Summary of Responses to the consultation paper on the Fees Payable by Applicants for Consent under the Electricity (Applications for Consent) Scotland Regulations 1990
Introduction
This report will summarise the responses received to the consultation paper on the Fees Payable by Applicants for Consent under the Electricity (Applications for Consent) Scotland Regulations 1990.
A further more in depth analysis of the consultation will be published shortly. A statement of policy leading from the consultation responses will also be published.
Summary
There was a total of 26 responses to the consultation on fees payable for consent under the Electricity (applications for consent) Scotland Regulations 1990. These responses are split as: local authorities (14), industry (6), trade bodies (3), other government departments (2) and individuals (1).
The consultation posed three questions relating to the proposed level of fees payable under the Electricity (Applications for Consent) Scotland Regulations 1990. They were:
1. Do you agree that the revised scale of fees detailed in Annex A should be introduced?
2. Do you agree that arrangements should be introduced to compensate planning authorities for the costs they incur in processing Electricity Act consents cases?
3. Do you agree with the proposed reimbursement arrangements?
Question 1
62% of respondents agreed that the revised scale of fees should be introduced. When analysed by group, local authorities showed a clear majority in favour of the introduction of the fee schedule with 11 voting yes and 2 voting no. The response from companies was less clear cut - 50 % in favour of the schedule and 50% against.
Question 2
There was a clear majority in favour of this proposal with 77% returning a yes answer.
Question 3
Around 73% disagreed with the proposed reimbursement arrangements. Disagreement however, was not centred on any one group of respondents.
The four month time limit to complete applications in order to claim maximum re-imbursement from the Executive, having to submit an invoice to the Executive with a detailed breakdown of the costs incurred, and the proposal not to reimburse planning authorities for an overhead line which requires an EIA but has a voltage not exceeding 132KV were the main issues raised by respondents to this question.