4.3 Hazard Workshop

  1. A key element of the consultation undertaken was the Hazard Workshop, meetings of local and national marine stakeholders to identify and discuss potential shipping and navigation hazards. Using the information gathered, a Hazard Log was produced to be used as input into the risk assessment undertaken in volume 2, chapter 13. This ensured that expert opinion and local knowledge was incorporated into the hazard identification process and that the Hazard Log was site-specific.

4.3.1 Hazard Workshop Attendance

  1. The Hazard Workshop was held on 31 August 2023 and was attended by the following organisations:
  • BP;
  • Forth Ports;
  • MCA;
  • NLB;
  • Port of Aberdeen;
  • RYA Scotland / Cruising Association;
  • SFF;
  • SPFA;
  • SWFPA;
  • UK CoS; and
  • Wilson Ship Management.

4.3.2 Hazard Workshop Process and Hazard Log

  1. During the Hazard Workshop, key maritime hazards associated with the construction, operation and maintenance and decommissioning of the Array were identified and discussed. Where appropriate, hazards were considered by vessel type to ensure risk control options could be identified on a type-specific basis.
  2. Following the Hazard Workshop, the risks associated with the identified hazards were ranked in the Hazard Log based upon the discussions held during the Workshop. Where appropriate, mitigation measures were identified, including any additional measures required to reduce the risks to ALARP. The Hazard Log was then provided to the Hazard Workshop attendees for comment.
  3. The Hazard Log has been used to inform the risk assessment undertaken in volume 2, chapter 13 and is presented in full in Appendix B.

4.3.3 Hazard Workshop Minutes

  1. A summary of the hazard workshop discussions is provided in Table 4.2.

Table 4.2: Hazard Workshop Minutes

Stakeholder

Point Raised

Response and Where Addressed in the NRA

Various (see paragraph 33)

Consideration of cumulative routeing would be important for the NRA. General consensus that on a cumulative basis, vessels choosing not to navigate in proximity to Ossian would likely pass further inshore. 

 

The minutes state that “vessels using potential corridors in the area formed on a cumulative basis are likely to be relatively low” and “large open areas are more important than multiple small cumulative corridors”.

Cumulative routeing assessment is provided in section 14.2.

RYA Scotland

Noted the importance of marine lights and addressing outages.

The Array complies with the relevant IALA requirements, including with regards to aid to navigation availability. The NLB have been consulted during the NRA process and lighting and marking will be agreed with NLB post-consent. An outline AtoN Management Plan is provided in volume 4, appendix 26, annex A.

SWFPA

Noted the importance of marine coordination and Vessel Management Plans (VMPs).

An outline NSVMP is provided in volume 4, appendix 24.

SWFPA

Future traffic should also be considered.

Approach taken in terms of future case traffic assumptions is detailed in section 13.

SWFPA

Emphasised the importance of marking structures on Electronic Chart Display and Information Systems, including depths and sizes of subsea hazards

Appropriate marking of structures on UKHO Admiralty Charts and other electronic charts as appropriate as an embedded mitigation for the Array as detailed in volume 2, chapter 12.

NLB

Noted that risk to transiting vessels was unlikely from catenary mooring lines given how close large vessels would need to be to turbines to risk interaction.

Underkeel interaction risk is assessed in section 16.

SWFPA and SPFA

Fishing vessels up to 24 m would likely keep a clearance of around 250-300 m, larger fishing vessels such as 70-90 m pelagic vessels would likely keep a 500 m clearance, and would be unlikely to transit through the Array.

Considered in the risk assessment in section 16.

SWFPA

Fishing vessel activity broadly well represented in the AIS datasets presented.

Data sources used are presented in section 5.

RYA Scotland

Noted that non-AIS recreational vessels were unlikely so far offshore, and that regardless those on AIS were a good representative of overall activity.

Data sources used are presented in section 5.