetable under Rule 8 of the EPR 2010 a list of bodies from whom a SoCG is required, and the deadline for submission. In addition, applicants are encouraged to submit agreed SoCG as part of their application documents, even if provisional to be developed during the examination. This means work needs to take place on them during the pre-application period, particularly with affected local authorities.   

SoCG should be short and focussed to be useful with the scope of a SoCG agreed between the parties from the outset. SoCG which simply record a long programme of detailed engagement between the applicant and the party involved serve only a limited purpose. In addition to basic information, agreement can often also be reached on technical matters and topics that rely on basic statistical data, for example the evidence to be submitted on traffic flows and whether methodologies concerning the determination of any significant effects have been agreed between the applicant and the consultee.

SoCG are often revised during the course of the examination as matters are resolved between the applicant and those making representations, mainly statutory bodies but by no means exclusively so. In some cases, SoCG remain unsigned at the end of an examination and therefore it is not clear to the Examining Authority whether the parties to it have agreed the final iteration. Accordingly, unsigned SoCG at the end of an examination should be afforded less weight by an Examining Authority in its consideration of the matters before it.

Paragraph 007 Reference ID 07-007-20240430

Published: 30/04/2024

How are assessors and legal advisers appointed?

Where appropriate, the Examining Authority can request that the Planning Inspectorate on behalf of the Secretary of State, to appoint one or more assessors with specialist expertise to advise and assist them (section 100 of the Planning Act).

Discussions with the Planning Inspectorate during pre-application should identify whether a specialist assessor is likely to be helpful in assisting the Examining Authority with an efficient and expeditious examination of the application. In most cases, therefore, the appointment is likely to be made at the pre-examination stage, although an assessor can be appointed at any time during the examination.

Where an assessor is appointed under Rule 11 of the EPR 2010, interested parties must be notified of the appointment, and the role of the specialist assessor should be explained as soon as is practicable.

Similarly, section 101 of the Planning Act and Rule 12 of the EPR 2010 provides for the Planning Inspectorate on behalf of the Secretary of State to appoint a barrister, solicitor or advocate to provide legal advice and assistance to the Examining Authority where requested, and which can include the ability to conduct oral questioning of a person making representations at a hearing.

Paragraph 008 Reference ID 07-008-20240430

Published: 30/04/2024

What are written representations and what role do they have in the examination process?

Section 90 of the Planning Act requires that the consideration of written representations is the principal means by which the Examining Authority is to examine applications. As part of the examination timetable the Examining Authority will set a deadline for the receipt of written representations, and it may disregard any written representations if these are received after the specified date.

The role of written representations in the examination is related to the definition of relevant representations in Regulation 4 of the Infrastructure Planning (Interested Parties and Miscellaneous Prescribed Provisions) Regulations 2015 (as amended) (“the IPMPP Regulations 2015”). Interested parties are encouraged to submit as full a case as possible as part of their relevant representations to enable the Examining Authority to have a full understanding of the main issues the application is giving rise to at the earliest stage in the process.

Accordingly, written representations enable interested parties to develop further the elements of their case set out in relevant representations if they need to, but they should not duplicate points previously submitted as part of relevant representations unless an interested party’s position has altered (for example, where further information has been submitted). Rule 10 of the EPR 2010 sets out the detailed provisions for making written representations.

Paragraph 009 Reference ID 07-009-20240430

Published: 30/04/2024

What are written questions and what role do they have in the examination process?

Rules 8 and 17 of the EPR 2010 enable the Examining Authority to ask written questions, require additional information from anyone at any stage of the examination process, and that a response is to be made in writing within a period it specifies. The Examining Authority may disregard any responses to its questions if these are received after the specified date.

An Examining Authority will typically conduct more than one round of written questions during an examination contingent on the number and complexity of any residual issues at a given point in the examination. The deadlines for responding to questions are often tight within the examination timetable and can impose substantial burdens on applicants and other participants in providing fully researched answers. It is crucial therefore that the Examining Authority keeps the written questions focused on the key issues of the examination.

The examination timetable will establish not only the deadlines for the receipt of all written material but also the opportunity for all interested parties to comment on such material and the responses of other interested parties. This can become complex for those unfamiliar with the NSIP consenting process and Examining Authorities are therefore encouraged to take these considerations into account in that setting realistic deadlines for the submission of written material.

Paragraph 010 Reference ID 07-010-20240430

Published: 30/04/2024

How can “other persons” be involved in the examination process?

Only interested parties (or their appointed representative) have an automatic right to participate in the examination. However, under Rule 10(3) of the EPR 2010, the Examining Authority has the discretion to permit any other person, including expert witnesses, to make written submissions about the application, or participate in any hearing held for the purpose of examining the application.

Paragraph 011 Reference ID 07-011-20240430

Published: 30/04/2024

Hearings

What are hearings and what role do they have in the examination process?

An examination into a NSIP is not a public inquiry and all participants should make their cases through written submissions and not expect a public hearing as the mechanism to do so. However, in addition to those situations where certain types of hearings must be held, an Examining Authority may decide to hold hearings to consider particular issues.

All types of hearing can be held in person, virtually or as blended events (a mix of in-person and virtual), but must be in public except in circumstances under section 95A of the Planning Act. In practice, almost all hearings take place in a blended format. Hearings are programmed in the examination timetable and can be cancelled if found to be unnecessary, or added to if issues emerge which warrant exploration through a hearing.

Where the application is examined by a panel, sections 76 and 77 of the Planning Act provide for hearings to examine specific issues to be held in concurrent sessions by one or more members of the panel. In practice this power has been little used because interested parties, particularly statutory bodies, find they need to participate in such concurrent sessions but are unable to do so. Nonetheless, the Secretary of State considers more use should be made of this provision where feasible in the interests of streamlining examinations.

Sections 91, 92, and 93 of the Planning Act provide for 3 different types of hearings: open floor, compulsory acquisition and on specific issues. If any interested party (as defined by section 102 of the Planning Act) requests an open floor hearing or an affected person (as defined by sections 59(4) and 92(5) of the Planning Act) a compulsory acquisition hearing, then one must be held if notified within the deadline set by the Examining Authority in the timetable. Otherwise, the Examining Authority has wide discretion about whether to hold issue specific hearings, having taken into account representations made by interested parties at the preliminary meeting.

Examining Authorities usually hold an issue specific hearing concerning the draft DCO submitted with the application at a very early stage in the examination, often immediately after the preliminary meeting. This can help to focus on what is the main output of the examination process which is the Examining Authority’s recommendations concerning the content of the DCO. Many of the issues which the application gives rise to are often reflected in the construction of the draft DCO, and for this reason what is now this routine programming of an issue specific hearing into the draft DCO at the beginning of the examination is strongly encouraged.

Paragraph 012 Reference ID 07-012-20240430

Published: 30/04/2024

How does the Examining Authority provide notification of hearings?

The Examining Authority will set a deadline as part of the examination timetable for those wishing to attend an open-floor hearing and all those entitled to appear at a compulsory acquisition hearing by which they must notify the Examining Authority of their wish to be heard at such hearings.

Under Rule 13 of the EPR 2010, the Examining Authority must then notify those entitled to appear at hearings giving such notice as appears to it to be reasonable of the date, time and place fixed (or joining details for attending virtually) for the holding of the hearing, as well as the subject matter.

Rule 13(7)(a) of the EPR 2010 imposes an obligation on the applicant regarding publicity for the hearing(s), including publishing a notice of the hearing in one or more local newspapers circulating in the locality in which the land in question is situated, or on a website maintained by or on behalf of the applicant.

Paragraph 013 Reference ID 07-013-20240430

Published: 30/04/2024

What is the procedure at hearings?

Under section 94 of the Planning Act, it is for the Examining Authority to determine how hearings are to be conducted, including the amount of time to be allowed at the hearing for the making of a person’s representations. Hearings under the Planning Act are inquisitorial rather than adversarial, with the Examining Authority probing, testing and assessing the evidence through direct questioning of persons making oral representations.

The Examining Authority will identify the matters to be considered, and those on which it requires further information, by publishing an agenda as early as possible but no later than 5 working days before an issue specific or compulsory acquisition hearing. An agenda will be more general for an open floor hearing, given this is an opportunity for any interested party to raise matters relating to the application.

The Examining Authority will determine the order in which persons will be heard. In most cases, other than open floor hearings, the applicant will give evidence first and will have the right of final reply, unless the Examining Authority in a particular case exceptionally decides otherwise. The Examining Authority will usually try to allocate a specific amount of time for the making of oral representations. It must act fairly in using the provisions in section 94(4) of the Planning Act and will ensure that the timetable agreed in Rule 8 of the EPR 2010 allows reasonable time for persons to make representations. In certain circumstances the Examining Authority may allow cross-questioning, but in practice this is very much an exception.

Rule 14 of the EPR 2010 requires that oral submissions must be based on an interested party’s relevant or written representation. This is to ensure that the hearing can focus primarily on the matters for which it has been arranged. Oral submissions should not therefore repeat material which has been submitted into the examination, and signposting will typically be sufficient in order to ensure the efficient operation of hearings.

However, subject to the Examining Authority’s discretion as to the conduct of the hearing, an interested party is not prevented from referring to matters not included in their written representation where it is relevant to the issues under consideration at the hearing, or to the examination more generally. This may also be the case where documents have changed since representations were first made (for example, the draft DCO).

Where interested parties intend to submit the same, or very similar evidence, it may be appropriate to work together to agree upon a spokesperson to put forward a case on everyone’s behalf.

Other than having a representative to speak on their behalf, interested parties who are entitled to appear at hearings do not have an automatic right to call witnesses to corroborate their evidence. However, Rule 14(10) of the EPR 2010 gives the Examining Authority the discretion to permit any other person to make oral representations at a hearing. This enables the Examining Authority to invite expert witnesses themselves or if requested to do so by interested parties.

Under section 94 of the Planning Act, the Examining Authority may refuse to allow representations to be made at the hearing which are, in its view:

• irrelevant, vexatious or frivolous;
• relate to the merits of policy set in a National Policy Statement;
• repeats other representations already made; or
• relate to compensation for compulsory acquisition of land or of an interest in or over land.

Additionally, under section 95 of the Planning Act the Examining Authority may request any interested party or person behaving in a disruptive manner to leave the hearing, or to remain only if that person complies with specified conditions.

Hearings are open to journalists and the wider public, as well as interested parties unless, under section 95A of the Planning Act, the Secretary of State directs otherwise in the interests of defence or national security. The Examining Authority will advise persons present at the start of hearings about matters relating to General Data Protection Regulations, live streaming and the recording of the event by those attending in-person and virtually. The only official record of the proceeding will be the digital recording placed on the project page of the Planning Inspectorate’s National Infrastructure Planning website. Any social media or similar communications arising out of the event/meeting will not be accepted as evidence in the examination of the application.

Paragraph 014 Reference ID 07-014-20240430

Published: 30/04/2024

What are the notification periods during the examination process?

The Examining Authority has the ability to set deadlines for the receipt of written material and the notification for hearings during the examination. The requirement under Rule 10(2) of the EPR 2010 for the Examining Authority to provide a minimum of 21 days’ notice by when a written representation is to be received has been removed.

Enabling the Examining Authority to set flexible deadlines for the submission of written evidence where it is deemed appropriate to do so, means a tailored examination timetable can be produced which reflects the specific circumstances of the application in question. A proportionate approach is also supported by using digital communication which allows for a rapid response from recipients shortly after receiving such a notice.

Similarly, the requirement for at least 21 days’ notice for any hearing under section 92(2) of the Planning Act (compulsory acquisition hearings) and section 93(1) of the Planning Act (open-floor hearings) of the Planning Act has also been removed. However, the Examining Authority will need to provide a reasonable timeframe when giving notice of hearings, adopting a balanced and proportionate approach taking into account the complexity of the hearing and the nature of the input needed from interested parties.  

Paragraph 015 Reference ID 07-015-20240430

Published: 30/04/2024

What are site inspections and how and when are they undertaken?

It is common practice for the Examining Authority to make site visits to become familiar with the proposed location of the NSIP including the features of the area in which it is situated, and the matters raised by interested parties. The Examining Authority may use a mixture of approaches, including virtual and remote arrangements, to become familiar with the application and surrounding area.   

Under Rule 16 of the EPR 2010, the Examining Authority (or members of the Examining Authority) may make unaccompanied site visits to an application site before, or during the examination. The Examining Authority may also undertake one or more accompanied site visits during the examination which it will notify to all interested parties. The Examining Authority can be accompanied by interested parties or their representative on such a site visit depending on its nature. Participants may draw attention to particular features of the location and its surroundings. However, this is not an opportunity for any party to make representations about the application.

Paragraph 016 Reference ID 07-016-20240430

Published: 30/04/2024

Can documents be transmitted electronically?

The Infrastructure Planning (Examination Procedure) (Amendment) Rules 2024 have removed the requirement under Rules 22(3) to (6) of the EPR 2010 for consent to be given by the recipient for any representation, notice or other document required or authorised to be sent under any provision of the EPR 2010 by electronic transmission. This gives flexibility to all the participants in an examination to conduct their role in the proceedings as efficiently as possible.

Paragraph 017 Reference ID 07-017-20240430

Published: 30/04/2024

Can changes be made to an application during an examination?

It is expected that applications will be as well prepared as possible prior to submission and an application will not be accepted by the Planning Inspectorate to proceed to examination if it is not of a satisfactory standard. However, there are occasions when applicants may wish to make changes to an application after it has been accepted for examination, but this should not be the routine practice. 

It is also recognised that applications may be made which contain different options for certain parts of a NSIP if the applicant has yet to decide on a preferred option at the time of submission. Where this is the case, applicants should select a preferred option as soon as practicable before the commencement of the examination to provide certainty for the Examining Authority and all other parties involved in the examination.

In deciding whether to accept an applicant’s proposed changes to an application, the Examining Authority will need to consider a number of factors such as whether:

• the changes would mean the project is effectively a different one from that contained in the application;
• the application (as changed) is still of a sufficient standard for examination;
• sufficient consultation on the changed application can be undertaken to allow for the examination to be completed within the statutory timetable;
• the changes would breach the principles of fairness and reasonableness for parties participating in the examination; and
• any other procedural requirements can still be met.

It is expected that applicants will discuss the implications of any changes they wish to make with relevant statutory consultees and notify the Examining Authority at the earliest opportunity. This means that proposed change requests must be made at an early stage in the examination to enable any appropriate consultation on the change within the statutory examination period.

This is particularly critical in NSIP applications that include provisions related to compulsory acquisition and/or temporary possession. The Examining Authority will need to consider if the proposed changes trigger Regulation 4 of the Infrastructure Planning (Compulsory Acquisitions) Regulations 2010 (as amended) which in turn requires Regulations 5 to 19 of these Regulations to be complied with, including time sensitive matters.

In such a case, the applicant may decide to withdraw the application and restart the pre-application process, or continue with their application in its original form, or submit an alternative proposal for change. The Examining Authority will not be able to indicate what degree of change would be acceptable in advance of the applicant submitting a proposed change request.

It is for the applicant to decide whether or not to propose a change to the accepted application during the examination, not other interested parties. Interested parties can highlight those areas where they think a proposal should be changed during the pre-application stage and also in their written representations and at hearings (where held).

Making substantial change requests is likely to be incompatible with a fast-track examination process, as there will be insufficient time to accommodate changes to the 4-month examination timetable to allow for representations to be made about proposed changes.

During the course of an examination there may be changes to land interests (for example changes of ownership or removal of interests or plots). Applicants do not need to provide a revised Book of Reference each time such a change occurs, but should record these in a schedule for submission to the Examining Authority. However, a final form Book of Reference which consolidates all the relevant information will need to be provided by the close of the examination. The Examining Authority may also request information about land rights and the progress of negotiating in different formats to the Book of Reference to assist in the examination process.

Paragraph 018 Reference ID 07-018-20240430

Published: 30/04/2024

How should changes to the draft Development Consent Order (DCO) be tracked during the examination?

If approved and made by the Secretary of State under section 114 of the Planning Act, the DCO is the most significant outcome of the NSIP consenting process because it:

• grants the development consent and some other required permissions for the approved project;
• grants the power to compulsorily acquire land and rights, if so required;
• defines the works which have been approved; and
• sets out the requirements (conditions attached to the DCO) which will control the construction, commissioning, and operation and, if appropriate, the decommissioning of the approved works.

It is therefore expected that the draft DCO will receive detailed scrutiny during the examination resulting in usually multiple amendments in response to:

• questions raised by the Examining Authority;
• representations made by interested parties, particularly statutory bodies; or
• agreement reached with interested parties, for example in relation to protective provisions or revisions to requirements.

Even taking into account such amendments, the aim should be to ensure the draft DCO remains concise and proportionate in form to the application being examined. 

The examination timetable will make provision for revised version(s) of the draft DCO to be submitted by the applicant. Where this is not expressly required in the timetable, applicants may choose to submit revised drafts at other times during the examination, for example, to meet timetabled deadlines for the submission of written representations. It is important that there is a clear audit trail to identify both changes to the draft DCO made during the examination and the reasons why those changes have been made. This will greatly assist the Secretary of State in understanding how the form of the draft DCO accompanying the Examining Authority’s recommendation has come about.

To achieve this, applicants should ensure that each revised draft DCO submitted during the examination is accompanied by:

• a track change version of the draft DCO highlighting any changes made from the previous version; and
• supporting drafting notes or a table of proposed changes to explain the purpose and effect of proposed revisions to draft DCO provisions.

A track change draft DCO version showing all the changes made from the version of the draft DCO originally submitted with the application should be submitted at the end of the examination together with an updated Explanatory Memorandum explaining the changes that have been made and the reasons. A validated word version of the final DCO (in a Statutory Instrument template) is also expected by the relevant decision-making Secretary of State and should be submitted before the end of the examination (applicants should also refer to guidance on the content of Development Consent Order).

Paragraph 019 Reference ID 07-019-20240430

Published: 30/04/2024

How are outstanding issues handled?

It should be the ambition for an Examining Authority following the closure of the examination to submit a report and recommendation to the Secretary of State which has no major issues left for resolution during the decision-making period. This is to enable the Secretary of State to be able to reach and publish a decision on the NSIP application within the statutory period of 3 months required by section 107(1) of the Planning Act.

On occasions where this is not possible and specific issues remain outstanding the Examining Authority should ensure these are clearly identified in the report so that the Secretary of State can immediately proceed to determine what additional material is needed during the decision stage. Practically, this is handled by the Secretary of State publishing any requests for further information and submissions on the National Infrastructure Planning website maintained by the Planning Inspectorate, where all the responses to such requests are also published.

Inevitably, the more matters which are for resolution by the Secretary of State on receipt of the Examining Authority’s report and recommendation, the more the statutory 3-month period in which to reach a decision is likely to be compromised, leading the Secretary of State to have to extend the decision making period and inform Parliament accordingly under section 107(7) of the Planning Act.

Paragraph 020 Reference ID 07-020-20240430

Published: 30/04/2024

Published 30 April 2024