Review of Post-consent Monitoring (PCM)

and Regulators Response

Kathryn Watson, Marine Licensing Case Manager

Overview

Post Consent Monitoring – why is it required?

Recommendations from “Independent Review of Post-

Consent Offshore Wind Farm Monitoring Data

Associated with Licence Conditions” Report (MMO

1031, April 2014)

Marine Management Organisation Response

Implications for Recommendations into OWF licencing

Why require Post-Consent Monitoring?

Incorporated into Licence Conditions to:

• Validate, or reduce the uncertainty in predictions made in the

EIA or HRA

• Provide evidence on the effectiveness of mitigation measures

• Allows the identification of any unforeseen impacts.

• Be proportionate, targeted, and based on actual risk

Uncertainty – that is the extent of error or assumptions

that were made in calculating the impact. The higher the

degree of uncertainty, the greater the need to monitor

Significance – the extent to which the identified impact is

deemed significant.

PCM Review Project When:

Started November 2012, Completed end 2013. Report published

April 2014

Who:

Undertaken by

Funded by

Managed by MMO and Cefas

Project Steering Group comprising regulators, advisors, and industry,

including members of the Offshore Renewable Energy Licensing

Group (ORELG) advised the project team.

Key Focus

• Seek ways of reducing burdens on business while

maintaining the integrity of the purpose of the Habitats

and Wild Birds Directives.

• Work towards development of strategic approach to

PCM – better designed and targeted to inform future

development proposals, mitigation measures and

licence conditions.

Some Key Questions Addressed

• What lessons have been learnt regarding best

practice monitoring and assessment techniques

applied?

• What have we learnt regarding the environmental

impacts associated with offshore wind farm

development which has been informed by PCM?

• Should standard licence conditions be maintained/

revised/ removed?

Topic Specific Recommendations Review broken down into 6 topic areas:

Benthos Coastal

Processes

Seabirds Fish &

Shellfish

Noise Mammals

Regulators Response

• MMO response provides recommendations on how

future PCM should be undertaken for the receptors

included in the review.

• MMO has reviewed recommendations made within the

Independent report and has set out its

recommendations for the individual receptors

• 22 recommendations in total

General Recommendations

To be considered for PCM on all receptors:

• Recommendation 1 – Regional approach to PCM

• Recommendation 2 – Minimum effort required to

detail change

Themes throughout receptor specific recommendations:

• PCM not always required

• Use of best-practice

• PCM needs to be targeted to its aims

Receptor Specific Recommendations

(Briefly) Coastal Processes:

• PCM not always required since significant impacts on

receptors not evident.

• May be required where sensitive receptor is present in order to

validate predictors / inform adaptive management

Underwater Noise:

• UK interim guidance (NPL 2014) and ISO standards (once

published) should be used to ensure representative noise

profiles are obtained

• Focus on validating EIA model predictions – consideration of

“worst-case” piling events

• Aim to demonstrate validity of marine mammal mitigation

zones and soft-start

• No requirements for monitoring operational noise

Receptor Specific Recommendations

(Briefly) Benthic Ecology:

• Use of grab samples should focus on areas/receptors

predicted to be impacted

• Cost-effective monitoring should be adopted

• PCM may not be required in absence of sensitive or

ecologically important habitats

• Monitoring colonisation of foundations considered on a case

by case basis.

• Temporal scale should be modified - >3 years with 5-year

substantive reviews

Fish and Shellfish:

• Cefas (2012) guidelines used as “best practice” data

acquisition

• EMF monitoring not ordinarily required for PCM of OWFs

Receptor Specific Recommendations

(Briefly) Birds:

• Use of radar (or other techniques) should be used for tracking

where barrier affects need monitoring

• Annual monitoring should be undertaken at same time/season

each year

• Application of model-based approaches to improve

characterisation of development areas

• Rapid developments in survey methods – should be

considered in future PCM

Marine Mammals:

• PCM should validate predictions in terms of levels and

duration of construction noise

• Development of registry for impulsive underwater noise –

cumulative effects

• Natural variables must be considered and whether PCM has

sufficient power to detect change

Licence conditions (1)

• Conditions typically developed between the regulator

(advisors and stakeholders) and developer as a project

evolves.

• Terms of conditions translated into monitoring

specifications which are required to be undertaken for

defined durations.

• Conditions require that the outcomes of these

monitoring programmes are subsequently reported to

the MMO

Licence conditions (2)

• National Planning Policy Framework 2012 Paragraph

206:

“Planning conditions should only be imposed where

they are necessary, relevant to planning and to the

development to be permitted, enforceable, precise

and reasonable in all other respects.”

Implications of Recommendations on

licence conditions

• Standardisation of approaches / Best Practice

– Aids enforceability of conditions

– Allows precise conditions to be included

– Comparison of results – temporally and spatially

• Standardisation of licence conditions

– Provides more certainty to developers in terms of regulatory

expectations

– Aids enforceability and demonstrates a reasonable

approach

Implications of Recommendations on

licence conditions

• Adaptive Monitoring (ie use of Substantive

Reviews)

– Conditions removed/varied if deemed to be no longer

necessary

– Conditions removed/varied if no longer relevant to

development

– Power analysis – can changes be measured?

• PCM not always required for specific receptors in

relation to individual projects

– PCM conditions only required if necessary

– Conditions remain relevant to the development

– Allows for a more reasonable approach to monitoring

Implications of Recommendations on

licence conditions

• Strategic/Regional Approach

– MMO supportive of regional approach to monitoring – used in

Aggregates sector

– Challenges remain regarding how to licence PCM conditions

using a regional approach in terms of:

• Relevance to development

• Relevance to marine licensing

• Enforceability

• Precision

– Need to work with industry/advisors to ensure regional

approach can be implemented into marine licensing framework

– Approach needs to be adopted by Industry and not imposed

by Regulator

Questions/Comments/Discussion

Enquiries to offshore@marinemanagement.org.uk

References

• Centre for Environment, Fisheries & Aquaculture Science (Cefas) (2012)

Guidelines for Data Acquisition to Support Marine Environmental Assessments of

Offshore Renewable Energy Projects. Available from:

http://www.cefas.defra.gov.uk/our-science/assessing-human-impacts/offshore-

renewable-energy.aspx

• Marine Management Organisation (MMO) (2014) Review of Environmental Data

Associated with Post-consent Monitoring of Licence Conditions of Offshore Wind

Farms. Report commissioned by MMO. Available from:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/review-of-environmental-data-mmo-

1031

• Marine Management Organisation (MMO) (2014b) Response to an Independent

Review of Environmental Data Collected at UK and European Offshore Wind farms

and 22 Recommendations for Future Post-Consent Monitoring. Available from:

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/review-of-environmental-data-mmo-

1031

• National Physical Laboratory (NPL) (2014) Good Practice Guide for Underwater

Noise Measurement. Available from:

http://www.thecrownestate.co.uk/media/559036/ei-good-practice-guide-

underwater-noise-measurement.pdf and

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Topics/marine/Licensing/marine/guidance

•