Guidance note for Environmental Impact Assessment In respect of FEPA and CPA requirements

OFFSHORE WIND FARMS
Guidance note for Environmental
Impact Assessment
In respect of FEPA and CPA
requirements
Version 2 - June 2004

---

Offshore Wind Farms:
Guidance Note for Environmental Impact
Assessment in Respect of FEPA and CPA Requirements
June 2004
Prepared by the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science
(CEFAS) on behalf of the Marine Consents and Environment Unit (MCEU)
© Crown Copyright 2004

---

Offshore Wind Farms: Guidance Note for Environmental Impact
Assessment in Respect of FEPA and CPA Requirements, June 2004.
1
Introduction........................................................................................................................ 1
1.1 Guidance Note Aims ...................................................................................................... 1
1.2 FEPA Framework........................................................................................................... 1
1.3 CPA Framework............................................................................................................. 3
2 Requirement for Environmental Impact Assessment ......................................................... 3
2.1 Statutory Requirements .................................................................................................. 3
2.2 Screening Opinion .......................................................................................................... 6
2.3 Scoping Opinion............................................................................................................. 6
2.4 Habitats Directive and Birds Directive........................................................................... 7
2.5 Data for inclusion in the Environmental Statement........................................................ 8
3
Coastal & Sedimentary Processes...................................................................................... 9
3.1 Aims & Scope................................................................................................................. 9
3.2 Baseline Assessment .................................................................................................... 10
3.3 Impact Assessment ....................................................................................................... 11
3.4 Survey Design .............................................................................................................. 11
3.5 Mitigating Actions........................................................................................................ 12
3.6 Monitoring.................................................................................................................... 12
4
Benthos............................................................................................................................. 13
4.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 13
4.2 Foreseeable effects ....................................................................................................... 13
4.3 Targets for investigation............................................................................................... 14
4.4 Design and conduct of surveys..................................................................................... 14
4.5 Laboratory processing of samples ................................................................................ 16
4.6 Analyses/reporting of data............................................................................................ 16
4.7 Submission of sampling/analytical plans for regulatory approval ............................... 16
4.8 Collaborative Work ...................................................................................................... 17
4.9 Selected Benthos References........................................................................................ 17
5
Fish Resources ................................................................................................................. 20
5.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 20
5.2 Important fish resources ............................................................................................... 22
5.3 Important aspects of fish habitat and fish biology........................................................ 23
5.4 Fish surveys .................................................................................................................. 25
5.5 Summary....................................................................................................................... 28
5.6 Selected Fisheries Resource References....................................................................... 28
6
Commercial Fisheries....................................................................................................... 29
6.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 29
6.2 Data collection.............................................................................................................. 30
6.3 Selected Commercial Fisheries References.................................................................. 31
7
Marine navigation ............................................................................................................ 31
8
Archaeology and other historical uses of the seabed ....................................................... 31
9
Marine Mammals ............................................................................................................. 32
10 Birds ................................................................................................................................. 32
11 Designated Sites and other Nature Conservation Interests .............................................. 33
12 Cumulative impacts.......................................................................................................... 33
13 Decommissioning............................................................................................................. 35
14 Summary .......................................................................................................................... 35
15 Contacts............................................................................................................................ 36
16 References........................................................................................................................ 39
Appendices
Round 2 Offshore Wind farm Consents - Joint Formal EIA Scoping Opinion................ 40
Useful Information on Marine EIA................................................................................... 41

---

1 Introduction
1.1 Guidance Note Aims
This Guidance Note has been prepared by the Centre for Environment, Fisheries and
Aquaculture Science (CEFAS, an Agency of the Department for Environment, Food
& Rural Affairs - Defra), on behalf of the Marine Consents and Environment Unit
(MCEU)1. Its purpose is to assist the offshore wind farm industry and their
consultants; the primary aim being to provide scientific guidance to those involved
with the gathering, interpretation and presentation of data within an Environmental
Impact Assessment (EIA) as part of the consents application process in England and
Wales. The guidance is intended to supplement the Department of Trade and
Industry's (DTI’s) guidance "Offshore Wind Farm Consents Process"
[http://www.dti.gov.uk/energy/leg and reg/consents/guidance.pdf]. It is not
definitive and it is therefore recommended that it be read in conjunction with the
legislation and the other sources to which it refers. It replaces the November 2001
document of the same name.
Guidance provided by this document refers only to those requirements necessary to
enable the assessment of an application under the Food and Environmental Protection
Act 1985 (FEPA) and Section 34 of the Coast Protection Act 1949 (CPA). Both Acts
require assessment of a proposed project within the marine environment with regards
to its potential for environmental impact.
If the EIA is to be used for any other purpose/licence application then the appropriate
authorities should be contacted in order to ensure that the EIA provides all relevant
information required.
1.2 FEPA Framework
In simple terms, a FEPA licence is required for the deposit of any substances or
articles in the sea or under the sea bed in UK waters, UK controlled waters, or from
British vessels. The FEPA licensing process is well established with in excess of 300
applications a year for activities as diverse as disposal of navigation dredgings, flood
defences, coast protection, port construction works, bridges and land reclamation.
When making applications for FEPA construction licences, applicants are required to
provide specific details about the project. These details include, but are not limited to:
• The materials to be used including a detailed design specification.
• The construction methodology.
• The equipment to be used.
• Contractor details.
• The precise location of the development (with exact co-ordinates).

1 The Marine Consents and Environment Unit (MCEU) is an alliance of the Department for Environment, Food and Rural
Affairs (Defra) - and the Department for Transport (DfT). It has responsibility for co-ordinating the administration of consents
over the full range of marine works for which the two Departments and the National Assembly for Wales each has responsibility.
1

---

• The precise timetable for the construction works (start/end dates, key milestones).
The potential impacts on the marine environment can, therefore, be assessed by the
statutory consultees against set parameters. The licensing authority can then make an
informed decision on whether or not to license the development and where necessary
include robust legally binding mitigation and monitoring measures. The materials and
many of the potential construction techniques used in offshore energy developments
are similar to those used in other marine construction projects so must be assessed on
the same basis.
However, it is apparent from the FEPA applications for the Round 1 offshore wind
farm developments that the project proposals are at a less advanced stage than is the
norm for any other licence request. The applications were made with many
uncertainties on project design with many of the above details being unavailable.
Examples of this uncertainty in the project descriptions are:
• The foundation type is not decided upon - gravity base, monopile or tripod (drilled
and/or driven).
• The materials are not specifically described.
• Precise location of turbines and configuration not decided upon.
• Cable type not decided upon.
• Cable route not decided upon.
• Onshore or offshore substation not decided upon.
• Construction methodology uncertain.
• No contractors appointed (construction problems not identified).
• Geotechnical surveys not undertaken – so suitability of the site not confirmed.
• Scour/cable protection requirements not assessed or formalised.
• Construction timetable not set.
All these uncertainties made a robust scientific assessment of the environmental
impacts very difficult. Lessons learned from Round 1 applications showed that
deficiencies in a project’s information as listed above created delays and problems in
issuing licences. The solution came in choosing one of the two only available
options:
• To refuse the licence application until the project parameters could be clearly
defined; or
• To take a pragmatic precautionary approach to issue the licences, where it was
considered appropriate, but with detailed licence conditions that enable the many
information gaps and uncertainties to be resolved in parallel to the research and
construction programme, whilst minimising environmental impacts.
Defra, as the licensing authority, chose the second option as a suitable solution on the
presumption that meeting the licence conditions and monitoring requirements during
and after the construction of the first few offshore wind farm developments would
contribute to the growing understanding of the engineering and environmental
constraints. As this information is fed into the public domain it would allow the
reassessment of the licence conditions for other consented or future projects, i.e. to
learn from real operational examples.
2

---

The early developments during Round 1 are, therefore, significantly contributing to
our current understanding of the issues associated with wind farm development in the
marine environment. The complexity and range of FEPA licence conditions attached
to all offshore wind farm developments is testament to this. However, this is all to the
benefit of the growth of the offshore renewables industry for the other consented
projects and all future rounds. Where monitoring outputs allow, the licence
conditions will, where appropriate, be amended or even removed.
Wherever possible developers are recommended to work together in producing survey
and monitoring packages and data collection so that costs and resources can be shared
(see Section 4.7 for more detail). A coordinated approach such as that provided by
AFEN (Atlantic Frontier Environmental Network) for the offshore oil and gas
industry is a model worthy of further investigation by the renewables industry.
It is suggested that applications are therefore submitted with a detailed project’s
description i.e. completed geotechnical surveys, known cable route, known
foundation type etc. This allows a robust and thorough site specific assessment
to be undertaken which will produce more focused and workable licence
conditions.
1.3 CPA Framework
In simple terms the requirements for CPA consent are similar to those for FEPA. The
main differences in the context of this Guidance Note are that CPA also covers
dredging activities (FEPA is only concerned with the disposal of dredged material at
sea) and the interference of the ‘development’ on navigation is given much higher
prominence. There is a joint application form for FEPA and CPA consents (see
www.mceu.gov.uk). Despite the legal differences the data requirements for CPA are
to all intents and purposes identical to those for FEPA and therefore no further
distinction is made in this Guidance Note.
2
Requirement for Environmental Impact Assessment
2.1
Statutory Requirements
The Environmental Impact Assessment Directive (97/11/EC) requires an EIA to be
carried out in support of an application for development consent for certain types of
project as listed in the Directive at Annexes I and II. Offshore wind farm
developments are listed in Annex II as ‘installations for the harnessing of wind power
for energy production (wind farms)’ and these provisions have been transposed into
UK legislation.
The term ‘Environmental Impact Assessment’ describes a procedure that must be
followed for certain types of project before they can be given development consent.
3

---

The procedure is a means of drawing together, in a systematic way, an assessment of
a project’s likely significant environmental effects. This helps ensure that the
importances of predicted effects, and the scope for reducing them, are properly
understood by the public and the relevant competent authorities before a decision is
made. From a developer’s point of view, the careful preparation of an Environmental
Statement (ES) will provide a number of benefits to a project:
• a useful framework within which environmental considerations and design
development can interact
• environmental analysis may indicate ways in which the project can be
modified to avoid or mitigate possible adverse effects
• thorough environmental analysis and provision of comprehensive
information allows the consenting authorities to reach a decision more
rapidly
Although new Regulations are under consideration to amend FEPA, the EIA Directive
has not yet been applied to the Act. Nevertheless, there are existing provisions within
FEPA to require licence applications to provide the licensing authority with such
information as it deems necessary to enable it to properly consider the application.
The licensing authority's policy being that this information shall include the
equivalent of a formal ES in support of all offshore wind farm proposals to inform the
process of impact assessment. With regard to the CPA, an EIA is also required to
satisfy the Harbour Works (Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 1999
where a scheme is proposed which is to be sited in or partly within a port or harbour.
As stated above, an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) will be required for all
offshore wind farm developments. The applicant will therefore need to show that a
full EIA has been undertaken by preparing and submitting an Environmental
Statement (ES) as part of the application process. Schedule 1 of The Harbour Works
(Environmental Impact Assessment) Regulations 1999 (SI 1999 No. 3445) transposes
the details of the information that must be included in an Environmental Statement
from Article 5(1) of the Council Directive 97/11/EC.
4

---

SCHEDULE 1 (definition of “environmental statement”)
1. Description of the proposed project, including in particular:
- a description of the physical characteristics of the whole project and the land-use
requirements during the construction and operational phases,
- a description of the main characteristics of the production processes, for instance nature and
quantity of the material used,
- an estimate, by type and quantity, of expected residues and emissions (water, air and soil
pollution, noise, vibration, light, heat, radiation, etc.) resulting from the operation of the
proposed project.
2. An outline of the main alternatives studied by the developer and an indication of the main
reasons for his choice, taking into account the environmental effects.
3. A description of the aspects of the environment likely to be significantly affected by the
proposed project including, in particular, population, fauna, flora, soil, water, air, climatic
factors, material assets, including the architectural and archaeological heritage, landscape and
the inter-relationship between the above factors.
4. A description of the likely significant effects of the proposed project on the environment
(which should cover the direct effects and any indirect, secondary, cumulative, short, medium
and long-term, permanent and temporary, positive and negative effects of the project),
resulting from:
- the existence of the project;
- the use of natural resources;
- the emission of pollutants, the creation of nuisances and the elimination of waste,
and a description by the developer of the forecasting methods used to assess the effects on the
environment.
5.
A description of the measures which the developer proposes to take in order to prevent,
reduce, remedy or offset any significant adverse effects on the environment.
6.
A non-technical summary of the information provided under paragraphs 1 to 5.
7.
An indication of any difficulties (technical deficiencies or lack of know-how)
encountered by the developer in compiling the required information.
Where the various consents impose a requirement for more than one EIA, the
consenting authorities will normally be content for the developer to provide a single
document, provided that its scope is sufficient to embrace the range of environmental
issues which each can be expected to consider. This may, for example, take the form
of separate volumes addressing particular topics, such as the foreshore and land-based
issues and sub-tidal matters.
Where an appropriate assessment is required under the Habitats Directive (see section
2.4), the EIA must provide the competent authority with the information as required
5

---

for that assessment. An EIA cannot substitute the need for an appropriate assessment,
although it is likely in most cases to inform the assessment. Where an offshore wind
farm project requires an appropriate assessment it may be decided to incorporate the
appropriate assessment within the EIA. If so, the ES prepared during the EIA, should
include a specific section under the heading; ‘the likely significant effects on the
internationally important habitats and/or species’ to aid the appropriate assessment
process.
The consents process for marine works under FEPA and CPA involves extensive
consultation,, including (but not limited to):
Other Government Departments e.g. Department for Transport (DfT), Ministry of
Defence (MoD);
CEFAS for scientific advice on fisheries, benthos, sedimentary processes,
hydrodynamics and coastal processes;
English Nature (EN), Countryside Council for Wales (CCW) and Joint Nature
Conservation Committee (JNCC) for statutory advice on species and sites of
nature conservation importance e.g. Special Protection Areas SPA), Special Areas
of Conservation (SAC), (Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), Marine Nature
Reserves (MNR);
Defra Sea Fisheries Inspectorate;
Local Authority interests – for planning, amenity/leisure, environmental health;
Port Authorities;
The Crown Estate;
Environment Agency – for water quality, migratory fish, coastal processes;
Other interest groups and non-governmental organisations (NGO) e.g. National
Federation of Fishermens Organisations, Royal Yachting Association etc.
2.2 Screening
Opinion
The Directive and implementing Regulations provide a procedure that enables
developers to apply to the competent authorities for an opinion (‘screening opinion’)
on whether an EIA is needed. However, due to the size and nature of such projects
and their potential to give rise to significant environmental effects all offshore wind
farm developments will require an EIA.
2.3
Scoping Opinion
The developer is responsible for preparing the ES that must be submitted with the
application for FEPA and CPA consents. A developer may ask the competent
authority for its formal opinion (‘scoping opinion’) on the data to be included in an
ES. Developers are recommended to submit a draft outline of the ES (a ‘scoping
document’ or ‘scoping report’) that sets out the main issues envisaged by the
developer to be, and proposes relevant studies, as a focus for the competent
authorities and the Statutory Consultees to consider. New procedures have been
implemented for Round 2 where all EIA scoping requests should be sent to DTI
(copied to MCEU) who will then co-ordinate the comments and advice from those
6

---

consultees listed in section 2.1. A flow diagram of this procedure is provided in the
Appendix to this Guidance note.
2.4
Habitats Directive and Birds Directive
The principal aim of the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of
natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora is to sustain biodiversity through the
conservation of natural habitats and wild fauna and flora in the territory of European
Member States. These targets are principally being met through the establishment of
Special Areas of Conservation (SACs).
There is a need for measures applied under the directive to be designed to:
• maintain or restore certain habitats and species at a favourable
conservation status, and
• take account of economic, social, and cultural requirements and regional
and local characteristics
It is also necessary to comply with the species provisions of the Habitats Directive. It
is an offence to deliberately kill, capture or disturb European protected species or to
damage or destroy their breeding sites or resting places.
The Directive requires that any activities, plans, or projects whether inside or outside
a ‘Natura 2000’ Site, that are likely to have a significant effect on the conservation
status of the site’s features shall be subject to assessment.
Therefore, where a proposed offshore wind farm site is located within, or would be
likely to significantly affect, a designated, proposed, or candidate ‘Natura 2000’ Site
(SAC and/or Special Protection Areas (SPA)), consenting authorities must ensure an
Appropriate Assessment is carried out under the Directive. Advice on whether an
appropriate assessment may be required for a development (and on the scope of such
an assessment) should be sought during the Scoping stage for the EIA by the
developer and consenting authority from English Nature, Countryside Council for
Wales and from JNCC for projects beyond territorial waters.
Where a proposed project does not fall within the boundaries of a European Site an
appropriate assessment will only be required if it is considered (and fully justified)
that a significant effect on the site is likely. It is the responsibility of the competent
authority, with advice from the conservation agencies to determine whether a
proposed project is likely to have a significant effect on a European Site.
Generally, a project may only proceed once it has been ascertained that it will not
adversely affect the integrity of the site’s features. In the event that the development
of a wind farm may result in some adverse impact on a European site, the scheme
would only be granted consent if the Secretary of State is satisfied that there are:

appropriate grounds of imperative overriding public interest;

that there is no alternative solution available and

that suitable compensating habitat can be identified for the loss to that site.
7

---