Neart Section DOCUMENT t na G n 36 Co T REFERENCE Gaoith onsent V : NNG-0504 he Variatio 4-935-NnG-S3 on Repo 36 CONSENT ort T VARIATION- -RPT-A2
Neart
Section
DOCUMENT
t na G
n 36 Co
T REFERENCE
Gaoith
onsent V
: NNG-0504
he
Variatio
4-935-NnG-S3
on Repo
36 CONSENT
ort T VARIATION--RPT-A2
Docum
SIGN OFF
Name (Role)
NnG
DOCUMENT
Document Nu
Document Tit
Rev. Date
[dd mm
1.0 23 Dec
2.0 7 Jan 2
ment Co
ent, Consents a
G
nG
nG
CONTROL
umber NNG
tle Sect
mm yyyy]
Desc
2018 For a
019 Mino
SectNeart n
PROTE
ontrol
and Compliance
G-0504-935-Nn
ion 36 Consen
ription
approval
or updates
ion 36 Coa Gaoithe DO
CT – NOT PROT
Signature
nG-S36 CONS
nt Variation Re
onsent VaOC REF: NNG-0504
TECTIVELY MARK
ENT VARIATIO
eport
ariation R4-935-NnG-S36 CO
KED
ON-RPT-A2
Pr
eport
ONSENT VARIATION
Date
7 Jan
7 Jan
7 Jan
repared C
N-RPT-A2
e
nuary 2019
nuary 2019
nuary 2019
Checked
PAGE 2 OF 11
Approved
Cont1 Introdu
2 Descrip
3 Summa
4 Implica
4.1
ents uction .............
ption of the Pro
ary of Proposed
tions of Variat
Seabirds ......
SectNeart n
PROTE
.....................
oposed Develo
d Variation ....
tion ................
.....................
ion 36 Coa Gaoithe DO
CT – NOT PROT
......................
opment ...........
......................
......................
......................
onsent VaOC REF: NNG-0504
TECTIVELY MARK
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
ariation R4-935-NnG-S36 CO
KED
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
.....................
eport
ONSENT VARIATION
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
N-RPT-A2
......................
......................
......................
......................
......................
PAGE 3 OF 11
........... 4
........... 4
........... 4
........... 4
........... 6
1 Int1. This
sect201
2 De2. The
an oapp
3. The founmet
3 Su4. This
5. The sectsepatrantran
6. It is dive
7. The nece
8. In adheig(EIA
4 Im9. This
cove
10. The Tranchan
11. The rece
troduct report suppor
tion 36 of the E8 (“the section
escriptio section 36 conoffshore wind troximately 15.
proposed devndations and ateorological ma
ummary variation appl
removal of reand offshore 22 of Annex 2
amendment o
amendment o
first variation tion 36 consenarate Marine Lnsmission worknsmission work
also necessaryestment of the
second variatiessary to enab
ddition to the ght by one metA).
mplicatio section of theered by the EIA
removal of refnsmission infranges are propo
table below neptor topic. Th
Maximum b5m. Whilst th
SectNeart n
PROTE
tion rts an applicatiElectricity Act n 36 consent”)
on of thnsent authoristurbine genera5km from East
elopment will ancillary equipmast.
y of Prolication seeks t
eferences to tra export cables)2;
of minimum bl
of maximum b
is to remove tht sought sectioicence (Licence
ks. It is therefoks.
y for the transm transmission w
on is to amendle the optimum
requested varitre, within the
ons of Ve report considA, Habitats Reg
ference to transtructure was
osed.
otes the impliche following po
lade width: the Section 36
ion 36 Coa Gaoithe DO
CT – NOT PROT
on under secti1989 to Neart ).
he Propes NnGOWL toating station wt Fife Ness (as
comprise a mament, piles, int
posed Vto make the fo
ansmission infr from the Desc
lade tip clearan
blade width in A
he transmissioon 36 consent e Number: 066ore requested t
mission works tworks to an off
d the maximumm WTG model
ations, this ap design envelo
Variatioers the potent
gulations Asses
nsmission infraassessed as pa
cations of the oints regarding
he EIA, HRA anstates 4.5m, th
onsent VaOC REF: NNG-0504
TECTIVELY MARK
ion 36C of the na Gaoithe Of
osed Do construct an
with a maximumshown in the f
aximum of 54 ter-array cablin
Variatioollowing variat
rastructure (i.ecription of the
nce from 35 to
Annex 1 from
n works from for the genera678/18/0) and that the sectio
to be removedffshore transm
m blade width to be used fo
pplication also ope assessed by
n tial implicationssment (HRA) a
structure has nart of the EIA a
increase in mag proposed cha
nd Appropriathe difference b
ariation R4-935-NnG-S36 CO
KED
e Electricity Actffshore Wind L
evelopmd operate the m output of 45figure in Appe
wind turbine gng, scour prote
on ions to the sec
. offshore subs Development
o 36 metres (m
4.5m to 5.5m
the Section 36ation works. T there is no reqn 36 consent b
d from the sectission operator
specified in Ar the project.
includes a comy the March 20
s of the propoand Appropria
no implicationsand consented
aximum blade wanges should b
e Assessment between the p
eport
ONSENT VARIATION
t 1989 to vary Limited (NnGO
ment Neart Na Gaoi50 MW locatedndix 1).
generators (WTection, cable pr
ction 36 consen
station platform in Annex 1 an
measured from
.
6 consent. NnGThe transmissioquirement for sbe varied to re
tion 36 consenr (OFTO) in due
nnex 1 from 4
mmitment to in018 Environme
osed variation ote Assessment
s for any enviro via a marine li
width and minbe noted:
are based on aroposed variat
N-RPT-A2
the consent gOWL) on the 3
ithe Offshore Wd within the Fi
TG), associatedrotection and
nt:
ms, interconnend from condit
LAT); and
GOWL’s applicon works are csection 36 con
emove referenc
nt in order to fe course.
4.5m to 5.5m.
ncrease the minental Impact A
on the receptot.
onmental topiicence. No ph
nimum rotor he
a maximum blation and the en
PAGE 4 OF 11
ranted under December
Wind Farm, rth of Forth
d jacket a
ector cables tions 12 and
cation for covered by a nsent for the ce to the
acilitate
This is
nimum rotor Assessment
or topics
c. hysical
eight on each
ade width of nvironmental
Table 1 : Impl
Receptor Top
Fish and shellf
ecology, includ
diadromous fis
Marine mamm
Ornithology
Commercial fis
Shipping and n
Military and ci
aviation
Cultural herita
Seascape, land
and visual imp
Socio-econom
Geology and w
assessments snacelle end o
Minimum roThe minimumpossible to ravariation appapplication do
plications of the
pic Imp
ish
ding
sh
All a
with
met
cha
mals
All a
app
are
whi
See
sheries
All a
the
met
navigation
All a
with
met
vil
All a
with
(inc
valid
age
All a
app
are
dscape
pacts
All a
with
(inc
is no
min
con
ics
All a
app
are
water Geo
SectNeart n
PROTE
supporting theof the blade.
otor height: thm rotor height
ise the rotor blication seeks t
ocuments.
e Variation on
plication
aspects of the pr
h the application
thods are the sam
nge which woul
aspects of the pr
lication and con
the same as asse
ch would affect
section 4.1
aspects of the pr
application and
thods are the sam
aspects of the pr
h the application
thods are the sam
aspects of the pr
h the application
luding maximum
d.
aspects of the pr
lication and con
the same as asse
aspects of the pr
h the application
luding maximum
ot considered to
imum rotor heig
clusions of the E
aspects of the pr
lication and con
the same as asse
ology and water
ion 36 Coa Gaoithe DO
CT – NOT PROT
e December 20
he design enveor ‘air gap’ bet
by up to severato increase the
Receptor Topic
roject relevant to
n and consent do
me as assessed i
d affect the con
roject relevant to
sent documents
essed in the EIA
the conclusions
roject relevant to
consent docum
me as assessed i
roject relevant to
n and consent do
me as assessed i
roject relevant to
n and consent do
m tip height) are
roject relevant to
sent documents
essed in the EIA
roject relevant to
n and consent do
m tip height) are
o be perceptible f
ght of 1m is still
EIA therefore rem
roject relevant to
sent documents
essed in the EIA
quality were sco
onsent VaOC REF: NNG-0504
TECTIVELY MARK
018 consent is
elope assessed tween sea leve
al metres before minimum rot
ics
o potential effec
ocuments. The
n the EIA theref
nclusions of the H
o potential effec
s. The number o
therefore the co
s of the HRA or A
o potential effec
ents. The numb
n the EIA theref
o potential effec
ocuments. The
n the EIA theref
o potential effec
ocuments. The
the same as ass
o potential effec
s. The number o
therefore the co
o potential seasc
ocuments. The
the same as ass
from the closest
lower than the w
main valid.
o potential socio
s. The number o
therefore the co
oped out of the
ariation R4-935-NnG-S36 CO
KED
just 50cm. Th
for the applicael and lowest bre the maximumtor height, whi
cts on fish and sh
number of turbi
fore the conclusi
HRA or Appropr
cts on marine ma
of turbines, para
onclusions of the
Appropriate Asse
cts on commercia
ber of turbines, p
fore the conclusi
cts on shipping a
number of turbi
fore the conclusi
cts on military an
number of turbi
sessed in the EIA
cts on cultural he
of turbines, para
onclusions of the
cape, landscape
number of turbi
sessed in the EIA
t viewpoint, over
worst case maxi
o-economic effec
of turbines, para
onclusions of the
EIA in agreemen
eport
ONSENT VARIATION
he maximum b
ation allowed fblade tip, was m tip height ofch is within th
hellfish ecology r
nes, parameters
ons of the EIA re
iate Assessment
ammals remain u
meters of found
e EIA remain val
essment.
al fisheries rema
parameters of fo
ons of the EIA re
and navigation re
nes, parameters
ons of the EIA re
nd civil aviation r
nes and the wor
A therefore the co
eritage remain u
meters of found
e EIA remain val
and visual effect
nes and the wor
A. An increase in
r 15km from the
mum rotor heig
cts remain uncha
meters of found
e EIA remain val
nt with the Scott
N-RPT-A2
blade width is t
for a range of 35m LAT, howf 208m LAT is
he range assess
remain unchang
s of foundations
emain valid. Sim
t.
unchanged com
dations and insta
id. Similarly the
ain unchanged c
oundations and
emain valid.
emain unchange
s of foundations
emain valid.
remain unchang
rst case turbine
conclusions of th
unchanged comp
dations and insta
id.
cts remain uncha
rst case turbine
n maximum blad
e wind farm. Th
ht assessed in th
anged compared
dations and insta
id.
tish Ministers. A
PAGE 5 OF 11
towards the
rotor heights.wever it is reached. Thissed in the
ged compared
and installation
milarly there is no
pared with the
allation methods
ere is no change
ompared with
installation
ed compared
and installation
ed compared
parameters
e EIA remain
pared with the
allation methods
anged compared
parameters
de width of 50cm
e increase in
he EIA. The
d with the
allation methods
All aspects of the
s
o
s
s
d
m
s
e
quality
Physical proces
Air quality
Benthic ecolog
4.1 Se
4.1.1 D
12. Shoassofoot50cmfor dAsse
13. Regain thlikel
14. As avaria
4.1.2 C
4.1.3 I
15. The gull,grea
16. For tthe
17. It wafor scollipredbree
18. For tmodnortnon
proj
Sco
is re
sses
Effe
the
Rep
requ
Air q
to p
Scot
gy
Ben
rele
201
eabirds
Displacemen
uld displacemeociated activity tprint, numberm to the maximdisplacement oessment.
arding rotor hehe application y to have any
a result, no furation applicatio
Collision Ris
Implications
NnG EIA Repo, lesser black-bat skua.
this variation avaried design,
as not consideseven species. sions in the nodicted no colliseding season (T
the five additiodelling presentth-south/south-breeding seas
SectNeart n
PROTE
ject relevant to p
ping Report (Ma
equired.
ects on physical p
project relevant
ort (Mar 2018) a
uired.
quality was scop
potential effects
ttish Ministers’ S
thic ecology wa
vant to potentia
8) and Scottish
nt and Barrie
ent or barrier e and effects mr of turbines ormum blade wior barrier effec
eight, the mindocuments aninfluence on th
ther assessmenon.
sk
s of variation
ort submitted ibacked gull, gr
application, co allowing for a
ered necessary For lesser blacon-breeding sesions in the breTable 9.68, Nn
onal species (bted in the NnGh-north directiosons for any of
ion 36 Coa Gaoithe DO
CT – NOT PROT
potential effects
ar 2018) and Sco
processes were s
to potential effe
and Scottish Min
ped out of the EI
on air quality re
Scoping Opinion
s scoped out of
al effects on bent
Ministers’ Scopin
er Effects
effects occur, tmay be influencr spacing betwdth at the nac
cts, compared w
or increase of nd assessed in the potential fo
nt of displacem
n for differe
n March 2018eat black-back
llision modellina comparison w
to present colck-backed gulleason (Table 9.eeding season,nG EIA Report)
black-headed g EIA Report, b
on two times af these species
onsent VaOC REF: NNG-0504
TECTIVELY MARK
on geology and
ottish Ministers’
scoped out of th
ects on physical
nisters’ Scoping
IA in agreement
main unchanged
(Sep 2018), the
the EIA in agree
thic ecology rem
ng Opinion (Sep
they are considced by the spac
ween turbines iscelle end of thewith those alre
1m in the minthe EIA, HRA a
or displacemen
ment or barrier
nt species
8 considered coked gull, black-
ng outputs for with consented
lision modellinl, modelling pr.67, NnG EIA R, with three co.
gull, common gased on 1,000
a year predicteds (Table 9-70).
ariation R4-935-NnG-S36 CO
KED
d water quality re
Scoping Opinion
he EIA in agreem
processes rema
Opinion (Sep 20
with the Scottis
d compared with
erefore no furthe
ement with the S
main unchanged
p 2018), therefor
dered to be caucing between ts proposed as e blade is conseady assessed
nimum height iand Appropriatnt or barrier eff
r effects was co
ollision risk for -headed gull, c
gannet, kittiwd outputs.
ng for all ten spredicted one coReport). For grollisions (one ad
gull, little gull, 0 birds passing d that there w
eport
ONSENT VARIATION
emain unchange
n (Sep 2018), the
ment with the Sco
in unchanged co
018), therefore n
sh Ministers. All
h the NnG Scopi
er consideration
Scottish Minister
compared with
re no further con
used by the prturbines. No cpart of this varidered to havein the EIA, HRA
s within the pate Assessmentfects to occur.
onsidered nece
ten species: gcommon gull,
wake and herrin
pecies as prediollision per brereat black-backdult and two im
Arctic skua an through the d
would be no co
N-RPT-A2
ed compared wi
erefore no furth
ottish Ministers.
ompared with th
no further consid
l aspects of the p
ing Report (Mar
is required.
rs. All aspects o
the NnG Scopin
nsideration is req
resence of a wchange to the riation. A min
e no effect on tA and Approp
arameters alret. It is also not
essary for inclu
annet, kittiwalittle gull, Arct
ng gull are pre
cted impacts weeding season ked gull, modemmature birds
nd great skua),development allisions in the b
PAGE 6 OF 11
th the NnG
er consideration
All aspects of
he NnG Scoping
deration is
project relevant
2018) and
f the project
ng Report (Mar
quired.
ind farm plus wind farm
nor increase of the potential
priate
ady described considered
usion in this
ke, herring tic skua and
esented for
were very low with no elling s) in the non-
collision risk rea in a breeding and
n
19. Basedesither
20. Coll
4.1.4 C
21. TablparaAppthe
22. Collfor gmod
23. Pleathis spre
24. The cons
25. For cons
26. As tHRA
ed on these lowgn proposed brefore not been
ision modelling
Collision mo
les 2, 3 and 4 ameters which propriate AssesBand collision
ision spreadshgannet, kittiwadelling outputs
ase note that th is due to rouneadsheets in Ap
Band model resent documen
gannet and kitsented design.
the potential efA and Appropr
SectNeart n
PROTE
w numbers anby this variationn presented fo
g outputs are
odelling out
below summa this applicatio
ssment (issued model.
eets for the upake and herrins.
he totals in thending. The moppendix 2.
efers to sea levts have used ‘L
ttiwake, collisio. For herring g
ffects of the vaiate Assessmen
ion 36 Coa Gaoithe DO
CT – NOT PROT
d an absence on would also n
or these species
summarised be
puts
rise the collisioon seeks to var 3rd December
pdated parameg gull, plus a s
e table below dore detailed nu
vel using ‘MeaLowest Astron
on modelling ogull there is no
ariation are thent remain valid
onsent VaOC REF: NNG-0504
TECTIVELY MARK
of significant enot result in sigs.
elow for gann
on risk modelliry. The consen 2018). All mo
eters are providsummary sprea
do not all appembers on whic
an Sea Level’ (Momical Tide’ (L
outputs are slig change betwe
e same or lowed.
ariation R4-935-NnG-S36 CO
KED
effects, it was cgnificant effect
et, kittiwake a
ng outputs fornted design is aodel outputs ar
ded in Appendadsheet compa
ear to sum corch these totals
MSL) and all enLAT). Both are
ghtly lower foreen the consen
er than previou
eport
ONSENT VARIATION
considered thats. Revised col
nd herring gul
r the consentedas per the NnGre based on 54
dix 2 of this reparing consente
rectly from the are summed c
ngineering info presented bel
r the varied dented and varied
usly described,
N-RPT-A2
at the minor chllision estimate
ll.
d design and tG EIA Report, H4 turbines usin
port, comprisined with varied
e monthly totacan be viewed
ormation and plow for clarity.
esign comparedd designs.
, the conclusio
PAGE 7 OF 11
hanges to the es have
the amended HRA and g Option 2 of
ng workings collision
als, however in the
previous
d with
ons of the EIA,
NNG-1807-012-EDF-
Table 2: Comp
Design
Consented
Varied
Table 3: Comp
Design
Consented
Varied
-Report-TMP-A01
parison of gannet co
Minimum rotor height (MSL and LAT)
Mbw
32m MSL / 35m LAT
5
33m MSL / 36m LAT
5
parison of kittiwake
Minimum rotor height (MSL and LAT)
Mbw
32m MSL / 35m LAT
5
33m MSL / 36m LAT
5
Secti
Neart na
PROT
ollision modelling out
Maximum blade width
Jan
5.0m 0
5.5m 0
collision modelling o
Maximum blade width
Jan
5.0m 0
5.5m 0
on 36 Conse
a Gaoithe DO
TECT – NOT PROTECTIV
utputs (all ages), 98.9
Feb Mar A
3 8 5
3 7 4
outputs (all ages), 98
Feb Mar A
0 1 1
0 1 1
ent Variation R
OC REF: NNG-0504-93
VELY MARKED
9% avoidance rate
Apr May Jun
19 14
18 13
8.9% avoidance rate
Apr May Jun
3 1
3 1
Report
5-NnG-S36 CONSENT
Jul Aug S
21 15 1
20 15 1
e
Jul Aug S
4 1 2
4 1 2
VARIATION-RPT-A1
Sep Oct Nov
6 7 1
5 6 1
Sep Oct Nov
2 3 2
2 3 2
Dec Breedingseason
0 93
0 89
Dec Breedingseason
10 9
9 8
PAGE 8 OF
g Non-breedi
Autumn Sp
7 7
7 7
g Non-breedi
Autumn Sp
17 2
17 2
F 11
ng Total
pring
108
103
ng Total
pring
28
27
NNG-1807-012-EDF-
Table 4: Comp
Design
Consented
Varied
-Report-TMP-A01
parison of herring gu
Minimum rotor height (MSL and LAT)
Mbw
32m MSL / 35m LAT
5
33m MSL / 36m LAT
5
Secti
Neart na
PROT
ull collision modelling
Maximum blade width
Jan
5.0m 1
5.5m 1
on 36 Conse
a Gaoithe DO
TECT – NOT PROTECTIV
g outputs (all ages),
Feb Mar
0 1
0 1
ent Variation R
OC REF: NNG-0504-93
VELY MARKED
99.5% avoidance ra
Apr May Ju
0 1 1
0 1 1
Report
5-NnG-S36 CONSENT
ate
un Jul Aug
0 0
0 0
VARIATION-RPT-A1
g Sep Oct
0 0
0 0
Nov Dec
1 1
1 1
PAGE 9 OF
Breeding season
Non-breed
2 4
2 4
F 11
ding Total
5
5
Appe
endix
SectNeart n
PROTE
x1:Si
ion 36 Coa Gaoithe DO
ECT – NOT PROT
iteLo
onsent VaOC REF: NNG-0504
TECTIVELY MAR
ocatio
ariation R4-935-NnG-S36 CO
RKED
on
eport
ONSENT VARIATIONN-RPT-A2
PAGE 10 OF 11
"Thorntonloch
500000
500000
525000
525000
550000
550000
575000
575000
6200
000
6200
000
6225
000
6225
000
6250
000
6250
000
Project
Neart na Gaoithe
0 5 10 15 km
Scale: 1:300,000
Reference: WGS 1984 UTM Zone 30NDate: 22 December 2017
Copyright © Mainstream Renewable Power Limited, 2017.Map produced by Mainstream Renewable Power.Not to be copied, reproduced, or otherwise distributed without expressly written permission.
Figure 1-1: Site LocationMap Title
Drawing Number
Legend
Map Details
Credits
¯
Wind Farm AreaOffshore Export Cable Corridor
" Landfall Location
UK02-0803-192-GOB-EIA_INT_1_1-DRG-A
0 2.5 51.25 Miles
AppeSpre
endixadsh
SectNeart n
PROTE
x2:Ceets
ion 36 Coa Gaoithe DO
ECT – NOT PROT
ollisi
onsent VaOC REF: NNG-0504
TECTIVELY MAR
onM
ariation R4-935-NnG-S36 CO
RKED
Modell
eport
ONSENT VARIATION
ling
N-RPT-A2
PAGE 11 OF 11