Moray Firth SAC
Bottlenose dolphin

                        Tier 1

  1. The results of the underwater noise modelling for the Array alone suggest that prey species may be impacted due to underwater noise up to tens of kilometres from the site boundary (volume 2, chapter 9 of the EIA Report). Similarly, ranges of injury and disturbance to prey species from piling and UXO clearance at Berwick Bank were predicted to be limited in extent, with behavioural effects potentially occurring over a wider area of up to tens of kilometres (SSE Renewables, 2022b). Although there is limited information on construction activities associated with the Proposed offshore export cable corridor(s), it is expected they would be similar to those assessed for the project alone (i.e. minor significance, see volume 2, chapter 9 of the EIA Report). Therefore, underwater noise only has the potential to impact prey species over a relatively small area in terms of the regional marine mammal study area as a whole.
  2. As detailed in the assessment on the Array alone (section 6.3.4), the availability of wider suitable foraging habitat across the regional marine mammal study area and the generalist feeding habits of bottlenose dolphin suggests that individuals would not be impacted by any localised and intermittent changes in prey availability associated with the Array in-combination with the Tier 1 projects. It is expected that the bottlenose dolphin population would be able to tolerate the effect without any potential impact on reproduction and survival rates.
  3. Overall, this potential impact is not predicted to result in adverse effects (i.e. disruption to foraging) for the bottlenose dolphin feature of this SAC as a result of the Array in-combination with the Tier 1 projects.

                        Tier 2

  1. The Tier 2 assessment, presented in paragraphs 939 et seq., concluded that in-combination effects are unlikely to occur. The CEA presented in the Array EIA Report (volume 2, chapter 10 of the Array EIA Report) concluded a minor significance of effect for this potential impact associated with the Tier 2 projects. Based on this, it is concluded that in-combination changes in prey availability associated with at the Array and the Tier 2 projects will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the bottlenose dolphin feature of this SAC.

                        Tier 3

  1. The Tier 3 assessment, presented in paragraphs 943 et seq., highlighted that it was not possible to undertake any meaningful in-combination assessment for the nine Tier 3 projects identified for this impact. This was due to the lack of publicly available information surrounding piling and UXO clearance parameters. The CEA presented in the Array EIA Report (volume 2, chapter 10 of the Array EIA Report) concluded a minor significance of effect associated with the Tier 3 projects. Based on this, it is concluded that in-combination changes in prey availability associated with at the Array and the Tier 3 projects will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the bottelenose dolphin feature of this SAC.

                        Conclusion

  1. Adverse effects on the qualifying Annex II marine mammal features of the Moray Firth SAC which undermine the conservation objectives of the SAC will not occur as a result of in-combination changes in prey availability during the construction phase. Potential effects from this activity on the relevant conservation objectives (as presented in section 6.2.3) are discussed in turn below in Table 6.80   Open ▸ .

 

Table 6.80:
Conclusions Against the Conservation Objectives of the Moray Firth SAC from Changes in Prey Availability during the Construction Phase of the Array In-Combination with other Plans and Projects

Table 6.80: Conclusions Against the Conservation Objectives of the Moray Firth SAC from Changes in Prey Availability during the Construction Phase of the Array In-Combination with other Plans and Projects

 

  1. It can be concluded, beyond reasonable scientific doubt, that there is no risk of an adverse effect on the integrity of the Moray Firth SAC as a result of changes in prey availability in the construction phase of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects.

6.4.6. Entanglement

  1. The LSE2 assessment during the HRA Stage One process identified that LSE2 could not be ruled out for entanglement in the operation and maintenance phase of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects. This relates to the following sites and relevant Annex II marine mammal features:
  • Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast SAC;

–           grey seal.

  • Southern North Sea SAC; and

–           harbour porpoise.

  • Moray Firth SAC;

–           bottlenose dolphin.

  1. The MDS considered for this in-combination assessment is shown in Table 6.81   Open ▸ . The secondary mitigation measures are presented in Table 6.48   Open ▸ for the assessment of the Array alone.  Fixed bottom projects were screened out of the in-combination assessment on the basis that there are no mooring lines or dynamic cabling in the water column that could present a risk of primary or secondary entanglement to marine mammals.

 

Table 6.81:
MDS Considered for the Assessment of Potential Impacts to Annex II Marine Mammals due to Entanglement during the Operation and Maintenance Phase of the Array In-Combination with other Plans and Projects

 Table 6.81: MDS Considered for the Assessment of Potential Impacts to Annex II Marine Mammals due to Entanglement during the Operation and Maintenance Phase of the Array In-Combination with other Plans and Projects

 

                        In-combination assessment

  1. There is the potential for in-combination impacts due to changes in prey availability in the construction phase of the Array and other plans and projects. For the purposes of this assessment, this potential impact has been assessed using the tiered approach outlined in section 4.6. The plans and projects screened into the in-combination assessment for this potential impact and their respective tiers are outlined in Table 6.81   Open ▸ .
                        Tier 1 and 2
  1. There were no Tier 1 or Tier 2 projects identified with the potential for entanglement risk (i.e. floating offshore wind projects) within the 50 km search buffer.
                        Tier 3
  1. There were two Tier 3 floating offshore wind projects identified within the 50 km buffer region with potential for in-combination effects associated with this impact:
  • Bellrock Offshore Wind Farm; and
  • Campion Offshore Wind Farm ( Table 6.81   Open ▸ ).
  1. These Tier 3 projects are in a pre-application phase and no EIA Scoping Report, EIA Report, or HRA Documentation are available to inform a quantitative assessment. Therefore, a qualitative assessment is provided below.
  2. As described in Table 6.48   Open ▸ for the Array alone, mooring lines and dynamic inter-array cables are likley to undergo routine inspections during the operation and maintenance phase, employing a risk-based adaptive management approach. All Tier 3 projects are located in excess of 50 km from the site boundary except for Bellrock, Bowdun, and Campion Offshore Wind Farms ( Figure 6.13   Open ▸ ). Of these projects only Bellrock and Campion Offshore Wind Farms are floating projects and may contribute to the cumulative impacts of entanglement. Only floating offshore wind farms have been considered in this in-combination assessment, as there is no risk of entanglement from fixed bottom wind farms (due to their lack of mooring lines).
  3. The risks of entanglement from floating offshore wind farms are not fully understood (see paragraphs 700 et seq.) but the commitment of the Array to monitor and manage the risks ( Table 6.48   Open ▸ ) will reduce any potential contribution to in-combination effects with other projects. There are no published standard industry measures at the time of writing but should other wind projects adopt a similar 'monitor and manage' approach, it is likely that the potential for in-combination effects would be further reduced. Considering the implementation of these designed in measures during the operations and maintenance phase of the Array, the potential for in-combination effects resulting from entanglement is considered very unlikely.
  4. The risk of entanglement due to presence of mooring lines and dynamic inter-array cables in the water column is predicted to be of very local spatial extent in the context of the geographic frame of reference. It is predicted that the potential impact will affect marine mammals directly in the case of both (rare) primary entanglement and secondary entanglement, however the risk of secondary entanglement is sufficiently reduced with the application of the designed in mitigation measures (routine surveys and removal of marine debris as required following inspection) and any population-level effects are highly unlikely ( Table 6.48   Open ▸ ). Based on this, it is concluded that in-combination entanglement associated with the Array and the Tier 3 projects will not have an adverse effect on the integrity of the marine mammal features of the SACs assessed in this Part of the RIAA.

                        Operation and maintenance phase

                        Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast SAC
Grey seal
  1. As detailed in paragraphs 974 et seq., there were only two Tier 3 projects identified for in-combination assessment associated with this impact: Bellrock and Campion Offshore Wind Farms. Due to the lack of publicly available information on these projects, only a qualitative assessment was provided. Based on the assessment in paragraphs 974 et seq., it has been concluded that population-level effects on the grey seal feature of this SAC are highly unlikely.

                        Conclusion

  1. Adverse effects on the qualifying Annex II marine mammal features of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast SAC which undermine the conservation objectives of the SAC will not occur as a result of in-combination entanglement during the operation and maintenance phase. Potential effects from this activity on the relevant conservation objectives (as presented in in section 6.2.1) are discussed in turn below in Table 6.82   Open ▸ .

Table 6.82:
Conclusions Against the Conservation Objectives of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast SAC from Entanglement during the Operation and Maintenance Phase of the Array In-Combination with other Plans and Projects

Table 6.82: Conclusions Against the Conservation Objectives of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast SAC from Entanglement during the Operation and Maintenance Phase of the Array In-Combination with other Plans and Projects

 

  1. It can be concluded, beyond reasonable scientific doubt, that there is no risk of an adverse effect on the integrity of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast SAC as a result of entanglement during the operation and maintenance phase of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects.
                        Southern North Sea SAC
Harbour porpoise
  1. As detailed in paragraphs 974 et seq., there were only two Tier 3 projects identified for in-combination assessment associated with this impact: Bellrock and Campion Offshore Wind Farms. Due to the lack of publicly available information on these projects, only a qualitative assessment was provided here. Based on the assessment in paragraphs 974 et seq., it has been concluded that population-level effects on the harbour porpoise feature of this SAC are highly unlikely.

                        Conclusion

  1. Adverse effects on the qualifying Annex II marine mammal features of the Southern North Sea SAC which undermine the conservation objectives of the SAC will not occur as a result of in-combination entanglement during the operation and maintenance phase. Potential effects from this activity on the relevant conservation objectives (as presented in section 6.2.2) are discussed in turn below in Table 6.83   Open ▸ .

 

Table 6.83:
Conclusions Against the Conservation Objectives of the Southern North Sea SAC from Entanglement during the Operation and Maintenance Phase of the Array In-Combination with other Plans and Projects

Table 6.83: Conclusions Against the Conservation Objectives of the Southern North Sea SAC from Entanglement during the Operation and Maintenance Phase of the Array In-Combination with other Plans and Projects

 

  1. It can be concluded, beyond reasonable scientific doubt, that there is no risk of an adverse effect on the integrity of the Southern North Sea SAC as a result of entanglement during the operation and maintenance phase of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects.
                        Moray Firth SAC
Bottlenose dolphin
  1. As detailed in paragraphs 974 et seq., there were only two Tier 3 projects identified for in-combination assessment associated with this impact: Bellrock and Campion Offshore Wind Farms. Due to the lack of publicly available information on these projects, only a qualitative assessment was provided. Based on the assessment in paragraphs 974 et seq., it has been concluded that population-level effects on the bottlenose dolphin feature of this SAC are highly unlikely.

                        Conclusion

  1. Adverse effects on the qualifying Annex II marine mammal features of the Moray Firth SAC which undermine the conservation objectives of the SAC will not occur as a result of in-combination entanglement during the operation and maintenance phase. Potential effects from this activity on the relevant conservation objectives (as presented in section 6.2.3) are discussed in turn below in Table 6.84   Open ▸ .

 

Table 6.84:
Conclusions Against the Conservation Objectives of the Moray Firth SAC from Entanglement during the Operation and Maintenance Phase of the Array In-Combination with other Plans and Projects

Table 6.84: Conclusions Against the Conservation Objectives of the Moray Firth SAC from Entanglement during the Operation and Maintenance Phase of the Array In-Combination with other Plans and Projects

 

  1. It can be concluded, beyond reasonable scientific doubt, that there is no risk of an adverse effect on the integrity of the Moray Firth SAC as a result of entanglement during the operation and maintenance phase of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects.

6.4.7. Injury and Disturbance from Underwater Noise Generated during the Operation of Floating Wind Turbines and Anchor Mooring Lines

  1. The LSE2 assessment during the HRA Stage One process identified that LSE2 could not be ruled out for operational noise in the operation and maintenance phase of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects. This relates to the following sites and relevant Annex II marine mammal features:
  • Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast SAC;

–           grey seal.

  • Southern North Sea SAC; and

–           harbour porpoise.

  • Moray Firth SAC;

–           bottlenose dolphin.

  1. The MDS considered for this in-combination assessment is shown in Table 6.85   Open ▸ .

Table 6.85:
MDS Considered for the Assessment of Potential Impacts to Annex II Marine Mammals due to Operational Noise during the Operation and Maintenance Phase of the Array In-Combination with other Plans and Projects

 Table 6.85: MDS Considered for the Assessment of Potential Impacts to Annex II Marine Mammals due to Operational Noise during the Operation and Maintenance Phase of the Array In-Combination with other Plans and Projects

 

                        In-combination assessment

  1. There is the potential for in-combination impacts due to changes in operational noise during the operation and maintenance phase of the Array and other plans and projects. For the purposes of this assessment, this potential impact has been assessed using the tiered approach outlined in section 4.6. The plans and projects screened into the in-combination assessment for this potential impact and their respective tiers are outlined in Table 6.85   Open ▸ .
                        Tier 1
  1. There were no Tier 1 projects with turbines (and therefore the potential for any in-combination operational noise) identified within the 50 km search buffer, and therefore there is no in-combination effect predicted from additional Tier 1 projects.
                        Tier 2
  1. There was one Tier 2 project identified within 50 km buffer with potential for in-combination effects associated with this impact:
  • Morven Offshore Wind Farm ( Table 6.85   Open ▸ ).
  1. As for the Array alone (section 6.3.6), impacts related to operational noise from turbines and anchor mooring lines are expected to be localised to within the close vicinity of the respective projects and as such, the assessment only focussed on projects within a representative 50 km buffer of the Array as a proportionate approach.
  2. Whilst there is the potential for the operations and maintenance phase of Morven Offshore Wind Farm to overlap with the operations and maintenance phase of the Array, this potential impact was scoped out in the Morven Offshore Scoping Report (Morven Offshore Wind Limited, 2023). This project is therefore not considered further in the Tier 2 assessment.
                        Tier 3
  1. There were three Tier 3 projects identified with potential for in-combination effects associated with this impact:
  • Bellrock Offshore Wind Farm;
  • Bowdun Offshore Wind Farm; and
  • Campion Offshore Wind Farm ( Table 6.85   Open ▸ ).
  1. The Tier 3 projects are in a pre-application phase and no EIA Scoping Report, EIA Reports, or HRA Documentation are available to inform a quantitative assessment. Therefore, a qualitative assessment is provided below.
  2. Operational noise from anchor mooring lines is likely to be considerably lower compared to underwater noise associated with piling and UXO clearance activities during the construction phase. Most Tier 3 projects are located in excess of 50 km from the Array. The exceptions are Bellrock, Bowdun, and Campion Offshore Wind Farms, and of these only Bellrock and Campion are floating projects. All three projects may contribute to cumulative effects with respect to operational noise (from either floating or fixed foundations) but are located between 8.67 km (Bellrock) to 44.15 km (Campion) from the Array (with the effects of operational noise likely to be highly localised) and therefore unlikely to lead to any significant in-combination effects.
  3. The Array alone assessment (see paragraph 740 et seq.) drew on a study completed at the Hywind Pilot Park in Scotland by Burns et al. (2022). In this study, the authors concluded that the maximum distance at which the TTS could occur across all hearing groups was estimated for harbour porpoise at 50 m from a turbine assuming that the animal would remain stationary for the 24 hour period (Burns et al., 2022). The study concluded that even at a wind speed of 25 knots, the noise footprint is negligible and in the relatively noisy soundscape of the North Sea, it does not present any realistic threat of auditory injury to marine species. As discussed in paragraph 740 et seq., Risch et al. (2023a) found noise emissions from floating offshore wind turbines were similar to the operational noise of fixed offshore wind turbines, with biggest difference between fixed and floating offshore wind turbines in relation to underwater noise generation is mooring-related noise, rather the operational wind turbine noise.
  4. Considering Bellrock, Bowdun and Campion Offshore Wind Farms are located over 8 km from the site boundary (in differing directions), and on the basis of the estimated TTS ranges associated with operational noise, the potential for in-combination impact is unlikely.
  5. Based on the information presented in paragraphs 995 et seq., it has been concluded that population-level effects on the marine mammal features of their respective SACs are highly unlikely.

                        Operation and maintenance phase

                        Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast SAC
Grey seal
  1. As detailed in paragraphs 995 et seq., there were only three Tier 3 projects included in the in-combination assessment for this impact: Bellrock and Campion Offshore Wind Farms. Due to the lack of publicly available information on these projects, only a qualitative assessment was provided. Based on the information presented in paragraphs 995 et seq., it has been concluded that population-level effects on the grey seal feature of this SAC are highly unlikely.

                        Conclusion

  1. Adverse effects on the qualifying Annex II marine mammal features of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast SAC which undermine the conservation objectives of the SAC will not occur as a result of in-combination operational noise during the operation and maintenance phase. Potential effects from this activity on the relevant conservation objectives (as presented in in section 6.2.1) are discussed in turn below in Table 6.86   Open ▸ .

 

Table 6.86:
Conclusions Against the Conservation Objectives of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast SAC from Operational Noise during the Operation and Maintenance Phase of the Array In-Combination with other Plans and Projects

Table 6.86: Conclusions Against the Conservation Objectives of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast SAC from Operational Noise during the Operation and Maintenance Phase of the Array In-Combination with other Plans and Projects

 

  1. It can be concluded, beyond reasonable scientific doubt, that there is no risk of an adverse effect on the integrity of the Berwickshire and North Northumberland Coast SAC as a result of operational noise in the operation and maintenance phase of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects.
                        Southern North Sea SAC
Harbour porpoise
  1. As detailed in paragraphs 995 et seq., there were only three Tier 3 projects included in the in-combination assessment for this impact: Bellrock, Bowdun, and and Campion Offshore Wind Farms. Due to the lack of publicly available information on these projects, only a qualitative assessment was provided. Based on the information presented in paragraphs 995 et seq., it has been concluded that population-level effects on the harbour porpoise feature of this SAC are highly unlikely.

                        Conclusion

  1. Adverse effects on the qualifying Annex II marine mammal features of the Southern North Sea SAC which undermine the conservation objectives of the SAC will not occur as a result of in-combination operational noise during the operation and maintenance phase. Potential effects from this activity on the relevant conservation objectives (as presented in section 6.2.2) are discussed in turn below in Table 6.87   Open ▸ .

 

Table 6.87:
Conclusions Against the Conservation Objectives of the Southern North Sea SAC from Operational Noise during the Operation and Maintenance Phase of the Array In-Combination with other Plans and Projects

Table 6.87: Conclusions Against the Conservation Objectives of the Southern North Sea SAC from Operational Noise during the Operation and Maintenance Phase of the Array In-Combination with other Plans and Projects

 

  1. It can be concluded, beyond reasonable scientific doubt, that there is no risk of an adverse effect on the integrity of the Southern North Sea SAC as a result of operational noise in the operation and maintenance phase of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects.
                        Moray Firth SAC
Bottlenose dolphin
  1. As detailed in paragraphs 995 et seq., there were only three Tier 3 projects included in the in-combination assessment for this impact: Bellrock and Campion Offshore Wind Farms. Due to the lack of publicly available information on these projects, only a qualitative assessment was provided. Based on the information presented in paragraphs 995 et seq., it has been concluded that population-level effects on the bottlenose dolphin feature of this SAC are highly unlikely.

                        Conclusion

  1. Adverse effects on the qualifying Annex II marine mammal features of the Moray Firth SAC which undermine the conservation objectives of the SAC will not occur as a result of in-combination operational noise during the operation and maintenance phase. Potential effects from this activity on the relevant conservation objectives (as presented in section 6.2.3) are discussed in turn below in Table 6.88   Open ▸ .

Table 6.88:
Conclusions Against the Conservation Objectives of the Moray Firth SAC from Operational Noise during the Operation and Maintenance Phase of the Array In-Combination with other Plans and Projects

Table 6.88: Conclusions Against the Conservation Objectives of the Moray Firth SAC from Operational Noise during the Operation and Maintenance Phase of the Array In-Combination with other Plans and Projects

 

  1. It can be concluded, beyond reasonable scientific doubt, that there is no risk of an adverse effect on the integrity of the Moray Firth SAC as a result of operational noise in the operation and maintenance phase of the Array in-combination with other plans and projects.