Material Assets and Waste

Introduction

This chapter describes the methodology and potential impacts for the material assets and waste assessment of the A75 Springholm and Crocketford Improvements (hereafter referred to as “the proposed scheme”). The assessment will be undertaken in accordance with the Design Manual for Roads and Bridges (DMRB) LA 110- Material assets and waste, (revision 0 ) (hereafter referred to as “DMRB LA 110”) and other relevant guidance as set out in this chapter.

The assessment for material assets and waste considers the following matters:

The consumption of ‘material assets’ [Article 3.1 (d) of the Directive 2011/92/EU], which includes materials and products from primary, secondary, recycled, sustainable, and renewable sources, and the use of excavated and other arisings that fall within the scope of waste exemption criteria.

Any impacts on mineral safeguarded areas (or other minerals supply aspects) within the relevant Mineral Planning Authority (MPA).

The production and disposal of ‘waste’ [Annex IV of the Directive 2011/92/EU], in the context of surplus materials which can become waste, as well as other substances which the holder discards or intends or is required to discard.

It does not include the direct energy use associated with operation of the network.

Legislative and Policy Framework

This section provides a summary of the legislation and policies relevant to this material assets and waste assessment.

Legislation

The following legislation is relevant to this material assets and waste assessment:

Landfill Tax (Scotland) Act 2014 (as amended)

This act defines taxable disposal of waste to landfill sites, to encourage waste reduction and recovery of value from waste.

The Environmental Protection (Duty of Care) (Scotland) Regulations 2014 (as amended)

These regulations set out requirements which apply to anyone who produces, carries, keeps, disposes of, or manages controlled waste in Scotland, to ensure waste is managed responsibly and does not harm the environment or human health.

Waste Electrical and Electronic Equipment (WEEE) Regulations 2013 (as amended)

These regulations set out the producer responsibility regime for waste electrical and electronic products in the UK. These regulations implement the requirements of the EU WEEE Directive (2012/19/EU). In particular, they ensure that producers of Electrical and Electronic Equipment (EEE) finance the cost of collection, treatment, recycling and recovery of that equipment when it becomes WEEE.

The Waste (Scotland) Regulations 2012 (as amended)

These regulations require businesses, public sector and not-for-profit organisations to present recyclable materials for separate collection (including glass, metal, plastic, paper and card). Food businesses must also separate food, unless in rural areas. Local authorities must provide a minimum recycling service to households and from 2021, biodegradable municipal waste is banned from going to landfill.

The Waste Management Licensing (Scotland) Regulations 2011 (as amended)

These regulations transpose relevant definitions contained in Directive 2008/98/EC and establish legal framework for waste management in Scotland, including licensing of waste management activities.

The Waste Batteries and Accumulators Regulations 2009 (as amended)

These regulations prevent incineration and landfilling of waste batteries, promote collection, treatment and recycling of waste batteries, and set out responsibilities for battery producers.

The Landfill (Scotland) Regulations 2003 (as amended)

The Landfill (Scotland) Regulations 2003 set standards for the design and operation of landfills.

The Special Waste Regulations 1996 (as amended)

These regulations implement the hazardous waste Directive 91/689/EEC. They outline procedures for disposing of, carrying and receiving special waste.

The Controlled Waste (Registration of Carriers and Seizure of Vehicles) Regulations 1991 (as amended)

These regulations supplement the Control of Pollution (Amendment) Act 1989, which makes waste carrier registration a legal requirement to transport controlled waste to or from any place in the UK. The regulations establish a system for the registration of carriers of controlled waste.

The Environmental Protection Act 1990 (as amended)

This act outlines the basic provisions for the management of all waste, which includes details on the definition of waste, and outlines the Duty of Care placed on those involved in managing wastes.

The Control of Pollution (Amendment) Act 1989 (as amended)

This act addresses regulation of waste transport, particularly of ‘controlled waste’. It requires waste carrier registration for carrying controlled waste and outlines the powers to deal with vehicles used for illegal waste disposal.

National Policy

The following sub-sections provide the national policy relevant to this material and waste assessment.

Scotland’s Circular Economy and Waste Route Map to 2030

Scotland’s Circular Economy and Waste Route Map to 2030 sets 11 priority actions to maximise progress towards a circular economy for Scotland. The Waste Route Map focuses on reducing waste, enhancing recycling and minimising the environmental impact of unavoidable waste.

National Planning Framework 4

The National Planning Framework 4 (NPF4) sets out national planning policy and guides spatial development for Scotland. This framework shapes how land is used and developed across the country. NPF4 is a statutory development plan, and its policies are used to make decisions on planning applications.

Making Things Last A Circular Economy Strategy for Scotland

Making Things Last A Circular Economy Strategy for Scotland sets out priorities for moving towards a circular economy, to keep products and materials in high value use for as long as possible.

Guidance Regulations: timber and FLEGT licences

Guidance Regulations: timber and FLEGT licences for businesses trading timber and timber-related products, Prevents the illegal harvest of timber in the UK market.

Safeguarding Scotland's Resources - Blueprint for a More Resource Efficient and Circular Economy

Safeguarding Scotland's Resources - Blueprint for a More Resource Efficient and Circular Economy is a programme to reduce waste; focusing on reuse and repair and maximising the value of materials.

Scotland's Zero Waste Plan

Scotland's Zero Waste Plan set out a framework for delivering a ‘zero waste’ Scotland. Sets out specific actions and priorities.

Local Policy and Plans

Local level policy and plans set out the following statements with regards to management of material assets and waste:

  • Dumfries and Galloway Local Development Plan 2 (LDP2):
    • Waste must be treated as a resource through keeping materials separate, to maximise their value. Prevention is encouraged, followed by recycling and energy recovery, with disposal (landfill) as the least preferred option of waste management, in accordance with the waste hierarchy.
    • A Site Waste Management Plan (SWMP) may be required by the Council depending on the type and quantity of waste expected.
    • Policy IN6: Waste Management Requirements for New Development lists waste management requirements for all non-waste related new development proposals. This policy states that ‘any planning application which in the view of the Council requires to address the issue of waste should be supported by a SWMP’.
    • The Council is working towards Scotland’s Zero Waste Plan objectives.
    • Policy ED13: Minerals states that ‘permanent development that would result in the sterilisation of mineral resources which are viable or may become viable and could be extracted in accordance with the LDP policy (or which are the subject of extraction interest) will not be permitted’.
    • Peat is generally to be protected as a carbon store.
  • Dumfries and Galloway Local Development Plan 2: Mineral Resources Supplementary Guidance :
    • Provides mineral resource maps and quarry locations.
  • Collation of the results of the 2019 Aggregate Minerals Survey for Scotland (AMSS):
    • Includes an assessment of mineral reserves and estimates regional landbank.

Assessment Methodology

The methodology applied is based on DMRB LA 110, using two geographically different study areas to examine the use of primary, secondary and recycled material assets and the generation and management of waste. Mineral Safeguarding Sites (MSSs) and peat resources which may be encroached on/intersected by the improvement strategies have also been examined. See the Study Area section of this chapter in respect to the study areas.

The material requirements and waste generated by the six improvement strategies is not currently known due to the limited design information available, which is typical at this early stage in the design process. Furthermore, material sources are currently unknown. Calculations of waste arisings (for instance for the earth works balance) will be estimated at DMRB Stage 3. This chapter therefore provides a high-level assessment of the impacts associated with likely materials use and waste generated by the improvement strategies.

The sources of information available at DMRB Stage 1 are the lengths of improvement strategies and the maximum number of new major structures required to be built within the improvement strategies. Therefore, a preliminary level evaluation was carried out, as set out in DMRB LA 110. As is proportionate at this stage of the DMRB assessment, materials and waste quantity estimates and cut/fill balance have not been taken into consideration.

This assessment considers MSSs and peat resources, material consumption, generation and management of waste with respect to the proposed scheme for the following:

  • The likely (though yet to be specified) materials required.
  • The likely (though yet to be specified) anticipated waste arisings (such as inert, non-hazardous, hazardous).
  • MSSs and peat resources in proximity of the improvement strategies.
  • The effects that would arise from potential issues identified and whether these are likely to be significant.
  • A conclusion about whether this level of assessment is sufficient to understand the effects of the proposed scheme or whether detailed assessment is necessary, and the identification of any mitigation measures.

Resources and receptors considered in the assessment include:

  • Policy and targets relevant to material assets and waste.
  • Resource depletion from quarries, other sources of minerals and other finite raw material resources.
  • Capacity of regional waste management infrastructure such as landfills, materials recovery facilities, composting sites and energy from waste plants.

Where quantitative data is not available, professional judgement has been used to inform the criteria set out in DMRB LA 110 when assessing the likely significance of effects during the construction period. This provides a qualitative measure of the relative environmental impacts associated with the use of materials and production of waste from the improvement strategies.

Data Sources – Use and Interpretation of DMRB LA 110

DMRB LA 101 - Introduction to environmental assessment (revision 0) (hereafter referred to as “DMRB LA 101”) advises to undertake a ‘simple assessment’ approach where there is a sufficient level of uncertainty on likely significant environmental effects, and where further evidence is required to support the assessment.

The assessment of effects on material assets and waste adopted for the significance categories is outlined in sub-section below. The significance of effects on material assets and waste are reported in accordance with Table 3.14 Significance criteria of DMRB LA 110.

Sub-section below, reproduced from DMRB LA 110, uses very precise and deliberate language, specifically “OR”, “AND” and “AND/OR” after each descriptor of effect to denote which significance category should be applied. All descriptors need to be met in full in order to assign a relevant significance category (for example with the notable exception of a large effect which can be assigned when a project sterilises greater than or equal to one mineral safeguarding site and/or peat resource). The descriptors of effect for the waste matter are either standalone (very large and neutral effects) or summative (large, moderate and slight effects).

In the absence of further guidance in the DMRB LA 110 standard, the descriptor for material assets with respect to achieved recovery/recycling rates has been interpreted to mean ‘project achieves XX% overall material reuse/recycling/recovery (by weight) to substitute use of primary materials on or off-site’ (for example within the first or second study area). Limiting this to solely ‘construction and demolition waste’ in the context of the ‘material assets’ descriptors (where there are already separate descriptors for ‘waste’) would be impractical and inappropriate given that ‘waste’ is a legally defined term, and that the proposed scheme would not look to use ‘waste’ to substitute primary materials given the potential costs, delays and risks associated with securing Waste Management Licenses.

In the absence of a Scottish specific target in the Scotland National Application Annex to DMRB LA 110 Material assets and waste, the England Average target of 25% (provided in England National Application Annex) has been adopted for the purposes of this assessment for the ‘relevant regional percentage target’.

The published version of DMRB LA 110 includes “AND” instead of “AND/OR”. This has been changed to correct an editorial error in the original guidance that was confirmed in an email from Wilson. S (2020) at Highways England.

Sterilisation is defined by DMRB LA 110 to mean “substantially constrain/prevent existing and potential future use and extraction of materials”. In the absence of further guidance, this has been interpreted to mean that the proposed scheme will need to substantially sterilise (in their entirety) one or more allocated mineral extraction sites and/or or existing or potential peat extraction site or intersects with a significant part of a safeguarded minerals site/existing or potential peat extraction site (greater than 50% by area). A peat resources is defined in DMRB LA 110 as “Existing or potential peat extraction sites”.

Consequently, this simplified assessment framework precludes the application of a methodology to derive a measure of the significance of effect based on the value of a resource (or receptor) and the magnitude of impact as with other DMRB topics.

DMRB LA 110 Significance Category Descriptions for Adverse Effects

The sub-sections below present the DMRB LA 110 Significance Category Descriptions for Adverse Effects (adopted from Table 3.13 of DMRB LA 110).

Very Large Significance

Material assets:

  • no criteria: use criteria for large categories.

Waste:

  • Greater than 1 percentage reduction or alteration in national capacity of landfill, as a result of accommodating waste from a project; or
  • Construction of new (permanent) waste infrastructure is required to accommodate waste from a project.

Large Significance

Material assets:

  • Project achieves less than 70% overall material recovery/recycling (by weight) of non-hazardous Construction and Demolition Waste (CDW) to substitute use of primary materials; and
  • Aggregates required to be imported to site comprise less than 1% reused / recycled content; and/or
  • Project sterilises greater than or equal to 1 mineral safeguarding site and/or peat resource.

Waste:

  • Greater than 1 reduction in the regional capacity of landfill as a result of accommodating waste from a project; and
  • Greater than 50% of project waste for disposal outside of the region.

Moderate Significance

Material assets:

  • Project achieves less than 70% overall material recovery/recycling (by weight) of non-hazardous CDW to substitute use of primary materials ; and
  • Aggregates required to be imported to site comprise reused/recycled content below the relevant regional percentage target.

Waste:

  • Greater than 1% reduction or alteration in the regional capacity of landfill as a result of accommodating waste from a project; and
  • 1-50% of project waste for disposal outside of the region.

Slight Significance

Material assets:

  • Project achieves 70-99% overall material recovery/recycling (by weight) of non-hazardous CDW to substitute use of primary materials; and
  • Aggregates required to be imported to site comprise reused/recycled content in line with the relevant regional percentage target.

Waste:

  • Less than or equal to 1% reduction or alteration in the regional capacity of landfill; and
  • Waste infrastructure has sufficient capacity to accommodate waste from a project, without compromising the integrity of the receiving infrastructure (design life or capacity) within the region.

Material assets:

  • Project achieves greater than 99% overall material recovery/recycling (by weight) of non-hazardous CDW to substitute use of primary materials; and
  • Aggregates required to be imported to site comprise greater than 99% reused/recycled content.

Waste:

  • No reduction or alteration in the capacity of waste infrastructure within the region.
Table 10-1: Significance Criteria for Material Assets and Waste (adopted from Table 3.14 of DMRB LA 110)
Significance Category Aspect Description

Significant (one or more criteria met)

Material assets

Category descriptions met for moderate or large effect.

Significant (one or more criteria met)

Waste

Category description met for moderate, large or very large effect.

Not significant

Material assets

Category description met for neutral or slight effect.

Not significant

Waste

Category description met for neutral or slight effect.

To note, there is no criteria for very large effects on materials, as discussed in the above sub-section.

Assumptions and Limitations

Assumptions

The assessment on material assets and waste receptors is predominantly based on a review of the publicly available baseline information, improvement strategy lengths, the indicative maximum number of major structures likely required to be built within each improvement strategy, and other design information available at the time of the assessment.

At this stage, due to the high-level design development and options appraisal, there are limited details available on construction materials and waste quantities. Therefore, a preliminary level evaluation has been carried out based on DMRB LA 110 methodology, while reporting the assumptions and limitations on data gaps. There has not been an assessment of the potential for using site-won arisings as this information is not available at this stage.

Professional judgement has been used, as appropriate, based on the scale of the improvement strategies and current waste management practices to identify the likely magnitude of the impact. It should be recognised that these will change in subsequent stages as the design progresses and more information becomes available. The assessment of significance assumes that there are no primary materials mandated to be used within any of the improvement strategies.

Operational impacts have been scoped out of this assessment, on the basis that these are not expected to be significant (by quantity). It is also assumed that the assessment of any environmental impacts and effects associated with material assets and waste during any future maintenance, renewal, or improvement works, would be undertaken by the Overseeing Organisation, in line with their requirements and therefore falls outside the scope of this assessment.

Limitations

Whilst the baseline data sources used in this assessment represent the most recently available information, there is a general lag (in years) for materials, waste processing and landfill capacity data in the UK/Scotland and conditions may have changed since the publication of this data. For example, as mineral planning permissions are granted for new reserves and as existing material reserves are worked and consumed. Waste management facilities may be subject to reduced capacities due to utilisation of their finite capacity or permit modification and surrenders changing the availability of capacities.

Although checks are made by stakeholders for anomalies or errors in their data prior to publication, it cannot be guaranteed that these data sets are error-free, or whether any commercial decisions have been taken by site operators that may have affected these data. The availability of material assets and waste management capacity may also be impacted by other buildings and infrastructure projects taking place at the time of construction of the proposed scheme.

Some environmental impacts associated with the extraction and transport of primary raw materials and manufactured products would likely occur offsite. The source, processing and manufacture of materials cannot be determined at this stage. Therefore, it is outside the scope of this assessment to consider the environmental impacts associated with the extraction of raw materials and the manufacture of products.

There is little information available at this early stage regarding the material requirements and waste quantities generated associated with constructing the proposed scheme. These limitations are typical of a scheme at this stage, and the information presented in this chapter includes professional judgement for assessing the requirements. This is considered to represent an appropriate level of detail in line with the assessment methodology outlined in Section 3 of DMRB LA 110.

There is limited information currently available for the following:

Material Assets :

  • Provenance of imported materials and products.
  • Materials that contain secondary/recycled content.
  • Any known sustainability credentials of materials to be consumed.
  • The type and volume of materials that will be recovered from on-site and off-site sources.
  • Details of on-site storage and stockpiling arrangements, and any supporting logistical details.

Waste Management :

  • The types and quantities of waste that may be produced associated with the proposed scheme.
  • The amount of waste (by weight) that will be recovered and diverted from landfill either on-site or off-site (that is, for use on other projects).
  • Types and quantities of waste arising from the proposed scheme (demolition, excavation arisings and remediation) requiring disposal to landfill.
  • Details of on-site storage and segregation arrangement for waste and any supporting logistical arrangements.
  • The chosen waste management methods (recycling, recovery, disposal) and precise geographical locations for managing each waste stream that cannot be re-used on-site.
  • The types and quantities of any hazardous waste.

Study Area

Study areas are defined with reference to DMRB LA 110. The assessment defines two geographically different study areas, used to examine the use of primary, secondary, recycled and manufactured materials, and the generation and management of waste.

The first study area comprises all land contained within the improvement strategies. Within this area materials would be contained, mineral safeguarding sites and/or peat resources could be sterilised, and waste generated and managed, including any areas identified for temporary uses. Such temporary land could include temporary storage areas, construction compounds, haul roads and land for temporary construction site drainage. This will be applied to the improvement strategies as appropriate for assessment, as exact details of construction boundaries are not yet defined. The improvement strategies are located within Dumfries and Galloway.

To allow determination of likely significance of effects in line with the latest DMRB requirements, a second study area has been defined, using professional judgement, as being sufficient to identify:

  • Feasible sources and availability of construction materials.
  • Suitable waste management facilities that could accept excavated arisings and waste generated by the proposed scheme.

Using professional judgement, the second study area is considered on a regional basis for Dumfries and Galloway, in line with DMRB LA 110. In the context of this chapter, the Dumfries and Galloway region comprises of Dumfriesshire, Kirkcudbrightshire, and Wigtownshire.

In reality, and in accordance with DMRB LA 110, professional judgement may need to be applied, with consideration for a balance of the proximity principle and value for money in establishing the second study area. A study area with greater than regional consideration may need to be applied during later DMRB stages to take a realistic account of the interregional movement of material assets and waste within the UK, to recognise that cross-boundary movements are likely to occur.

The study areas described above are shown on Figure 10-1 (A and B).

Baseline Conditions

A desktop review assessment has been undertaken using the information available at this time, in order to establish for the two study areas, the current and likely future baseline conditions for material assets and waste over the next 10-years in the absence of a specified anticipated construction period.

Baseline data has been collected at the regional level for Dumfries and Galloway, including the availability of primary, secondary and recycled aggregate materials; as well as information on waste management capacity, including remaining landfill void space and annual capacities of waste transfer, waste treatment, metal recycling and waste incineration facilities. The presence of mineral safeguarded and allocated sites, and active quarries has been collected on a county level for Dumfries and Galloway.

For the landfill capacity and waste infrastructure baseline, surrounding regions of the second study area have been included in the assessment. This broader area is referred to as ‘Dumfries and Galloway and the surrounding area’ and includes Dumfries and Galloway, the Scottish Borders, Ayrshire, Lanarkshire and Glasgow City.

The baseline has been prepared with reference to the latest minerals, waste and waste planning information, and other information, comprising:

Material Assets

For the purposes of this assessment, material assets are considered to be the physical resources that may be required for the construction of the proposed scheme, which may be of man-made or natural origin.

Primary, secondary and recycled aggregates have been chosen to act as a proxy indicator of regional material assets given that large quantities of aggregates are typically required for motorway and all-purpose trunk road schemes. This is also considered appropriate due to the prominence given to aggregates in DMRB LA 110.

Material Assets – Aggregates Consumption Associated with the Existing Roads Network

The operational maintenance of the existing road network is likely to consume both unbound aggregates (used as sub-base and drainage applications) and bound aggregates (used in ready-mixed concrete, asphalt and pre-cast concrete products). At this stage, no figures are available regarding the baseline quantities of operational and maintenance aggregates consumption generated across the first study area. This information will be sought where it is available as the design develops through the subsequent stages.

Material Assets – Regional Primary, Secondary and Recycled Aggregates

Scotland’s National Planning Framework 4 (hereafter referred to as “NPF4”) continues the UK landbank approach to planning for the supply of construction aggregates. Adopted in February 2023, NPF4 details the long-term planning strategy for Scotland to 2045. In terms of minerals, NPF4 sets out planning policies which ensure that a steady supply of construction aggregates is maintained to meet the needs of society and the economy in an acceptable and sustainable manner.

NPF4 requires those preparing local development plans to adopt a landbank approach to planning for the supply of construction aggregates. This approach is intended to ensure that a stock of reserves, with planning permission, is maintained to ensure adequate supplies of aggregates. Those preparing local development plans are required through NPF4 to maintain a landbank of permitted reserves equivalent to a minimum of ten years’ supply at all times. The 10-year period recognises the likely time that it takes to bring a new site into full production.

NPF4 confirms that Dumfries and Galloway had a total landbank for crushed rock and sand and gravel of 109 years and 14 years respectively at the end of 2019 (the most recent year available), as presented in Table 10-2 below.

Table 10-2: 2019 Dumfries and Galloway Landbank and Reserves, Aggregate Minerals Survey for Scotland

Dumfries and Galloway, Aggregate Minerals Survey for Scotland: Reporting Year 2019

Sand and Gravel

Crushed Rock

Landbank (years)

14

109

Sales (tonnes)

407,000

165,000

Reserves (tonnes)

5,852,000

17,878,000

Review of the British Geological Survey Directory of Mines and Quarries suggests that the mines and quarries in the study area are able to supply a wide range of materials, including but not limited to, primary aggregate, concrete and asphalt products. It can reasonably be inferred that there is likely to be an adequate supply of construction aggregates available within the study area to construct the proposed scheme; and policy, strategic and legislative drivers are likely to facilitate that sufficient capacity is provided.

A metric for estimating recycled and secondary aggregates within the regions is via the assessment of Construction and Demolition Waste (CDW) management data contained within SEPA’s Waste Discover Data tool . The latest datasets show that 4,616,588 tonnes of CDW was generated in Scotland in 2022. The composition of this waste is indicated in Table 10-3.

The tool also confirmed that 90.4% of inert and non-hazardous CDW was recorded as having been recycled in 2022 (88.8% average between 2011 and 2022), against the EU Waste Framework Directive 2008/98/EC target of 70% by 2020. Construction and demolition recycling rates are from data provided to Europe for reporting under the Waste Framework Directive. Construction and demolition recycling excludes hazardous waste and naturally occurring soil and stones coded under 17 05 04 of the European Catalogue List of Wastes.

Table 10-3: Generated Construction and Demolition Waste from all Sources in 2022
Waste Type Generated in 2022 (tonnes) Composition in 2022 (percentage)

Dredging spoils

5,129

0.11

Glass wastes

20,277

0.44

Household and similar wastes

2,610

0.06

Metallic wastes, ferrous

85,316

1.85

Metallic wastes, mixed ferrous and non-ferrous

20,415

0.44

Metallic wastes, non-ferrous

10,329

0.22

Mineral waste from construction and demolition

1,359,714

29.45

Other mineral wastes

2,215

0.05

Plastic wastes

7,825

0.17

Soils

2,981,523

64.58

Vegetal wastes

792

0.02

Wood wastes

120,443

2.61

Total

4,616,588

100

Mineral Safeguarding Sites and Peat Resources

DMRB LA 110 defines mineral sites as ’operational sites or sites identified within strategic planning documents for the extraction of minerals‘. Scotland’s NPF4 requires that:

  • Local development plans should safeguard important workable mineral resources, which are of economic or conservation value, and take steps to ensure these are not sterilised by other types of development.

A review of the Dumfries and Galloway Local Development Plan 2: Mineral Resources Supplementary Guidance has identified, from Map 2, underlying greywacke (a form of sandstone) north-west of the first study area. From the current maps available, it appears that the mineral is present within a 2km buffer of the first study area. However, the intersection is slight, and none of the improvement strategies themselves appear to intersect the mineral safeguarding site (MSS). It is therefore unlikely that any improvement strategies would intersect the greywacke MSS. From Map 2, there are no quarries identified within the improvement strategies. Therefore, there is no likely impact on MSSs in Dumfries and Galloway.

A review of the Mining Remediation Authority Map Viewer shows that none of the improvement strategies lie within a Coal Mining Reporting Area.

Peat (superficial geology), and peatland, have been identified within the DMRB Stage 1 Assessment Corridor. Please refer to Figure 9.1 (A and B) – Superficial Geology and Peatland.

Peat (superficial geology) is contained within the DMRB Stage 1 Assessment Corridor and is impacted by Improvement Strategy 1,2 and 5; it is also in close proximity to Improvement Strategy 4.

A review of the Carbon and Peatland 2016 map also indicates that Class 3, 4 and 5 peatland is contained within the DMRB Stage 1 Assessment Corridor. Improvement Strategies 1, 2, 5 and 6 impact class 3, 4 and 5 peatland and Improvement Strategies 3 and 4 impact class 4 and 5 peatland.

As some improvement strategies have the potential to intersect with peat (superficial geology) and peatland, impacts on MSSs and peat resources will be considered further in this assessment.

Materials – Future Baseline

For the purpose of this assessment, it has been assumed that the size of the primary aggregate landbanks and the supply market for secondary and recycled aggregate will be largely the same during the construction period as for the baseline year.

While it is expected that existing landbanks will continue to be depleted, other sites and extensions to existing sites are likely to be granted to offset any potential shortfall in capacity, so that sufficient availability is provided in line with future policy requirements and market demands. MSSs and peat resources in proximity of the proposed scheme are also assumed likely to remain as per the current baseline.

Waste

The proposed scheme would potentially produce a range of waste types including inert, non-hazardous and hazardous wastes. The majority of wastes assumed to be produced would be construction and demolition type wastes (CDW). There would also be a small amount of municipal-type waste associated with construction workers such as food waste and packaging. A large proportion of this waste is likely to be suitable for reuse, recycling or other recovery, although a proportion may also require disposal.

Waste – Waste Generation Associated with the Existing Roads Network

The operational maintenance of the existing road network is likely to generate a range of CDW wastes including, but not limited to asphalt planings, soft-estate vegetative arisings, road sweepings, gully arisings, oil separator waste, animal by-products and litter. At the time of writing, there were no precise figures available regarding the baseline quantities of operational/maintenance waste generated across the first study area.

Waste – Waste Transfer, Treatment Recycling and Recovery Baseline

The availability of waste transfer, treatment, recycling, recovery and disposal infrastructure within Dumfries and Galloway and the surrounding area, able to accept inert, non-hazardous and hazardous waste likely to be generated during construction, has been considered through a review of the SEPA Scottish waste sites and capacity tool .

A number of the waste facilities identified in Table 10-4 operate more than one waste management activity on-site and include both merchant and restricted facilities. The reported tonnages therefore represent the total wastes inputted to each facility type and not the tonnages per activity. Similarly, the reported capacities are for the facility type as a whole, not per activity as these data are not currently published by SEPA.

Table 10-4: Annual Capacity and Utilised Capacity of Operational Waste Sites in Dumfries and Galloway and the Surrounding Area, 2023
Waste Management Facility Type Annual Waste Capacity (tonnes) Waste Inputs (2023) (tonnes) Utilised Capacity (2023) (percentage)

Anaerobic digestion

275,750

114,872

42

Anaerobic digestion / Other treatment

121,135

104,597

86

Civic amenity

437,374

182,262

42

Civic amenity / Composting

38,926

15,179

39

Civic amenity / Landfill (not operational)

2,499

796

32

Civic amenity / Transfer station

667,982

191,444

29

Co-incineration

750,000

71,845

10

Composting

105,800

29,282

28

Incineration / Anaerobic Digestion / Other treatment

246,000

164,136

67

Incineration / Other treatment

10,000

3,266

33

Landfill

1,130,000

142,399

13

Landfill / Civic Amenity / Composting

277,500

7,005

3

Landfill / Composting

254,950

75,482

30

Landfill / Other treatment

1,800,000

464,071

26

Landfill / Transfer station

125,000

42,621

34

Metal recycler

337,921

537,303

159

Metal recycler / Transfer station

21,000

9,641

46

Other treatment

3,943,229

4,105,246

104

Transfer station

8,199,025

1,292,799

16

Transfer station / Landfill (not operational)

140,000

1,585

1

Transfer station / Other treatment

883,905

442,376

50

Total capacity / inputs, and average utilised capacity (2023)

19,767,996

7,998,207

42

It can therefore be assumed on the basis of the above facility types, throughputs and capacities, that there would be significant opportunity for appropriate wastes arising during the construction of the proposed scheme to be reused, recycled or otherwise recovered via appropriate means, subject to the waste hierarchy.

Notwithstanding, the available waste transfer, treatment, recycling and recovery infrastructure is considered to be a beneficiary of incoming feedstock through driving the management of waste up the waste hierarchy. These facilities are therefore not considered to be receptors, for the purposes of the assessment in the same way as landfills, given that they have the potential to reduce the magnitude of adverse impacts associated with waste generation and disposal.

Waste – Inert, Non-Hazardous and Hazardous Landfill Capacity Baseline

For wastes which cannot be reused, recycled or otherwise recovered, disposal to landfill would be required. SEPA Scottish waste sites and capacity tool details the total remaining landfill capacity in Dumfries and Galloway and the surrounding area in 2023 as presented in Table 10-5.

Table 10-5: Landfill Capacity Available in Dumfries and Galloway and the Surrounding Area, 2023
Landfill Type Dumfries and Galloway and the Surrounding Area (tonnes)

Hazardous

0

Non-hazardous landfill

7,253,902

Inert landfill

5,315,500

Total

12,569,402

There is no hazardous landfill capacity remaining in Dumfries and Galloway and the surrounding area, therefore national hazardous landfill capacity has been considered for the proposed scheme (see Table 10-6).

Table 10-6: Hazardous Landfill Capacity Available in Scotland, 2023

Landfill Type

Scotland (tonnes)

Hazardous

31,000

Total

31,000

Waste – Future Waste Treatment, Recycling and Recovery Capacity Baseline

Waste treatment, recycling and recovery facilities are typically characterised by large annual throughputs; consequently, large step changes in capacity (as single facilities are commissioned) have an exaggerated impact on trends. Waste treatment, recycling and recovery infrastructure capacity cannot, therefore, be realistically projected forward to the construction period.

Waste treatment, recycling and recovery infrastructure respond to market demands, and historical trends show that infrastructure is added or removed, not least to cope with changes in waste generation. The future waste treatment and recovery infrastructure capacity for use in the assessment will, therefore, be based on the most recent available SEPA annual capacity/input data. This suggests that there is likely to be adequate opportunity for wastes arising during the construction to be recycled or otherwise recovered via appropriate means.

Waste – Future Inert, Non-Hazardous and Restricted User Landfill Capacity Baseline

Projected future inert, non-inert and hazardous landfill capacity has been estimated in Table 10-7. This is based on the average annual percentage change in remaining landfill capacity for the years for which consistent data are available from the SEPA Scottish waste sites and capacity tool (2015 to 2023).

The predicted changes in landfill capacity are derived from the existing SEPA waste sites and capacity tool time-based data (such as remaining landfill capacity at the end of each calendar year). These data have been projected forward to 2035, using the calculated average annual capacity change in inert and non-hazardous landfill (5.09% increasing capacity), and hazardous landfill (13.37% decreasing capacity) from 2015 to 2023, in order to provide an estimate of the remaining landfill capacity that may be available during the construction period (which has yet to be specified, but has been assumed likely to fall within the next 5-8 years). These estimates assume the continuation of a similar trend as that reported by SEPA for 2015 to 2023.

Due to there being no hazardous landfill capacity remaining in Dumfries and Galloway and the surrounding area, this assessment has considered hazardous landfill capacity on a national basis. There is limited non-hazardous landfill capacity and no remaining inert landfill capacity in Dumfries and Galloway, which is why the further decision has been made to assess the inert and non-hazardous landfill capacity in the region on the basis of Dumfries and Galloway and the surrounding area (Dumfries and Galloway, the Scottish Borders, Ayrshire, Lanarkshire and Glasgow City).

Table 10-7: Forecast Future Inert and Non-Hazardous Landfill Capacity in Dumfries and Galloway and the Surrounding Area and National Hazardous Landfill Capacity
Timeline Forecast Future Landfill Capacity in the Second Study Area - Dumfries and Galloway and the Surrounding Area Inert and Non-Hazardous Landfill Capacity (tonnes) Forecast Future Landfill Capacity in the Second Study Area - National Hazardous Capacity (tonnes)

2015

22,149,429

164,264

2016

20,561,385

133,601

2017

19,684,593

100,000

2018

17,416,457

80,000

2019

16,198,240

59,180

2020

15,858,253

43,557

2021

26,155,689

34,732

2022

13,325,178

17,225

2023

12,569,402

31,000

2024

13,209,370

26,856

2025

13,881,921

23,266

2026

14,588,715

20,156

2027

15,331,496

17,462

2028

16,112,095

15,128

2029

16,932,438

13,106

2030

17,794,548

11,354

2031

18,700,553

9,836

2032

19,652,687

8,521

2033

20,653,298

7,382

2034

21,704,855

6,395

2035

22,809,952

5,541

Average between (2025 to 2035)

18,014,778

12,559

There is generally a reducing trend for landfill capacity in Scotland, however, it is envisaged that the vast majority of waste arising from the proposed scheme would be reused, recycled or otherwise recovered in accordance with legislative and policy requirements. This assumption is validated by the available Scottish statistics with 90.4% of inert and non-hazardous CDW having been recycled and diverted from landfill in 2022 (the most recent year available).

This will be required in order to demonstrate the proposed scheme’s contribution to achieving Scotland's Zero Waste Plan target of recycling 70% of all waste, and landfilling a maximum of 5% by 2025; and to comply with the provisions of The Waste (Scotland) Regulations 2011 (for example taking all such reasonable measures available to apply the waste hierarchy) and The Waste (Scotland) Regulations 2012 (for example banning the landfilling of segregated waste).

It is also of note that even where wastes are accepted at landfill some may, subject to their properties, be used within landfill cover or other engineering uses, rather than be subject to and accounted as disposal. Any landfills that have ceased infilling at the time of construction and are no longer accepting waste may also still require inert and non-hazardous materials for capping and restoration purposes and therefore may be amenable to accepting any suitable surplus materials arising from the proposed scheme. However, the potential for this to occur has not been explored at this stage.

Sensitivity

The baseline environment is comprised of receptors which have been defined geographically based on the likely environmental effects, associated with the use and consumption of material assets and the production and disposal of waste, as set out in DMRB LA 110. Whilst these receptors and an indication of their sensitivity have been summarised in the sub-section below, it should be noted that the DMRB LA 110 simplified significance framework precludes the need to assign a sensitivity rating to the identified receptors for the purposes of assessment.

Baseline Receptor Sensitivity

The following sub-sections describe the sensitivity of the baseline receptors.

Primary, Secondary and Recycled Aggregate Resources

There is likely to be a good supply of both primary and recycled aggregates within the study area to construct the proposed scheme. Although, there is currently limited information on the availability of secondary aggregates.

Mineral Safeguarding Sites and Peat Resources

There is one mineral site within the 2km buffer zone of the first study area.

There is Class 3, 4 and 5 peatlands identified within the first study area, and there is potential intersection of all improvement strategies (except Improvement Strategy 4) with peat soil. Given that all improvement strategies appear to intersect or be in close proximity to peat resources, as a receptor, peat and peatland has been scoped in to further assessment of potential impact and effects in this chapter.

Waste Management Infrastructure

There is likely to be sufficient inert and non-hazardous landfill capacity (18,014,778 tonnes) within the second study area to support the construction of the proposed scheme. However, there is anticipated to very limited hazardous landfill capacity (12,559 tonnes).

Potential Impacts

Material Assets

The types of materials likely to be required for construction would be common to all improvement strategies including aggregates, concrete and asphalt. At this stage of the proposed scheme, there is no information on the quantities of materials to be used during construction for all improvement strategies. However, information on the indicative maximum number of new major structures required for each improvement strategy and the approximate lengths of improvement strategies have been estimated. A summary of this data can be seen in Table 10-8.

The indicative maximum number of new major structures presented in Table 10-8 is based on the estimated number of major structures only, excluding minor structures that may require to be built for the improvement strategies. Retaining walls have not been considered at this stage. For the purposes of this assessment, a minor structure has an expected length of 2m or greater, up to 20m, and a major structure has an expected length of 20m or greater. In addition, structure numbers are approximate depending on the route option developed at DMRB Stage 2.

Table 10-8: Improvement Strategy Approximate Lengths and the Indicative Maximum Number of New Major Structures required for each Improvement Strategy
Improvement Strategy Approximate Length (km) Indicative Maximum Number of New Major Structures

Improvement Strategy 1

19.0

4

Improvement Strategy 2

12.4

2

Improvement Strategy 3

5.4

1

Improvement Strategy 4

6.0

2

Improvement Strategy 5

11.0

1

Improvement Strategy 6

17.2

3

Imported aggregates can be either primary (sand, natural gravels or rock) or secondary (recycled concrete, recycled road planings or materials from building demolition). The choice of whether to use primary or secondary aggregates (or both) would be made considering a combination of factors such as materials source, specification, production and transport. Secondary aggregates may not always have the lowest impact on the environment, and materials would be selected based on a consideration of all relevant impacts – like the effects from transportation.

Waste

The main waste streams generated by construction of the proposed scheme is expected to be CDW, in a form of unavoidable construction wastes (off-cuts, off-specification products), avoidable construction wastes (damaged and excess materials), demolition waste from the existing structures and excavated arisings (cut).

Other waste types generated by the improvement strategies would include soils, WEEE, packaging wastes, wood or timber waste, waste metal and Municipal Solid Waste (MSW) from site offices and construction workers. Quantities of those are not available at this stage, however, available information on waste management facilities in Dumfries and Galloway and the surrounding area (see Table 10-4) and professional judgement suggest there is adequate capacity to transfer, recycle and recover waste from the construction of the proposed scheme.

For all improvement strategies, small amounts of hazardous wastes such as used paint, oils, adhesives, sealants, bituminous mixtures and tars generated during construction could be managed via the regional hazardous waste transfer station facilities for recycling, recovery and disposal as appropriate. Although it is possible that some specific items of hazardous wastes may end up being disposed of outside of the region, this is unlikely to be large volumes (for example, small numbers of portable batteries to very specialist national facilities).

As per the Waste – Future Inert, Non-Hazardous and Restricted User Landfill Capacity Baseline section of this chapter , it is expected that at least 70% of non-hazardous CDW from the proposed scheme would be reused, recycled or otherwise recovered. Realistically, it is expected that it would be at least 90%. Nonetheless, to present the worst-case scenario, the assessment assumed that all excavated arisings would require disposal to a landfill.

Impact of Improvement Strategies – Material Assets

From Table 10-8, general assumptions can be made for the material quantity requirements for each improvement strategy. The longer the improvement strategy, the more material is likely to be required for improvement strategy construction. The higher the maximum number of major structures required to be built to enable construction of the improvement strategy, the more material is likely to be required for the construction of these major structures.

The limitation to this assumption is that it is unknown at this stage whether the route options that are to be developed within improvement strategies would be single carriageway or dual carriageway, and the size of the different major structures required for each improvement strategy. This information is not typically available DMRB Stage 1.

Improvement Strategy 1 is the longest (approximately 19km) and would require the highest maximum number of new major structures (4 structures). On this basis, it is likely that Improvement Strategy 1 would require the most materials for construction.

Improvement Strategy 3 is the shortest (approximately 5.4km) and would require the lowest maximum number of new major structures (1 structure). On this basis, it is likely that Improvement Strategy 3 would require the least materials for construction.

Based on this logic, a shorter improvement strategy length and a lower maximum number of new major structures required to be built to enable construction, the less construction material would be required for the proposed scheme. Sub-section below1 summarises a ranking of the likely impacts of materials from the improvement strategies.

Improvement Strategy 5 is approximately 11.0km in length and would require a maximum of 1 new major structure. Improvement Strategy 4 is approximately 6.0km in length and would require a maximum number of 2 new major structures. In this instance, it is more difficult to determine which option may have the greater effect. As the size of the major structures is considered a more variable parameter, this has been selected as the less reliable indicator of the quantity of material that may be required for construction. For this reason, the longer improvement strategy (Improvement Strategy 5) has been assumed to have a greater effect from materials than Improvement Strategy 4.

Likely Significant Effects of Material Assets from Improvement Strategies

The following sub-sections outline the likely significant effects of material assets from the improvement strategies (ranked in order from most to least) and the reasoning behind the ranking.

Improvement Strategy 1

Likely significance is 1 st (most significant). This is the longest improvement strategy (approximately 19.0km) and has the highest maximum number of new major structures to be built (four).

Improvement Strategy 6

Likely significance is 2 nd overall. This is the second longest improvement strategy (approximately 17.2km) and has the second highest number of new major structures to be built (three).

Improvement Strategy 2

Likely significance is 3 rd overall. This is the third longest improvement strategy (approximately 12.4km) and has the joint second lowest maximum number of new major structures to be built (two).

Improvement Strategy 5

Likely significance is 4 th overall. This is the third shortest improvement strategy (approximately 11.0km) and has the joint lowest maximum number of new major structures to be built (one).

Improvement Strategy 4

Likely significance is 5 th overall. This is the second shortest improvement strategy (approximately 6.0km) and has the joint second lowest maximum number of new major structures to be built (two).

Improvement Strategy 3

Likely significance is 6th (least significant) overall. This is the shortest improvement strategy (approximately 5.4km) and has the joint lowest maximum number of new major structures to be built (one).

Impact of Improvement Strategies – Waste

From Table 10-8, general assumptions can be made for the waste quantities associated with each improvement strategy. It is likely that the longer improvement strategies, would require more excavation activities and therefore more excavation waste is likely to be generated. The higher the maximum number of new major structures required to be built within the improvement strategy, the more waste from construction (offcuts, damaged and excess materials) is likely to be generated to enable the major structure to be built. Demolition waste is also more likely for longer improvement strategies, as these routes span greater distances, covering more land surface and increasing the chances of intersecting with existing structures.

The limitation to this assumption is that it is unknown at this stage whether the route options that are to be developed within improvement strategies would be single carriageway or dual carriageway, and the size of the different major structures required. This information is not typically available DMRB Stage 1.

As is typical at this early stage of the design process, the design of the improvement strategies is currently not at a stage to determine potential demolition waste, so this is also a limiting factor in this assessment.

Improvement Strategy 1 is the longest (approximately 19.0km) and has the highest maximum number of new major structures to be built (4 structures). On this basis, it is likely that Improvement Strategy 1 would generate the most waste from construction, excavation and demolition.

Improvement Strategy 3 is the shortest (approximately 5.4km) and has the lowest maximum number of new major structures to be built (1 structure). On this basis, it is likely that Improvement Strategy 3 would generate the least waste from construction, excavation and demolition.

Based on this logic, a shorter improvement strategy length requires less structures to be built to enable construction and as such, less construction, excavation and demolition waste would be generated by the proposed scheme. The sub-section below summarises a ranking of the likely impacts of waste from the improvement strategies.

Improvement Strategy 5 is approximately 11.0km long and would require a maximum of 1 new major structure. Improvement Strategy 4 is approximately 6.0km long and would require a maximum of 2 new major structures. In this instance, it is more difficult to determine which route may have the greater effect. As the size of the major structures is considered a more variable parameter, this has been selected as the less reliable indicator of the quantity of waste that may be generated. For this reason, the longer improvement strategy (Improvement Strategy 5) has been assumed to have a greater effect from waste than Improvement Strategy 4.

Likely Significant Effects of Waste from Improvement Strategies

The following sub-sections present the likely significant effects of waste from the improvement strategies (ranked in order from most to least) and the reasoning for the ranking.

Improvement Strategy 1

Likely significance is 1 st (most significant) overall. This is the longest improvement strategy (approximately 19.0km) and has the highest maximum number of new major structures to be built (four).

Improvement Strategy 6

Likely significance is 2 nd overall. This is the second longest improvement strategy (approximately 17.2km) and has the second highest maximum number of new major structures to be built (three).

Improvement Strategy 2

Likely significance is 3 rd overall. This is the third longest improvement strategy (approximately 12.4km) and has the joint second lowest maximum number of new major structures to be built (two).

Improvement Strategy 5

Likely significance is 4 th overall. This is the third shortest improvement strategy (approximately 11.0km) and has the joint lowest maximum number of major new structures to be built (one).

Improvement Strategy 4

Likely significance is 5 th overall. This is the second shortest improvement strategy (approximately 6.0km) and has the joint second lowest maximum number of new major structures to be built (two).

Improvement Strategy 3

Likely significance is 6 th (least significant) overall. This is the shortest improvement strategy (approximately 5.4km) and has the joint lowest maximum number of new major structures to be built (one).

It should be noted that although the sub-sections above use reasonable assumptions for the likely impacts of waste to be generated from the proposed scheme, the amount of demolition waste generated could notably affect the waste estimates for the improvement strategies and must be considered further.

Design, Mitigation and Enhancement Measures

Measures are proposed, where appropriate, to reduce the potential impacts associated with both the consumption of material as well as the generation and management of waste during the construction of the proposed scheme. There is considerable synergy between material use and waste generation, thus, there is overlap between the mitigation measures.

Design Measures

The design of the proposed scheme has not been sufficiently developed to allow mitigation measures to be defined in detail. This section then identifies established and reliable design, mitigation and enhancement measures considering relevant legislation, policy and good practice. These measures would be implemented during subsequent stages as more information becomes available.

The design for the proposed scheme would aim to minimise the use of materials where practicable and follow the waste hierarchy by reducing waste generation, increasing the recycling or recovery of waste where feasible, and reducing where possible the need for waste disposal. The earthworks design associated with the proposed scheme would aim to achieve a cut/fill balance to avoid the need to import or export material during the construction of the proposed scheme. Where practicable, construction materials would be sourced from locations close to the proposed scheme, for example, aggregate, tarmac and drainage products such as pipework.

Additional measures to design out waste and improve resource efficiency include:

  • Importing materials with high recycled content.
  • Designing the layout to use the existing topography.
  • Designing for off-site construction of elements if practical (for example manholes, retaining walls).
  • Designing for deconstruction and flexibility to make sure structures can be maintained, refurbished or extended if required.

Mitigation Measures

The production of a SWMP is regarded as good practice and an effective tool to achieve the most sustainable outcome in terms of waste and materials management. Furthermore, the Dumfries and Galloway LDP2 Policy IN6 states that any non-waste related planning application which in the view of the Council requires to address the issue of waste should be supported by a SWMP.

Potential additional measures that can be taken to reduce waste arisings during construction include:

  • Segregating all arisings on-site.
  • Reuse and recovery of materials on-site.
  • Screening arisings for use as recycled aggregates.
  • Identifying reusable materials on site for use on-site, storage or resale.
  • Recycling and reusing suitable materials from any excess incoming construction materials.
  • Removing recyclable and recoverable materials from site to be processed by licensed facilities.

Enhancement Measures

Enhancement measures will be explored throughout the design and construction. Design choices and the choice of materials for the construction of the proposed scheme may make a significant contribution to minimising the material operational effects by influencing the required frequency of maintenance and their lifecycle.

Enhancement opportunities exist for reuse of soils and materials within the proposed scheme, that align with the requirements of the waste hierarchy and can be implemented where applicable post-consent during the detailed design phase and subsequent construction work.

Example enhancement opportunities could include, but are not limited to:

  • Using surplus recycled or recovered materials in community projects, for example using recycled mulch from tree felling on adjacent community facilities.
  • Recycling suitable material for construction of noise and landscape bunding outside of the road boundary where need has previously been identified (where land availability allows).

Assessment of Likely Significant Effects

The likely significance of the potential effects is assessed within the summary provided in the sub-sections below, which takes into consideration the application of the mitigation measures detailed in the Design, Mitigation and Enhancement Measures section of this chapter.

At this stage of assessment, based on the information available, all improvement strategies have been assessed as having the same significance outcome for material assets and waste. However, the varying potential significance of effects based on the approximate improvement strategy lengths and indicative maximum number of major structures required can be seen and considered in the Likely Significant Effects of Material Assets and Waste from Improvement Strategies sections of this chapter.

Overall, the potential impacts from all improvement strategies would result from the use of material resources in construction, resulting in the depletion of natural resources at a regional and national level. This could prevent the consumption of similar material assets by future generations. The generation of surplus materials and wastes as a result of construction may impact upon the available waste management infrastructure, through both the permanent use of local and regional landfill capacity, or the short-term use of waste and recycling infrastructure capacity.

The baseline information indicates that there is likely to be sufficient material available to meet the volume required to be brought onsite for construction of all improvement strategies. It is reasonable to assume that, in line with standard practice, all improvement strategies would be able to achieve greater than or equal to 70% (by weight) of non-hazardous CDW to substitute the use of primary materials. It is also reasonable to assume that the aggregates required to be imported to site could be selected and sourced to ensure they comprise reused or recycled content in line with the percentage target of 25% for the England average target, in the absence of a Scotland specific target.

There is an increasing trend in inert and non-hazardous landfill capacity, and there is currently a reasonable overall landfill capacity available within Dumfries and Galloway and the surrounding area, as shown in Table 10-5. These data indicate that there is sufficient capacity to enable landfill disposal, if this is required by the proposed scheme. However, due to limited and declining hazardous landfill capacity in Scotland, it is possible that hazardous waste generated by the proposed scheme may require to be disposed of outside of the country boundary. In reality, small amounts of hazardous waste generated by the proposed scheme are likely able to be managed at treatment facilities within the region, and hazardous waste disposal to landfill should be avoided where feasible.

Given the current information available, the outcome of this assessment is that all improvement strategies are likely to have a moderate and ‘significant’ effect on waste receptors, due to the very limited hazardous waste capacity remaining and forecast in Scotland. All improvement strategies are likely to have large and ‘significant’ effects on material asset receptors, due to potential sterilisation of peat resources, for the purposes of environmental impact assessment or for selecting the improvement strategy.

Summary of Significance Assessment for Improvement Strategies 1 – 6: Material Asset

The following DMRB significance criteria were considered:

  • Project achieves 70-99% overall material recovery/recycling (by weight) of non-hazardous CDW to substitute use of primary materials.
  • Aggregates required to be imported to site comprise reused/recycled content which meets the relevant regional percentage target, which meets relevant regional percentage target, which the England average of 25%.
  • Project sterilises greater than or equal to one mineral safeguarding site and/or peat resource.

The results of the assessment against the first two DMRB significance criteria listed above was a significance of Slight and Not Significant.

The results of the assessment for the last DMRB significance criteria listed above was a significance of Large.

Description of Impacts – Material Asset

For material assets for Improvement Strategies 1 - 6, it is estimated that the proposed scheme could achieve 70-99% overall material recovery/recycling (by weight) of non-hazardous CDW to substitute virgin material, and the England average target of 25% for reused/recycled content for material brought to site.

This assumption is based on the proposed scheme’s contribution to achieving Scotland’s Zero Waste Plan target of recycling 70% of all waste and landfilling a maximum of 5% by 2025. With good practice and mitigation this is likely to be higher.

This assumption is further supported by Scottish waste statistics which confirm that 90.4% of inert and non-hazardous CDW was recycled in 2022 (88.8% average between 2011 and 2022).

Reference to the Mineral Products Association ‘Profile of the UK Mineral Products Industry 2023 Edition’ also confirms that ~30% of the total supply of construction aggregates in 2022 was from recycled and secondary sources.

However, Improvement Strategies 1 – 6 appear to intersect or be in close proximity to peat soils and peatland. This means there is potential to sterilise peat greater than or equal to 1 peat resource, and therefore the overall impact significance of material assets must be categorised as large.

Summary of Significance Assessment for Improvement Strategies 1 – 6: Waste

The following DMRB significance criteria were considered:

  • Greater than 1% reduction or alteration in the regional capacity of landfill as a result of accommodating waste from a project.
  • 1-50% of project waste for disposal outside of the region.

The results of the assessment against both DMRB significance criteria listed above was a significance of Moderate and Significant.

Description of Impacts – Waste

There is capacity within the regional waste infrastructure to accommodate the likely types and quantities of non-hazardous and inert waste material from Improvement Strategies 1- 6. Table 10-4 demonstrates the range of facilities that are available to manage wastes, in particular inert and non-hazardous waste materials.

The regional waste infrastructure is likely to have sufficient landfill capacity to be able to accommodate non-hazardous and inert waste types generated from the proposed scheme, without compromising the integrity of the receiving waste infrastructure. With recycling and mitigation, the volume of waste generated is even more likely to have a less than1% impact on regional landfill capacity.

Hazardous waste transfer stations and physical treatment or physico-chemical treatment facilities within the region are likely to be able to manage small quantities of hazardous waste expected to be generated by the proposed scheme. However, landfill sites in Scotland have limited capacity to manage quantities of hazardous waste that require landfill disposal depending on their type and properties and may require disposal outside of the region.

Proposed Scope of Future Assessment

Further information, namely estimates for material and waste quantities, would be required in subsequent DMRB Stages. From preliminary assessment, it seems likely that waste will be scoped in to further assessment, and materials and mineral safeguarding areas will also be scoped in to further iterations. Anticipated construction period, estimated construction, excavation, and demolition waste, and cut/fill balances would be required for more detailed waste significance criteria assessment. Estimated construction material quantities for the improvement strategies (influenced by the carriageway dimensions for example single carriageway/dual carriage way) and indicative maximum number of major structures required to enable development of the improvement strategies would also be required, as would construction material quantities for any supporting or temporary structures of the proposed scheme.

Summary

At this stage of assessment, all improvement strategies have been assessed to have similar significance for adverse effects. All improvement strategies are likely to have moderate and significant effects on regional and Scotland-wide waste receptors and are likely to have large and significant effects on regional material asset and mineral safeguarding area receptors.

As is proportionate at DMRB Stage 1, estimated quantities for materials required and waste generated from the proposed scheme have not been taken into consideration. Assumptions have been made based on the approximate improvement strategy lengths and indicative maximum number of new major structures required. Table 10-9 summarises the outcome of this assessment, using a ranking from 1 st (likely to have the most significant effect) to 6 th (likely to have the least significant effect).

Table 10-9: Likely Significance of Effect of Material Assets and Waste from Improvement Strategies

Improvement Strategy

Likely Significance of Effect of Material Assets and Waste (Ranked in Order From Most to Least)

Improvement Strategy 1

1st

Improvement Strategy 6

2nd

Improvement Strategy 2

3rd

Improvement Strategy 5

4th

Improvement Strategy 4

5th

Improvement Strategy 3

6th

However, due to the high level nature of information available at this stage, Table 10-9 does not account for the potential effects of demolition waste as a result of the proposed scheme. This will need to be assessed in further stages of assessment in order to gain clarity on the effects of construction, excavation and demolition waste generated by the proposed scheme.