Preston New Road fracking firm Cuadrilla is 'living in hope' over two-year site restoration extension, it is claimed

The public and politicians made the claims during a meeting at which the firm succeeded in a bid to secure an extra two years to restore the land that it bored into in the search for shale gas.

The plot, off Preston New Road in Little Plumpton, became the focus of semi-permanent protest after the government gave the green light for test drilling in October 2016.

Work began the following April and – under the planning permission granted – the company was required to complete all decommissioning and restoration activity within a period of 75 months. That should have seen all evidence of the area’s dalliance with fracking removed – and the site returned to its former use as an unremarkable field – by next month.

However, Lancashire County Council’s development control committee has now agreed to a request from Cuadrilla to extend that deadline until July 2025. No further fracking will be allowed to be carried out during the interim timeframe.

Members of Lancashire County Council’s development control committee were split over the proposal, which was recommended for approval by County Hall planning officials who had described the delay as “unfortunate” – but concluded that it was acceptable.

Fylde MP Mark Menzies and Fylde Borough Council had both objected to the plans, along with Fylde West county councillor John Singleton and 84 members of the public.

A demonstration was staged outside County Hall ahead of – and during – the meeting by Nanashire: Nanas Against Fracking and Preston New Road Rolling Roadside Protest.

In his objection, Mr. Menzies said that there had been “adequate time” to restore the site, but suggested that Cuadrilla had not done so in the “hope that there will be a change of government policy”.

Friends of the Earth made a similar charge, stating that the firm had “not accepted the reality of national policy”, while Wrea Green resident, Dr Francis Rugman, said that “the proposed prolonged postponement of restoration means there is a potential return to fracking” on the site.

A moratorium – or indefinite ban – is currently in place on fracking, having been reinstated when Rishi Sunak became Prime Minister in the autumn. His short-lived predecessor Liz had announced in September last year that she would remove the block on fracking where there was “local support” for the process.

It had originally been outlawed in 2019 following a series of tremors at the Little Plumpton site that year. The largest of them – measuring 2.9 on the Richter scale – saw fracking suspended in the area and it never recommenced.

The development control committee heard that the decommissioning process is lengthy – not least because of the eight months it is expected to take for the necessary safety checks to be carried out in order for Cuadrilla to be able to surrender its permit to the Environment Agency.

Committee member Steve Holgate called for the time extension to be refused so that the authority could at least take the enforcement action that would enable closer monitoring of the work to ensure that there was no further delay – even if it still ended up taking the two years that had been sought.

The Labour politician said: “At least we [would have] feet on the ground and we can say, ‘Why haven’t you done anything?’ Because my greatest fear is that they go away and they just don’t do anything for another 18 months.

“It makes us look stupid, inefficient, ineffective and a joke – and we cannot have that of our committee because we are here to represent the people of Lancashire, not Cuadrilla,” County Cllr Holgate said.

However, several Conservative members warned that if the matter went to appeal, it would drag the matter out even further – “For God knows how long”, in the words of County Cllr Eddie Pope.

He suggested an additional condition of six-monthly monitoring reports being presented to the committee – which was accepted.

Under the approval, all the fencing and surface materials must be removed within 18 months with the final topsoil added within two years and the site vacated.

Addressing the committee with her objection, Susan Holliday, from the Preston New Road Action Group, blasted Cuadrilla for making what she said was “little effort to abide with their commitments [over] landscaping – and now trying to get a plan agreed that is double the length of time to that [granted] in the original planning permission”.

“This application should therefore be refused. If LCC grants [permission], it will send a clear message to Cuadrilla that the planning conditions can be ignored with impunity,” Ms. Holliday added.

John Powney, speaking on behalf of Ribble Estuary Against Fracking, said that the firm’s need to apply for an extension was born out of either “lack of planning on their part or hope that the government may change their stance [on fracking]”.

Cuadrilla notified the county council in March 2022 that they would start work within a week to decommission the two wells on the site.

At this time, the site was subject to an order to plug and abandon them, issued by the North Sea Transition Authority (NSTA). But this was superseded the next month by a notice that allowed for their continued suspension until 30 June, 2023. That move coincided with the global energy crisis that followed the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

Committee chair Matthew Maxwell-Scott acknowledged that commercial decisions may have contributed to the current situation, but said he believed that there would be a “hypersensitivity” about any revised timeline amongst residents – and that they were likely to alert County Hall to any further slippage in the plans.

However, one of his predecessors, Munsif Dad – who chaired the committee when the county council refused permission for the Preston New Road site in the summer of 2015, before that decision was later overturned by the government – said an “example” should be made of Cuadrilla and their request refused.

“[They haven’t] been [an] applicant who likes to adhere to conditions and I think this committee over the years…[has] been very lenient in giving flexibility to [them].

“I think this committee needs to take decisions, not on hypotheticals, but the facts that we have in front of us,” Cllr Dad added.

However, the time extension was supported by a majority of members.

Speaking after the meeting, Ms. Holliday said that she was “disappointed that some councillors were more concerned that Cuadrilla might appeal [a refusal] than about the welfare of their residents”.

“It will be interesting to see what the six monthly monitoring shows.”

Also outside the meeting, county council Green Party group leader Gina Dowding said that it was “regrettable” that enforcement action would not now be taken against the firm.

"Cuadrilla have hadto be chased to meet their conditions every step of the way and have played the system for too long. The least the community deserves is for this site to be restored as promptly as possible to the standards that were originally agreed,” County Cllr Dowding said.

Meanwhile, Miranda Cox, from Frack Free Lancashire added: “We’re disappointed, but not entirely surprised by today’s decision to allow Cuadrilla an extra two years to restore the site. Our experience has shown that they are able to act with impunity when it comes to their responsibilities to the local community in terms of their planning conditions.

“For the past several years, we’ve seen numerous breaches of planning consent and no regulator has been willing to place any sanctions upon the company.

“Therefore, we believe that the condition placed upon Cuadrilla today, in that they must report to Lancashire County Council every six months for the next two years with regards to the progress of site restoration, is actually a toothless request. There was no indication that any sanctions will be placed upon Cuadrilla should they fail to comply nor any security bond taken.

“We have no guarantees that Cuadrilla even has the funds to undertake the work required and we strongly suspect that the taxpayer will end up footing the bill for this.”

Cuadrilla did not respond to a request for comment and was not represented at the committee meeting.

TIMELINE

Decommissioning of the wells will be carried out in accordance with UK guidelines on well abandonment and according to a plan agreed by the Environment Agency (EA), the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) and an independent well examiner. The wellheads will be removed and the casing of the well cut off at two metres below ground level to allow restoration of the site to agricultural use.

A rig will then be required to undertake the works to abandon the boreholes, which includes filling the bores with concrete. It is expected that a period of four to six months will be needed to gain regulatory approval for the decommissioning programme and a further period of eight to 12 weeks to carry out the works on both wells.

The site currently has a permit from the EA. The restoration works to the site cannot commence until the permit has been surrendered and that requires the operator – Cuadrilla, in this case – to demonstrate that the abandonment works to each borehole have been successful. A programme of groundwater and surface water monitoring is required to demonstrate the effectiveness of the abandonment works which, could take between six to 12 months.

Upon the permit being surrendered [likely after around eight months], the restoration works will then begin. They would involve the removal of the concrete drilling pad and initial part of the well and the surrounding hardcore surface and pollution prevention membranes, together with any remaining equipment. The perimeter fencing would also be removed, following which the stored soils would be used to level and restore the site surface to an agricultural field. An aftercare plan would then be implemented.

Source: LCC