Comment

Representation ID: 23031

Received: 17/08/2021

Respondent: Severn Trent Water

[Attachment: DPR Wal 1 Severn Trent]

Potential impact of proposed developments on sewage treatment works

General comment regarding treatment capacity:
Whilst sewage treatment works may not have sufficient spare capacity to accept the levels of development being proposed in its catchment area this does not necessarily mean that development cannot take place. Under Section 94 of the Water Industry Act 1991 sewerage undertakers have an obligation to provide additional treatment capacity as and when required. Where necessary we will discuss any discharge consent implications with the Environment Agency. If there are specific issues which may prevent or delay the provision on additional capacity these have been highlighted below.
[Headline data taken from the attachment: ’DPR Wal 1 Severn Trent’]
BARNHURST (WRW)
1. Estimate headroom based on current quality performance (RAG) - Significant
2. "Future quality issues (RAG)" – [None]
3. "Physical constraints regarding provision of additional treatment capacity (RAG)" - [None]
4. Any other comments - AMP7 scheme for CM - sufficient spare capacity on site for the proposed growth.
COVEN HEATH (WRW)
1. Significant
2. [None]
3. [None]
4. AMP7 scheme for CM - sufficient spare capacity on site for the proposed growth.

GOSCOTE (WRW)
1. Significant
2. Probable issue
3. Limited potential to provide additional capacity
4. Scheme for quality purposes. Sufficient spare capacity to accommodate proposed growth. Ammonia performance is challenging (unknown discharge into sewerage system).

GOSPEL END (WRW)
1. Significant
2. [None]
3. [None]
4. AMP7 scheme for quality purposes, scope also includes reduction of DWF to 1,800m3/d which will reduce the spare capacity on site. There will still be spare capacity even though at the moment there is no growth proposed for this site.

LITTLE ASTON (WRW)
1. Significant
2. [None]
3. [None]
4. Sufficient spare capacity to accommodate proposed growth.

LOWER GORNAL (WRW)
1. Significant
2. [None]
3. [None]
4. AMP7 quality scheme - this site will close and flows will be transferred to Roundhill. Any load from the new dwellings would also have to be redirected.

MINWORTH (WRW)
1. Significant
2. [None]
3. [None]
4. Sufficient spare capacity to accommodate proposed growth.

RAY HALL (WRW)
1. Significant
2. [None]
3. [None]
4. AMP7 scheme for CM. Sufficient spare capacity to accommodate proposed growth.

ROUNDHILL (WRW)
1. Minimal
2. [None]
3. [None]
4. AMP7 scheme for quality purposes and allowance to treat tranferred load from Lower Gornal. DWF will be increased to 64,500m3/d which will create spare headroom sufficient to accommodate the proposed growth.

TRESCOTT (WRW)
1. Significant
2. [None]
3. [None]
4. Sufficient spare capacity to accommodate proposed growth.

WALSALL WOOD (WRW)
1. Minimal
2. Probable issue
3. [None]
4. Sufficient spare capacity can accommodate majority of proposed growth. Ammonia performance is challenging.

WILLENHALL (WRW)
1. N/A
2. N/A
3. N/A
4. Load transferred to Minworth STW