St Louis Power Station Redevelopment

Non-Technical Summary
Introduction
The Central Electricity Board (CEB) commissioned Mott MacDonald Ireland Limited to undertake an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) for the proposed redevelopment of St Louis Power Station. St Louis Power Station is located in Port Louis, the capital of Mauritius, as illustrated on Figure 1 Site Location.
Figure 1: Site Location

Site Location

An EIA is a process for identifying, describing and assessing the potential direct and indirect impacts of a particular development on the environment. An Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) is the document produced as a result of that process. An EIS has been prepared for submission to the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development in compliance with the Environment Protection Act 1991 and the Environment Protection Act (EPA) 2002. Following the grant of an EIA licence, CEB will submit an application for the provision of a Development and Land Use Permit for the proposed development to the Municipal Council of Port Louis.

298346/IWE/DDP/2/C 20 July 2012 C:\DOCUME~1\has41559\OTLocal\PIMSLI~1\Workbin\59E510BC.2\Final EIS_St Louis EIS_Rev C.doc

St Louis Power Station Redevelopment

This document is a Non-Technical Summary the objective of which is to provide a brief overview of the proposed development and associated potential significant environmental impacts and proposed mitigation. It is recommended that the main EIS document is reviewed in order to obtain detailed information regarding the proposals.

Central Electricity Board

The CEB is a state-owned enterprise which reports to the Mauritian Ministry of Energy and Public Utilities. Established in 1952, and empowered by the Central Electricity Board Act 1964, the CEB is responsible for the preparation and undertaking of development schemes with the general aim of promoting, coordinating and improving the generation, transmission, distribution and sale of electricity in Mauritius. The CEB currently produces around 40% of power requirements in Mauritius from its four thermal power stations and nine hydroelectric plants.

Need for the Development

St Louis Power Station was the first diesel power station commissioned by CEB in October 1955. The first engine, firing on Light Fuel Oil (LFO), was operating by the end of 1955. A further seven engines were commissioned between 1955 and 1962. All of these engines have now been decommissioned. From 1978 to 1981, six Pielstick engines (G1-G6), firing Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO), were commissioned. In 2006 three new Wartsila engines (G7-G9), burning HFO, were commissioned. Analyses carried out for CEB by Mott MacDonald in 2005, as part of the Fort Victoria Power Station Redevelopment proposal, recommended that future electricity generation needs in Mauritius should be met by coal fired power plants with CT Power (Mauritius) Ltds coal fired unit originally intended to enter service in 2010. However, the proposed coal fired power plant at Pointe aux Caves has not yet been granted an EIA licence. This development has been indefinitely delayed due to environmental concerns and, consequently, this has prompted the CEB to proceed with the redevelopment of St Louis Power Station in order to meet forecasted demands. As a result, the present situation is that if urgent action is not taken during 2012, there is likely to be a shortage of generation capacity in Mauritius in 2014. The redevelopment of St Louis Power Station is intended to provide the necessary increased generation capacity until CT Power (Mauritius) Ltds coal fired power plant is constructed. The Pielstick engines are nearing the end of their useful life and are required to be retired. CEB is proposing to replace these engines with newer more efficient plant, similar to the three existing Wartsila engines. CEB proposes to operate the new engines as semi-baseload plant, similar to the operation of the existing units. As such the engines are expected to operate between 8 am and 9 pm each day. A baseload plant is normally operated continuously to meet baseload electricity demands.

Proposed Redevelopment of St Louis Power Station

St Louis Power Station currently operates an electricity generation capacity of approximately 70MW comprising: 6 no. 5MW Pielstick engines (G1 - G6), commissioned between 1978 and 1981; and 3 no. 13MW Wartsila engines (G7 - G9), commissioned in 2006. It is proposed that the redevelopment of the St Louis Power Station will be undertaken in two phases, as described below.

298346/IWE/DDP/2/C 20 July 2012 C:\DOCUME~1\has41559\OTLocal\PIMSLI~1\Workbin\59E510BC.2\Final EIS_St Louis EIS_Rev C.doc

ii

St Louis Power Station Redevelopment

Phase 1 Phase 1 of the redevelopment will comprise the construction of a new powerhouse building with sufficient space to cater for two 15MW engines. Two new engines, similar to the existing Wartsila engines, will be installed in this powerhouse and two of the existing Pielstick engines (G5 and G6) and associated cooling towers will be decommissioned. The powerhouse containing engines G5 and G6 will be demolished. Cooling radiators, similar to those associated with Wartsila Engines will be installed directly northwest of 3 the powerhouse. Two Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) storage tanks, each with a volume of 750m , and a new incinerator are also proposed to be installed during Phase 1 of the development. Ancillary works will include construction of an electrical annex and loading bay and the removal of two workshop buildings to accommodate the proposed HFO storage tanks. Subject to authorisation, it is anticipated that Phase 1 of the development will be commissioned in 2014. Phase 2 Phase 2 of the redevelopment will comprise the installation of two additional engines, similar to the existing Wartsila engines, in an extension to the powerhouse provided under Phase 1, and the decommissioning of the remaining four Pielstick engines (G1-G4) and associated cooling towers. As stated previously, the redevelopment of St. Louis Power Station is required in order to meet forecasted demands due to delays associated with the development of a coal fired power plant at Pointe aux Caves. Should the coal fired power plant development proceed, as is now planned, it is anticipated that there will no longer be a requirement for the installation of the additional engines, as proposed under Phase 2. It should be noted however that if the coal fired power plant development does proceed, the remaining four Pielstick engines will be decommissioned in any event by 2017. In order to assess the worst-case scenarios associated with the current redevelopment proposals for St. Louis Power Station the EIA considers the full implementation of Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the development. The redevelopment proposed under both Phase 1 and Phase 2 is illustrated in Figure 2 overleaf and Appendix 4 of the EIS and is summarised in Table 1 below.
Table 1: Proposed Redevelopment
Pielstick Engines (5MW) Existing Phase One Phase Two 6 4 0 Wartsila Engines (13MW) 3 3 3 New Engines (15MW) 0 2 4 Total (MW) 69 89 99

Components of Proposed Redevelopment After Phase 1, the power station will have four Pielstick units (G1-G4), three Wartsila units (G7-G9) and two new units (G10 and G11), with a total installed capacity of approximately 90 MW. After Phase 2, the power station will have the existing three Wartsila units (G7-G9) and four new 15 MW units, making a total installed capacity of approximately 100 MW (G10 and G13),. On the basis that fuel for at least four days continuous operation should be stored at St Louis; the following heavy fuel storage capacities are required: Phase 1 - 1766m ; and
3

298346/IWE/DDP/2/C 20 July 2012 C:\DOCUME~1\has41559\OTLocal\PIMSLI~1\Workbin\59E510BC.2\Final EIS_St Louis EIS_Rev C.doc

iii

St Louis Power Station Redevelopment

Phase 2 - 1958m . There is at present approximately 1100m of Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) storage at St Louis associated with the existing Pielstick and Wartsila engines. The existing heavy fuel tanks associated with Pielstick engines G5 3 and G6 have a combined capacity of 600m . These will be removed to provide space for the Phase 1 3 development so that only 500m of the existing storage capacity will be retained. It is therefore proposed 3 that two new HFO storage tanks with a capacity of 750m each will be provided as part of the Phase 1 development. The existing storage and fuel handling system will be maintained and upgraded as part of the proposed development to reduce significantly the potential of oil leakage. Operational procedures require all waste oils to be passed to the waste oil incinerator for destruction. Based on consideration of waste sludge likely to be generated, an additional incinerator is proposed alongside the existing one; refer to Figure 2 Site Layout Phase 1 & 2. However this will only operate intermittently, when required. Wastewater washings either pass to the waste oil incinerator or are discharged from the site via the oil / water separators. Oil contaminated wastes are collected and stored separately in a dedicated covered impermeable based bunded area before being burnt in the waste oil incinerator. General solid wastes are stored on site until collection for recycling, where possible, or disposal through local waste disposal services. Hazardous wastes are disposed of in accordance with the regulatory requirements. Raw feed water for the proposed new engines proposed will be sourced from the public water mains, as per the existing situation. The Pielstick engines are currently cooled utilising water from St Louis Stream. The Wartsila engines employ radiator cooling. It is proposed that the new units will also employ radiator cooling. Therefore, following the retirement of the Pielstick engines, and the implementation of Phase 2 of the proposed redevelopment, process discharges to the St Louis stream will be significantly reduced. No abstractions from nearby watercourses are proposed as part of this redevelopment. The proposed power 3 plant will require approximately 5m /hr of raw feedwater. Existing waste management procedures will be maintained during Phase 1 and Phase 2 of the development, subject to changing legislation.
3

298346/IWE/DDP/2/C 20 July 2012 C:\DOCUME~1\has41559\OTLocal\PIMSLI~1\Workbin\59E510BC.2\Final EIS_St Louis EIS_Rev C.doc

iv

St Louis Power Station Redevelopment

Figure 2:

Ste Layout Phase 1 & 2

298346/IWE/DDP/2/C 20 July 2012 C:\DOCUME~1\has41559\OTLocal\PIMSLI~1\Workbin\59E510BC.2\Final EIS_St Louis EIS_Rev C.doc

St Louis Power Station Redevelopment

Construction Phase Duration It is anticipated that construction will commence in 2013 with construction and commissioning activities expected to last for 16 months each during Phase 1 and Phase 2. The total number of construction staff on-site will vary during the construction phase of the works but are expected to peak at approximately 80 persons. It is expected that up to 10 no. heavy goods vehicle (HGV) deliveries per day will access/egress the site during peak construction activities. Normal working hours during the construction period are expected to be Monday to Friday 7 am to 9 pm hours. Activities likely to create a noise nuisance at residential properties will be avoided between the hours of 7 pm and 7 am. Works associated with the demolition in proximity to residential properties will be restricted to between 8 am to 6 pm to prevent noise nuisance. Construction activities will gradually phase out from pre-construction to predominantly civil activities followed by commissioning and testing of plant and equipment.

Benefits of the Proposed Development

During the construction phase of the redevelopment, local labour will be employed, where possible. This will have a significant positive impact for the local economy. Construction workers will positively impact on businesses in surrounding areas that will provide workers with services including accommodation, food, and entertainment creating employment opportunities in the local service industry. The redevelopment of St. Louis Power Station will also ensure continued employment throughout the lifetime of the plant. The operation of the redeveloped power station will have a significant positive impact on the national economy by improving the public utilities infrastructure and generating additional electricity. The retirement of the existing Pielstick engines and associated cooling towers and the commissioning of new more efficient engines remote from residential properties will result in significant improvements in terms of noise emissions. The optimised stack height and efficiencies associated with the proposed new engines will result in significant improvements in air quality following the completion of Phase 2 of the development. In addition, Pielstick engines G1-G6 are currently cooled utilising water from St Louis Stream. Wartsila engines G7-G9 employ radiator cooling. It is proposed that the new units will also employ radiator cooling. Therefore, following the retirement of the Pielstick engines, and the implementation of Phase 2 of the proposed redevelopment, process discharges to the St Louis stream will be significantly reduced.

Further Development of St. Louis Power Station

CEB originally considered a further phase of development, Phase 3, to include an additional two engines, similar to the existing Wartsila engines, (G14 and G15). However, further to an air quality modelling assessment, and based on available information, further development of St. Louis Power Station is not recommended at this time, due to concerns that it would likely give rise to unacceptable impacts on air quality in the surrounding area. Limited ambient air quality data is available in Mauritius. Available data was obtained approximately 10 years ago and is not considered to be representative of the existing situation. For this reason CEB intends to undertake monitoring of relevant atmospheric pollutants in the vicinity of the power station. Once sufficient data has been gathered it is intended to revisit the environmental acceptability of developing

298346/IWE/DDP/2/C 20 July 2012 C:\DOCUME~1\has41559\OTLocal\PIMSLI~1\Workbin\59E510BC.2\Final EIS_St Louis EIS_Rev C.doc

vi

St Louis Power Station Redevelopment

Phase 3 of the proposals, if deemed necessary. At that stage CEB will engage in consultation with the Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development, the Municipal Council of Port Louis and other relevant agencies and agree the scope of environmental assessments to be undertaken in order to obtain the required EIA licence and Development and Land Use Permit. It should be clearly noted however that the current scope of the redevelopment proposals, and the content of this Non-Technical Consultation and the EIS, is limited to Phase 1 and Phase 2 only, as detailed above

Consultations
CEB and their agents, Mott MacDonald, undertook pre-application consultation meetings with the following stakeholders on preliminary design proposals, including Phase 3, in January 2012: Municipal Council of Mauritius; Ministry of Environment and Sustainable Development; Ministry of Housing and Lands; Ministry of Health and Quality of Life; and National Environmental Laboratory (NEL). Based on feedback received during these meetings the design proposals were revised and the proposed fuel storage tanks were relocated to maintain a greater distance from sensitive residential receptors. Comments from the public were also invited by means of a public consultation meeting held at Camp nd Chapelon Community Centre, Camp Chapelon on 22 May 2012. The aforementioned stakeholders were also invited to attend. Stakeholders were generally supportive of the proposed redevelopment, based on the understanding that the retirement of the old Pielstick engines would result in significant environmental improvements. However, some residents did raise concerns that previous commitments made by CEB were still outstanding. CEB acknowledges these concerns and has therefore committed to promptly facilitate the following: Medical checkups will be carried out for local residents in the vicinity of the St Louis power station; Landscaping activities around the power station and the vicinity will be undertaken; The canal along Philippe Rousset Street will be maintained and regularly monitored; Power lines will be rerouted as required; and Poles disposed of alongside the walls of the power station will be removed. In addition, a line of communication has been established by CEBs Public Relations Officer with a representative of the local residents to ensure that public grievances are managed in an appropriate and timely manner.

298346/IWE/DDP/2/C 20 July 2012 C:\DOCUME~1\has41559\OTLocal\PIMSLI~1\Workbin\59E510BC.2\Final EIS_St Louis EIS_Rev C.doc

vii

St Louis Power Station Redevelopment

Socio-Economic
A desk-based assessment of the impacts on socio-economics was undertaken to assess information relating to recent trends in population, employment and economic activity in the vicinity of the proposed development. It is likely that the proposed development will increase the population of the area in the short term during the construction phase, as it is probable that there will be an influx of construction workers. Construction workers will positively impact on businesses in surrounding settlements that will provide workers with services including accommodation, food, and entertainment creating employment opportunities in the local service industries. This will be a significant positive impact on the local economy. There is a potential for negative impacts during construction due to visual impacts, increased noise and dust. However, these will cease following completion of construction. During the construction period a Construction Environmental Monitoring Plan (CEMP), incorporating mitigation measures for reducing dust, noise and visual impacts will be implemented in order to minimise any adverse impacts on the receiving environment. During the operational phase, the proposed redevelopment and continued operation of the power station will ensure sustained employment thereby offering a significant positive benefit in terms of direct permanent employment opportunities and indirectly through the supply of goods and services. Due to the retirement of the existing Pielstick engines and associated cooling towers, a significant buffer zone will be created between the main operational area of the power station and residential properties. In addition, Phase 1 of the redevelopment of the St Louis Power Station will provide the necessary increased generation capacity until CT Power (Mauritius) Ltds coal fired power plant is operational.

Noise
A noise impact assessment of the construction and operational phases of the proposed redevelopment was completed. This assessment took into consideration the existing baseline noise environment and assessed the potential impacts against national and internationally accepted criteria and noise limits. Construction is likely to be audible in the vicinity of the development, although due to the temporary and transient nature of the works, this will not result in any significant long term impacts. The noise impact assessment shows that construction noise levels from the various plant items used in Phase 1 is expected to fall below the daytime threshold of 65 dB in all cases. Changes in ambient noise due to construction noise are negligible. Therefore, no significant adverse effects are expected. During Phase 2, the noise impacts slightly exceed the 65 dB threshold during some activities and all changes in ambient noise levels are less than for 5 dB. The worst case impacts would occur during demolition of the main Pielstick engine hall (G1-G4), although this is currently not planned. However, no significant adverse effects would be expected as activities associated with demolition will be limited to the 8 am to 6 pm period. The increase in traffic flows during the peak construction period is expected to be very small relative to the flows on the M2 motorway. The haul route does not pass in close proximity to the residential receptors to the south of the site. Consequently, it is concluded the corresponding noise impacts are not expected to generate significant impacts. Predicted noise levels at the noise sensitive receptors during operation show that, in general, there will be significant reductions in operational noise at all off site positions. The comparison of the received noise levels at the nearest residential receptors, when the site is fully operational, is expected to reduce by 24 dB, which is substantial. The noise assessment has shown that compliance with the absolute noise levels specified within the relevant legislation, standards and guidance is mainly dependent on the removal

298346/IWE/DDP/2/C 20 July 2012 C:\DOCUME~1\has41559\OTLocal\PIMSLI~1\Workbin\59E510BC.2\Final EIS_St Louis EIS_Rev C.doc

viii

St Louis Power Station Redevelopment

of all the Pielstick engines and therefore is not expected to be achieved until Phase 2 is fully implemented. Noise levels from the site under full operation, in the area of the nearest residential receptors, is expected to meet the Mauritian Environmental Standards for Noise (for Power Station noise) but exceed the 45 dB(A) guideline value recommended by the WHO (World Health Organisation) and IFC/World Bank Group for the night period, by up to 8 dB. It should be noted however that these noise values are intended as guidelines and not noise limits. The proposed redevelopment will result in significant reduction of noise impacts experienced at nearby sensitive receptors.

Air Quality
Assessment of construction phase impacts has identified that there is a high dust raising potential associated with the proposed development. Appropriate mitigation measures have therefore been proposed, which will be implemented as part of a CEMP, to minimise the risk of significant impacts. Emissions from the operational phase of the proposed development have been assessed through detailed dispersion modelling following good practice guidance. A suitable stack height has been determined for effective dispersion of pollutants taking into account nearby buildings and terrain. The results of the dispersion modelling show the proposed redevelopment will result in an overall improvement in air quality. Following the introduction of Phase 1 and Phase 2 the annual mean pollutant concentrations will reduce significantly. An Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan (EMMP) will be developed in consultation with the Ministry of Environment including the agreement of a standard report format detailing monitoring procedures for emissions to air to confirm compliance with applicable limits. In addition results presented for Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) (an airborne pollutant) in the EIA are conservative as a worst case fuel sulphur content of 3% has been used in the modelling, whereas it is more likely that the fuel will have a sulphur content of approximately 2%. For all airborne pollutants, potential air quality impacts should be balanced against the need for more electricity (the project increases the electricity generation while also having an overall improvement on air quality), brought about by steady growth in industry and commerce, and subsequent health benefits, social equity opportunities and environmental benefits for increasing electricity provision that is distributed not only for economic activity but also to domestic users. As limited ambient air quality data is available in Mauritius a further monitoring study is recommended to be undertaken.

Water
An assessment of the impacts of the proposed development on the baseline water environment has been undertaken and mitigation measures have been proposed, as appropriate, to address any significant impacts with respect to construction activities, water consumption and waste water discharges. Existing drainage infrastructure will be utilised for the redevelopment works where practicable. No abstractions from nearby watercourses are proposed as part of this redevelopment i.e. once the Pielstick engines have been retired water abstraction from the St Louis Stream will cease as radiator cooling of the new engines is proposed. Potential construction phase impacts are typical of those associated with any civil engineering activity and mainly relate to contamination of water bodies. The implementation of mitigation measures during the construction phase will ensure that the impact of the proposed development on water resources during the construction phase will not be significant.

298346/IWE/DDP/2/C 20 July 2012 C:\DOCUME~1\has41559\OTLocal\PIMSLI~1\Workbin\59E510BC.2\Final EIS_St Louis EIS_Rev C.doc

ix

St Louis Power Station Redevelopment

During operation, it is anticipated that there will be no substantial increase in existing water demand and discharge requirements. A new closed circuit cooling system using radiators is proposed. This option significantly reduces the potential for environmental impacts on the aquatic environment when compared with the cooling system employed for the existing Pielstick engines. Other potential operational phase impacts include accidental releases of potentially polluting substances due to day-to-day operations within the power station site. The proposed development is consistent with existing activities at St Louis Power Station. The proposed discharges are of a similar physico-chemical nature to existing wastewaters and no significant increase is anticipated. As a consequence, subject to the implementation of appropriate mitigation measures, it is considered that the overall residual impact of the proposed development during the operational phase will not be significant.

Land Quality
St Louis Power Station has been in operation since 1955, as such it is considered reasonable to assume that there is potential to encounter previously unrecorded contaminated material. Potentially adverse impacts may arise due to exposure of contaminated soil, infiltration of surface water through exposed ground, sediment run-off, dewatering activities, if required, etc. The baseline land quality assessment included a desktop study and a review of the findings of a ground investigation undertaken in 2003 / 2004 by Aqualia Limited. Baseline soils identified comprise gravely clay / silt and basalt bedrock. The principal source of construction impacts are removal of soils and sediment, contamination mobilisation, contamination of groundwater and settlement. The removal of contaminated soils and sediment is a positive impact as contamination sources are removed. Mitigation measures include the reuse of materials where possible, development of a Spoil Management Plan, a Contamination Management Plan, an Emergency Spill Response Plan and appropriate material storage areas, including bunding. In general the residual impacts are low to not significant. The principal source of operational impacts is related to accidental spills/leaks and appropriate design. The residual impacts, once appropriate mitigation measures are implemented, are low to not significant.

Flora and Fauna

St. Louis Power Station is reasonably level with an elevation of approximately 26 metres. Immediately to the East of the site, the terrain rises steeply to the top of Pailles Hill (225 metres high) and to the Northeast of the site the terrain rises steeply to the top of Signal Mountain (323 metres high). To the West of the power station, there is a deep river valley with the St Louis Stream running its course along the bottom at an approximate elevation of 8 metres. These areas of complex terrain are largely uninhabited and lightly vegetated due to the steep gradients. The power station is located within an industrially zoned area. However, residential housing is located directly to the Southwest boundary of the site. A small road separates the site from this residential area which was constructed after St. Louis Power Station was commissioned. No buffer zone has therefore been maintained between the power station site and sensitive receptors such as residential dwelling. The proposed development site is brownfield (i.e. previously developed) and is located wholly within the confines of the existing power station which has been in operation since 1955. The site consists predominantly of made ground with limited vegetation on site. There are no significant features of ecological significance within St. Louis Power Station. It is therefore considered that there will be no direct impacts on ecology during the construction phase. However, dust, noise and effluent emissions during the construction phase have the potential to impact on ecology in the surrounding area.

298346/IWE/DDP/2/C 20 July 2012 C:\DOCUME~1\has41559\OTLocal\PIMSLI~1\Workbin\59E510BC.2\Final EIS_St Louis EIS_Rev C.doc

St Louis Power Station Redevelopment

There is potential for surface runoff water to come in contact with contaminated material on the site during the operational phase, particularly in areas used for the storage or handling of chemicals and oils. All such areas will be contained within bunds to control and contain runoff water. No abstraction from St. Louis Stream is proposed once the Pielstick engines have been retired, notwithstanding the water demands of other industrial operators in the vicinity. The extent of regular discharge (cooling water system) from the Power Station will be reduced significantly over time as the Pielstick engines will be decommissioned, leaving only discharges from the oil / water separator and rainwater drains. Atmospheric emissions of Nitrogen Oxides (NOx) and Sulphur Dioxide (SO2) have the potential to impact on ecosystems directly or indirectly in the form of acid deposition. The redevelopment of St Louis Power Station will result in an overall improvement in air quality. Overall, the impact on flora and fauna is therefore not anticipated to be significant.

Vibration Impacts
CEB has previously received complaints relating to developing cracks within buildings from local residents who consider the cause to be vibration impacts associated with the operation of St. Louis Power Station. It is proposed that the Pielstick engines will be decommissioned and replaced with new more efficient plant. Similar to the existing Wartsila engines, these new units will be installed over resilient mounting, i.e. a suspension system or cushioned mounting designed to reduce the transmission of normal noise and vibration to the mounting surface. Furthermore, the engines will be designed and guaranteed to meet the BS 6472 Guide to Evaluation of Human Exposure to Vibration in Buildings standard for vibration. It is therefore considered that the impacts associated with the proposed redevelopment of St. Louis Power Station will be long-term and positive due to the displacement of older, inefficient engines with newer, quieter and resilient mounted plant.

Visual Impacts
The proposed redevelopment will entail the removal and replacement of a number of buildings, each of which will have some visual impact locally but within an area already characterised by industrial development. The exception to this will be the addition of a 45 metre multi-flue stack associated with the new powerhouse and an additional incinerator stack which will be viewed in the context of the built-up character of the power plant and surrounds and the existing 45 metre stack, associated with the Wartsila engines and the incinerator stack. The heights of the proposed stacks have been determined to provide optimum dispersion of atmospheric pollutants. With improved engine design, the atmospheric emissions will be significantly less visible from the new engines compared to the Pielstick engines. Therefore, with progressively less use of the Pielstick engines, there will be increasingly less visual impact of plumes from the existing engine stacks. As such, when Phase 1 and Phase 2 are fully implemented and the Pielstick engines are decommissioned, the overall visual impact is anticipated to be of low to moderate significance. However, it should be noted that a more significant impact has been avoided due to the proposed multi-flue design.

Traffic
The site access to St Louis Power Station is via a dedicated road direct to the M2 motorway. Increased traffic and HGV movements during the construction phase will be short-term and construction traffic flows on local roads are expected to be low, with a maximum of 80 construction workers employed and 10 HGV deliveries per day anticipated during an expected peak construction period of three months. Normal working hours during the construction period are expected to be Monday to Friday 7 am to 9 pm.

298346/IWE/DDP/2/C 20 July 2012 C:\DOCUME~1\has41559\OTLocal\PIMSLI~1\Workbin\59E510BC.2\Final EIS_St Louis EIS_Rev C.doc

xi

St Louis Power Station Redevelopment

The proposed redevelopment of St Louis Power Station will not increase either the number of heavy goods vehicles or cars visiting the site during the operational phase. No significant impact on traffic volumes resulting from the proposed redevelopment is expected.

Archaeology
The generation of electricity on the site since 1955 with two major phases of construction suggests the likelihood of archaeological remains being present is low. However, an archaeological watching brief is recommended during geotechnical investigations and excavation of undisturbed layers in the subsurface, as for all building development of this nature.

Environment Management and Monitoring Plan

To demonstrate the satisfactory environmental performance of the power station and compliance with relevant regulations following its redevelopment, a number of environmental management and monitoring procedures will be implemented. It is recommended that an Environmental Management and Monitoring Plan (EMMP) is developed, in liaison with the Ministry of Environment and recently established Environmental Monitoring Committee, including the formulation of a pro forma Report, detailing sampling procedures and comparison of atmospheric and aqueous discharges and noise emissions with applicable limits. In addition to regulatory reporting, the EMMP should include procedures for documenting visual inspections and the handling and storage of chemicals and wastes on site and their disposal off site. It is also recommended that a programme of staff awareness training is implemented, with initial focus on health and safety, and waste minimisation.

298346/IWE/DDP/2/C 20 July 2012 C:\DOCUME~1\has41559\OTLocal\PIMSLI~1\Workbin\59E510BC.2\Final EIS_St Louis EIS_Rev C.doc

xii