Project: A2953 Client: East Anglia Offshore Wind Limited Title:
East Anglia THREE– Navigation Risk Assessment
www.anatec.com
day, compared with the May 2013 survey when an average of two fishing vessels were recorded per day. From the tracks it was noted that there was both a combination of vessels engaged in fishing and vessels transiting to and from fishing grounds and ports.
507. When considering the RYA Cruising Atlas (2010), it could be seen that there were three routes (one low and two medium) running in an approximate east – west direction and transiting from the UK coast to mainland Europe. The combined 40 days of AIS and radar data from the marine traffic surveys showed similar results but low levels of 1 to 2 per day. The vast majority of recreational craft were sailing vessels on transit.
31.2 Modelling 508. The following scenarios have been considered as part of the NRA process;
• Base case without windfarm; • Base case with windfarm; • Future case without windfarm (assuming 10% increase in traffic); and • Future case with windfarm (assuming 10% increase in traffic) Vessel to Vessel only.
509. Results showed the change in vessel-to-vessel collision frequency due to the windfarm development was estimated to be 1.18x10-02 per year for the partial fill build scenario and 4.01x10-03 for the 100% fill build scenario. This represents a 0.63% increase (partial fill build scenario) and 0.21% increase (100% fill build scenario) from the pre wind farm vessel-to-vessel collision risk for the area considered.
510. For allision risk (based on modelling of the revised routeing following the complete installation and commissioning of the proposed East Anglia THREE project) the frequency of a passing powered vessel allision is estimated to be 2.97x10-02 per year for the partial fill build scenario (one allision every 34 years) and 1.67x10-02 for the 100% fill build scenario (one allision every 60 years). The frequency of a drifting vessel allision is estimated to be 2.07x10-03 per year for the partial fill build scenario (one allision every 483 years) and 1.14x10-03 for the 100% fill build scenario (one allision every 879 years).
31.3 Hazard Worksop 511.
In order to provide expert opinion and local knowledge a hazard workshop was
undertaken to create a hazard log that was specific to the proposed project. The hazard log identified the hazards caused or changed by the introduction of the proposed East Anglia THREE project, and cumulatively the proposed East Anglia FOUR project. It looked at the risk associated with the hazard, the controls that could be put in place and the tolerability of the residual risk. The log also included embedded mitigations (required and best practice) required to show that the hazards associated with the proposed project are Broadly Acceptable or Tolerable on the basis of ALARP declarations. No risks were assessed to be unacceptable. Two hazards were ranked within the Tolerable (ALARP) region based on the most likely outcome whilst eleven were ranked as Tolerable (ALARP) based on a realistic worst case outcome.
Date: Doc:
07.05.2014 A2539 East Anglia THREE Windfarm Appendix 15.1 Page: 202
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68 |
Page 69 |
Page 70 |
Page 71 |
Page 72 |
Page 73 |
Page 74 |
Page 75 |
Page 76 |
Page 77 |
Page 78 |
Page 79 |
Page 80 |
Page 81 |
Page 82 |
Page 83 |
Page 84 |
Page 85 |
Page 86 |
Page 87 |
Page 88 |
Page 89 |
Page 90 |
Page 91 |
Page 92 |
Page 93 |
Page 94 |
Page 95 |
Page 96 |
Page 97 |
Page 98 |
Page 99 |
Page 100 |
Page 101 |
Page 102 |
Page 103 |
Page 104 |
Page 105 |
Page 106 |
Page 107 |
Page 108 |
Page 109 |
Page 110 |
Page 111 |
Page 112 |
Page 113 |
Page 114 |
Page 115 |
Page 116 |
Page 117 |
Page 118 |
Page 119 |
Page 120 |
Page 121 |
Page 122 |
Page 123 |
Page 124 |
Page 125 |
Page 126 |
Page 127 |
Page 128 |
Page 129 |
Page 130 |
Page 131 |
Page 132 |
Page 133 |
Page 134 |
Page 135 |
Page 136 |
Page 137 |
Page 138 |
Page 139 |
Page 140 |
Page 141 |
Page 142 |
Page 143 |
Page 144 |
Page 145 |
Page 146 |
Page 147 |
Page 148 |
Page 149 |
Page 150 |
Page 151 |
Page 152 |
Page 153 |
Page 154 |
Page 155 |
Page 156 |
Page 157 |
Page 158 |
Page 159 |
Page 160 |
Page 161 |
Page 162 |
Page 163 |
Page 164 |
Page 165 |
Page 166 |
Page 167 |
Page 168 |
Page 169 |
Page 170 |
Page 171 |
Page 172 |
Page 173 |
Page 174 |
Page 175 |
Page 176 |
Page 177 |
Page 178 |
Page 179 |
Page 180 |
Page 181 |
Page 182 |
Page 183 |
Page 184 |
Page 185 |
Page 186 |
Page 187 |
Page 188 |
Page 189 |
Page 190 |
Page 191 |
Page 192 |
Page 193 |
Page 194 |
Page 195 |
Page 196 |
Page 197 |
Page 198 |
Page 199 |
Page 200 |
Page 201 |
Page 202 |
Page 203 |
Page 204 |
Page 205 |
Page 206 |
Page 207 |
Page 208 |
Page 209 |
Page 210 |
Page 211 |
Page 212 |
Page 213 |
Page 214 |
Page 215 |
Page 216 |
Page 217 |
Page 218 |
Page 219 |
Page 220