Scotland North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

bp
Clair
Sullom Voe Foinaven Schiehallion
North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

August 2011
Information Sheet
Project name DECC reference number Type of project Undertaker name Undertaker address Licences/owners North Uist Exploration Well W/4123/2011 Exploration well BP Exploration Operating Company Limited (BP) 1-4 Wellheads Avenue, Dyce, Aberdeen, AB21 7PB Licence number P.1192 BP Exploration Operating Company Limited is the nominated operator Field interests BP Exploration Operating Company Limited Nexen Petroleum UK Limited Faroe Petroleum (U.K.) Limited Cieco Exploration and Production (UK) Limited Idemitsu Petroleum U.K. Limited 47.5% 35% 6.25% 6.25% 5%
Short description
The project involves the drilling and subsequent abandonment of an exploration well and possible sidetracks at the location of the North Uist prospect. It is located in UK Block 213/25c, approximately 125 km north west of the Shetland Islands and approximately 30 km southeast of the UK-Faroes median line in a water depth of 1,291 m. January 2012. This may change depending on availability of the drillship and other operational matters. N/A None Genesis Oil and Gas Consultants Ltd.
Anticipated date for commencement of works Date and reference of any earlier environmental statements Significant environmental impacts identified Statement prepared by
Page i
August 2011
This page is intentionally left blank
August 2011
Page ii
Non-Technical Summary
Introduction
This Environmental Statement (ES) presents the findings of the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) conducted by BP for the proposed North Uist Exploration Well project. The project involves the drilling and abandonment of a single exploration well and possible sidetracks into the North Uist reservoir to determine the presence of hydrocarbons. The North Uist prospect is located in UK Block 213/25c, approximately 125 km north west of the Shetland Islands and approximately 30 km southeast of the UK-Faeroes median line (Figure 1) in a water depth of 1,291 m.
production of oil and gas from the Clair, Schiehallion, Loyal and Foinaven fields over the last 15 years. The North Uist prospect is a potential hydrocarbon reservoir that could have significant reserves. The aim of this exploration well is to obtain reservoir properties that enable the prospect to be evaluated for potential future development.
Development concept and schedule

The development concept is a vertical exploration well into the prospect using a dynamically positioned drillship, the Stena Carron, owned and operated by Stena Drilling, a highly experienced drilling company. The choice of the Stena Carron brings a highly stable drilling vessel with significant weather tolerances and avoids the need for anchor handling vessels and consequential anchor scars on the seabed. Drilling of the well is planned to commence in January 2012, however this could change depending on availability of the drillship and other operational matters, and could be any time from October 2011 until August 2012.
Project background and purpose

The North Uist prospect is one of several hydrocarbon prospects identified west of Shetland for which BP is the Operator, on behalf of itself and its partners in the field licence. Drilling in the west of Shetland area has been taking place for more than 30 years, in water depths of up to 1,800 m and BP has a successful track record of development in this area. BP has pioneered the
Environmental statement remit

This ES has been prepared in accordance with
Figure 1: Location of the proposed project.
August 2011
Page iii
the requirements of the Offshore Petroleum Production and Pipelines (Assessment of Environmental Effects Regulations 1999 (as amended) which require evaluation of projects likely to have a significant effect on the offshore environment. As a single exploration well with no installation of a pipeline or hydrocarbon production, the project does not require a statutory ES. Nevertheless BP has chosen to voluntarily prepare and submit this ES. The aim of the EIA is to assess the potential environmental impacts that may arise from the project and to identify measures that will be put in place to prevent or minimise these impacts. The ES summarises the EIA process and outcomes. The scope of the EIA is well established for such projects and the proposed project as assessed within this ES comprises; drilling of the well taking measurements to profile the geology and well abandonment prior to leaving the site.
A single well will be drilled in five sections with cemented steel casings, designed to BPs well design standards and approved in accordance with the UK Regulations covering well integrity. Downhole equipment will be used to determine key reservoir properties and additional geophysical data will be obtained by a combination of an airgun at the surface and a moving sensor in the well (a Vertical Seismic Profile). Should a significant find of hydrocarbons be discovered there is a potential for one or more sidetracks to be drilled to further evaluate the prospect. In any hole section, there is a low risk that the section may have to be re-drilled should the hole collapse or the drilling assembly become stuck. Drilling muds and cuttings handling Different types of mud are used for different parts of the well for a number of reasons including the control of pressure in the well, lubrication of the drill bit and circulation of the rock cuttings out of the hole.
1 The 36, 26 and 17 /2sections of the well will be drilled using water-based mud (WBM), which is suitable for discharge to the sea. Design work is still ongoing to determine whether WBM or Oilbased mud (OBM) provides the best mud type for the 121/4 section of the well. If OBM is selected, this will be reflected in the PON15B (chemical permit) application. OBM will be used for drilling the 81/2section and into the reservoir formation itself, since this has superior properties for those particular sections. The OBM will be returned to shore and recovered.
Environmental philosophy
BP and its field partners are committed to conducting activities in compliance with all applicable legislation and in a manner which contributes to BPs stated goals of no accidents, no harm to people and no damage to the environment.
The development
Reservoir and fluid characteristics
The current most likely interpretation of North Uist is a sequence of Jurassic sediments overlying either Basement or Devono-Carboniferous sediments. Evidence from the Eribol well 18 km away, and the Rosebank and Lochnagar wells 40 km away, which are the nearest wells with hydrocarbons, indicate the most likely oil type, if present, at the North Uist site would be a relatively light crude. The North Uist well is not a high-pressure hightemperature (HPHT) well.
WBM cuttings from the tophole sections will be discharged to the seabed. Drill cuttings contaminated with WBM from the middle hole section will be discharged from the drillship into the sea following mud recovery operations. This is normal practice and is not considered to be a risk to the environment. OBM contaminated drill cuttings will be recovered and shipped to shore for treatment and disposal. Well control equipment and well testing The primary well control barrier is the use of weighted drilling fluids which are sufficiently heavy to counterbalance the formation pressure. The main secondary barrier will be the blow out preventer (BOP) system which exists to prevent uncontrolled flow from the well by positively closing the well-bore when required.
Wells and drilling

The Stena Carron drillship will be used to drill the well and it will be accompanied by a standby vessel and attended by periodic supply vessels and crew transfer helicopters. August 2011
Page iv
Well completion Since the objective of the well is to determine the presence of hydrocarbons, and there is no intention to flow the well or preserve the well for use in the future, the tubing, valve work and other equipment necessary for production (known as well completion) will not be installed. Well abandonment At the end of the operation, the well will be sealed with cement plugs, in line with the current DECC guidance and industry good practice. The wellhead will be severed approximately 3 m below the seabed using a mechanical cutter prior to removing the wellhead and leaving the seabed free of obstructions.
Seabird numbers in the region are low in comparison to areas over the continental shelf and overall seabird vulnerability to oil pollution in the area is low. The proposed development occurs within ICES rectangle 51E6. Fish landings data at UK ports from 2005-2007 suggest that the area is not commercially important with overall landings from this rectangle valuing less than 1,000 per annum.
Conservation interests
A diverse range of cetaceans including minke, killer, sperm, beaked and long-finned pilot whales, Atlantic white-sided, white-beaked and Rissos dolphins have been sighted in the Faroe-Shetland Channel. Of the marine species in UK waters that have been identified for protection under Annex II of the European Habitats Directive, grey seals, bottlenose dolphins and harbour porpoises have been recorded in low numbers in the vicinity of the project site. Of the bird species listed in the Annex I of the Birds Directive, the European Storm-petrel, Leaches storm-petrel and the Arctic tern are all found within the project area. Several other bird species are found, with highest counts being associated with northern fulmars, northern gannets, black-legged kittiwakes and puffins. No Annex I habitats have been identified in the area of the development. The closest are the Wyville-Thomson Ridge and the Darwin mounds located approximately 225 and 260 km respectively southwest of the project site. It is not considered likely that the North Uist project will have any impact on these designated areas at this distance. Shetland is the closest land mass to the project and, in the unlikely event of a major oil spill occurring, may be affected. Shetland contains numerous coastal habitats designated as sites of international, European and national importance. Other potential sensitivities to oil spills in coastal areas include fishing, mariculture, tourism and amenity.
The environment
The North Uist project site is located on the floor of the Faroe-Shetland Channel at a depth of 1,291 m. The seabed at the project site is gently undulating with a very low slope gradient. The oceanographic regime consists of an upper layer of warm North Atlantic water flowing towards the northeast, overlying a lower layer of cold Norwegian Sea bottom water, flowing towards the southwest. The area is exposed to strong winds from the west and south west while significant wave heights exceed 2.5 m for 50% of the year and 4 m for 10% of the year. Surveys of the floor of the Faroe-Shetland Channel show it to be made up of relatively featureless mud with some gravel, overlain by a thin layer (<5 cm thick) of muddy sands.
Key environmental sensitivities

Phytoplankton data specific to the Faroe-Shetland Channel is limited, however, phytoplankton species as a whole to the west of Shetland are similar to those in the North Sea. The Channel serves as an important area for aggregations of overwintering Calanus species (zooplankton). Benthic communities at the bottom of the FaroeShetland Channel are less diverse than those in shallower waters or in neighbouring deep water areas with warmer currents. No spawning or nursery grounds for commercial species are known within the area of the project, though the pelagic eggs of some species may drift in upper part of the water column e.g. blue whiting and monkfish.
Assessment of potential impacts

The following impacts were assessed as requiring more detailed assessment.
August 2011
Page v
Non-Technical Summary Physical presence

Seabed impacts Seabed impacts are unlikely to be significant and will be limited to the immediate area around the well location. These localised impacts may include the direct physical injury of benthic (seabed) species, the localised loss of seabed habitat or indirect impacts which may be caused by the re-suspension and re-settlement of sediments. The maximum area that will be directly impacted is extremely small and is expected to recover quickly.
well to gain geological information, which is a routine operation. These have the potential to disturb marine mammals and the JNCC guidelines for seismic surveys (JNCC, 2010) will be followed to minimise any risk. In order to remove the wellhead at the end of the operation and keep the seabed clear, it is proposed to use a mechanical cutting tool. Use of an explosive cutting charge will be a contingency measure if mechanical cutting is unsuccessful. If this method is used, to mitigate any potential impact to cetaceans, three levels of mitigation will be adopted: a charge design which minimises the blast size and radius, marine mammal observers to visually observe mammals and passive acoustic monitoring to listen for marine mammal sounds. As a result, it is considered that the risk of injury to a marine mammal is negligible and application for a licence to disturb such mammals is not required.
Discharges to sea
Potential discharges to sea during drilling operations include cuttings, WBM, cement and associated chemicals. WBM cuttings generated from drilling the tophole section of the well will be discharged to the seabed in line with current practice. Drill cuttings with WBM generated from drilling the middle section(s) of the well will be discharged from the drillship into the sea following mud recovery operations in line with current practice. The risks to the marine environment from these discharges are assessed as non-significant and will be subject to detailed controls under the UK consenting process for permitting offshore chemicals. Existing procedures will be followed to contain and ship to shore for disposal the OBM cuttings generated from drilling the lower section(s) of the well. Cuttings on the seabed will cover a wide area at a very low thickness, and a small area near the well at thicknesses of a few centimetres. Smothering or burial will be limited to the thickest areas within around 100 m of the well. In other areas, the organisms present should not be smothered and should be able to move through this surface layer of deposition. There will be some temporary impact on benthic fauna in the immediate vicinity of the well and on plankton in the water column. Overall this impact is not considered significant.
Atmospheric emissions
Atmospheric emissions will occur from fuel use on the drillship and supporting vessel. These will be commensurate with normal marine activities. Acid gas emissions from fuel consumption are controlled under MARPOL Annex VI, and specifically the drillship will have an International Air Pollution Prevention Certificate demonstrating compliance with good practice on emissions control.
Accidental events
This ES incorporates the latest analysis of oil spill risks currently available and relevant to the project. The North Uist project site is a reservoir that does not contain fluids at high pressure and temperature. Oil spills BPs target is for zero oil spills. Numerous and substantial measures are used to prevent oil spills occurring during drilling operations and the industry is always striving to improve by implementing lessons learned. There have been no significant blowouts for any operations leading to oil pollution in the UK in over 20 years, and the lessons learned since the Deepwater Horizon incident in the Gulf of Mexico have only strengthened the preventative measures taken. The likelihood of a loss of well control event leading to a spill, particularly from the drilling of a well such as the North Uist reservoir, is considered extremely remote. Nevertheless as the
Underwater noise
The presence of the drillship is not predicted to give rise to any significant noise impact, and is reflective of any large vessel. Airguns will be used in the water after drilling the
August 2011
Page vi
consequences of a blowout can be significant, BP implements a wide range of measures to prevent a loss of well control incident. In addition to having in place a number of comprehensive prevention measures, BP implements a range of response/ mitigation measures in order to address the small remaining residual risk of an oil spill. These response/mitigation measures are detailed in BPs spill response strategy. Spill response strategy An Oil Pollution Emergency Plan (OPEP) will be submitted for this project. The OPEP contains BPs plans for responding to any unplanned release of oil. BP, along with other North Sea operators, have engaged Oil Spill Response to provide a wide range of spill response equipment and expertise, including aircraft, vessels, dispersants, booms, recovery and surveillance equipment. These resources can be mobilised to the project site. BP maintains an onshore oil spill plan for its west of Shetland operations (the Schiehallion/ Loyal, Foinaven and Clair fields) in addition to the offshore response. Chemical spills As with oil spills, BPs target is for zero chemical spills. The possibility of a chemical spill however cannot be completely eliminated. Given the nature of the high energy marine environment of the project area, any chemical spill is expected to rapidly disperse with only a negligible to minor localised impact on plankton or fish egg/larvae, depending on the season. The low probability of a chemical spill occurring with any significant associated environmental impact means the residual risk of a chemical spill is low.
and will occur over a well-defined period of time. Standard communication and notification measures will be in place to ensure that all vessels operating in the area are aware of the project activities occurring. A standby vessel will also be present throughout. The temporarily increased vessel presence in the project area is expected to have an insignificant impact. Fishing interaction The drillship will not leave anchor mounds on the seabed while only a small, thin layer of cuttings will remain. Other users of the sea The project site is outwith any known areas of renewable energy or of military activity. The proposed site is within an area of current oil and gas activity.
Cumulative and transboundary impacts

Cumulative effects are those that impact on the environment and add to existing or reasonably foreseeable future impacts. Transboundary effects are those impacts where the area of influence could reasonably be expected to extend beyond the UK boundary line into either Faroese or Norwegian waters. Other oil and gas fields currently developed in the West of Shetland area include the Foinaven, Schiehallion and Clair fields. In addition, the Laggan and Tormore fields are currently under development and drilling by other operators has recently taken place, and continues to take place, for other prospects such as Alligin, Lagavulin, Rosebank, Lochnagar, Cambo, Glenlivet, Tornado and South Uist. This assessment indicates that the impacts of this project are not expected to have a detrimental impact on the local environment either individually or in cumulation with other operations within the region. No transboundary issues from planned discharges to sea or atmospheric emissions will occur. Due to the temporary and localised nature of any impact, cumulative and/or transboundary impacts associated with the generation of underwater noise are considered highly unlikely. The cumulative risk of oil spills is not considered significant, since the likelihood of a single major spill occurring is historically extremely low, and significant preventative and control measures are in place. The results of oil spill modelling, for a scenario Page vii
Socio-economic impacts
Interaction with other sea users The project site is utilised by a number of other sea users, primarily the fishing and shipping industries. Fishing intensity in the area is very low in overall UK terms, and interference is limited to approximately 3 months while the drillship is present. Increased vessel presence The increase in the number of vessels in the area during project activities will be of limited duration August 2011
where no response measures were implemented, indicate that in the very unlikely event of a worst case spill, oil is likely to move into Norwegian waters and is ultimately likely to affect the Norwegian coastline. In a minority of circumstances, it could affect the northwest Shetland coast for this scenario. The assessment of spill frequency demonstrates the extremely low probability of such an event, without a relevant precedent in the North Sea. For this scenario oil is also predicted to cross over into the Faroese waters, but the overall conclusion from a variety of modelling outputs is that oil is not expected to beach on the Faroes. Clearly the potential worst case scenario impacts described above would be reduced by response measures put in place. In the event of a worst case spill which is predicted to drift into Norwegian waters the NORBRIT plan will be activated by the UKs Counter Pollution Branch of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA). The NORBRIT plan is a joint UK/Norway oil spill contingency plan operating within the framework of the 2006 National Contingency Plan. In the event of a major spill which is predicted to drift into Faroese waters, the MCA will liaise with the Marine Rescue and Co-ordination Centre (MRCC) in Torshavn, Faroe.
Conclusions
Overall it is considered that, following application of preventative and mitigation measures identified within this ES, the planned operation will not cause any significant residual environmental impacts. It is recognised that the consequences of a major oil release, however low the probability of that occurring could be significant, and this is reflected in the planning, preventative control and contingency measures that are put in place. The preventative measures control the risk of oil spill to an extremely low level and set in place measures to combat any pollution. In line with good environmental practice and DECC recommendations, the oil spill strategy is outlined in this Environmental Statement. The operational details will be further expanded in the Oil Pollution Emergency Plan which will include further consultation with the statutory authorities and appraisal of response arrangements.
August 2011
Page viii
Abbreviations and Glossary
Abbreviations
AFEN Atlantic Frontier Environmental Network AIW Arctic Intermediate Water
EIA Environmental Impact Assessment EMS Environmental Management System EPC Offshore Installations (Emergency Pollution Control) Regulations 2002
EPS European Protected Species API American Petroleum Institute ES Environmental Statement AQO Air Quality Objectives ESE East Southeast BAOAC Bonn Agreement Oil Appearance Code BIOFAR BIOlogical investigations of the FARoese BMT BMT ARGOSS BODC British Oceanographic Data Centre GDP Group Defined Practice BOP Blowout Preventer CEFAS Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science CFC Chlorofluorocarbon CHARM Chemical Hazard and Risk Management CO Carbon Monoxide HCFC Hydrocarbofluorocarbon CO2 Carbon Dioxide HR Habitat Regulations cP Centipoise HSE Health & Safety Executive CPR Continuous Plankton Recorder Hz Hertz cSAC Candidate Special Area of Conservation dB DeciBel DECC Department of Energy and Climate Change DP Dynamic Positioning DPO Duty Pollution Officer DREAM Dose Related Risk and Effect Assessment Model dSAC Draft Special Area of Conservation DTI Department of Trade and Industry (now DECC) E East EEMS Environmental Emissions Monitoring System IAPP International Air Pollution ICES International Council for the Exploration of the Sea IMO International Maritime Organisation FSCBW Faroe-Shetland Channel Bottom Water GEBCO General Bathymetric Chart of the Oceans GHG Greenhouse Gas GOR Gas to Oil Ratio EU European Union FEPA Food and Environment Protection Act FPSO Floating Production Storage and Offloading (vessel)
ISO International Standards Organisation IUCN International Union for the Conservation of Nature JIP Joint Industry Partnership JNCC Joint Nature Conservation Committee kHz Kilohertz km Kilometre km2 Square Kilometres
August 2011
Page ix
LMRP Lower marine riser package m Metre m3 Cubic Metres MARPOL International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships
OPOL Offshore Pollution Liability Association OPPC Oil Pollution Prevention and Control Regulations OPRC Oil Pollution Preparedness Response and Cooperation Regulations OSCAR Oil Spill Contingency and Response
MCA Maritime and Coastguard Agency MDBRT Measured Depth Below Rotary Table mg Milligram mm Millimetre MMO Marine Mammal Observer MNAW Modified North Atlantic Water MODU Mobile Offshore Drilling Unit MRCC Marine Rescue and Coordination Centre (located in the Faroe Islands) m/s Metres per Second N North NATO North Atlantic Treaty Organisation PLONOR Pose Little Or No Risk to the environment PON Petroleum Operation Notice ppb Parts per Billion ppm Parts per Million psi Pounds per Square Inch pSAC Possible Special Area of Conservation PTS Permanent Threshold Shift ROV Remotely Operated Vehicle SAC Special Area of Conservation SAST Seabirds at Sea Team SCI Site of Community Importance SEA Strategic Environmental Assessment SEL Sound Exposure Level SERPENT Scientific and Environmental ROV Partnership using Existing Industrial Technology SFF Scottish Fishermens Federation SINTEF The Foundation for Scientific and OSPAR Oslo and Paris Convention for the Protection of the Marine Environment of the North East Atlantic OSPRAG Oil Spill Prevention and Response Advisory Group (OSPRAG) OSR Oil Spill Response Limited PAH Poly Aromatic Hydrocarbons PAM Passive Acoustic Monitoring PEXA Practice and Exercise Area
NAW North Atlantic Water Nm Nautical Mile NMHC Non Methane hydrocarbons NNE North Northeast NNW North Northwest NOX Nitrogen Oxides NSAIW Norwegian Sea Arctic Intermediate Water NSDW Norwegian Sea Deep Water NSTF North Sea Task Force N2O Nitrous Oxide OBM Oil Based Mud OCR Offshore Chemicals Regulations OCU Operations Control Unit OMR Offshore Marine Regulations OPEP Oil Pollution Emergency Plan
August 2011
Page x

Industrial Research sm3/day Standard Cubic Metre per Day SMRU Sea Mammal Research Unit SNH Scottish Natural Heritage SOPEP Shipboard Oil Pollution Emergency Plan SOSREP Secretary of State Representative (Energy and Climate Change) SOx Sulphur Oxides SPA Special Protection Area SPU Strategic Performance Unit SSSI Site of Special Scientific Interest SVT Sullom Voe Terminal SW South West TBT Tributyltin THC Total Hydrocarbon Concentration TTS Temporary Threshold Shift UK United Kingdom US United States UKAPP United Kingdom Air Pollution Certificate UKCS United Kingdom Continental Shelf UKDEAL UK Digital Energy Atlas and Library
UKHO United Kingdom Hydrographic Office UKMMAS United Kingdom Marine Monitoring and Assessment Strategy UKOOA United Kingdom Offshore Operators Association VSP Vertical Seismic Profile VOC Volatile Organic Compound WBM Water Based Mud WONS WOSPS Well Operations Notification System West of Shetland Pipeline System
Pa2-s Micro Pascal per Second
August 2011
Page xi
Glossary
Annex I Habitat Habitat, listed on the Habitats Directive, considered most in need of conservation within Europe. Annex II Species Species (not including birds), listed on the Habitats Directive, considered most in need of conservation within Europe. Anthropogenic Relating to human activities (or man-made). Annulus The tube shaped void between a pipe string and a surrounding pipe string or formation. Appraisal well A well drilled to confirm the size or quantity of an oil discovery. Before development, a discovery is likely to need at least two or three such wells. Auks Birds of the family Alcidae in the order Charadriiformes. Barrels The traditional unit of measure of oil volume, equivalent to 159 litres (0.159 m3) or approximately 35 imperial gallons. Bathymetry The measurement of water depths in oceans, seas and lakes. Benthic Adjective pertaining to anything related to the sea bed. Benthos The plant and animal community of the bottom of the sea, including littoral and sublittoral components. Best Available The latest stage of development Technique (BAT) (state of the art) of processes, of facilities or of methods of operation, which indicate the practical suitability of a particular measure for limiting discharges, emissions and waste. Definition of available includes demonstrated techniques, timescale as well as economic considerations. "Techniques" include both the technology used and the way in which the installation is designed, built, maintained, operated and dismantled.
Best Environmental The development option that Practice offers the minimal environmental impact assuming no technical limitations. Biodiversity/Diversity The diversity of plant and animal life. Diversity is the measure of the variety of species contained within a habitat. Biota The plant and animal life of a particular region. Bioturbation The mixing of sediments or particles by fauna. Birds Directive European directive to protect habitats of wild bird species through the designation of SPAs. The directive provides a framework for the conservation and management of, and human interactions with, wild birds in Europe. The objective is to create a coherent network of protected species which meets the protection requirements of endangered and migratory bird species. Blowout Uncontrolled release of reservoir fluids into the wellbore and sometimes to the surface wellbore or casing. Blowout preventer Hydraulically operated device used to prevent uncontrolled releases of oil or gas from a well. Boreal Of the north or northern regions. By-catch Fish caught unintentionally in a fishery. C130 Hercules A four engine turboprop military transport aircraft. Cement Used to set casing in the well bore and seal off formations and apertures. It is also used as a coating to add weight to submarine pipelines. Cetaceans Collective term for whales, dolphins and porpoises. Chlorophyll This is a green pigment found in all plants, algae, and blue-green algae. Chronic Recurring intermittently over a long period. Completion See Well Completion.
August 2011
Page xii
Conductor The conductor is the first casing string which is cemented in the well. It extends from just above the seabed to a depth sufficient to support the structured loads placed on it during operations. Conspecific Of or belonging to the same species. Continental shelf Continental shelf or the area at the edges of a continent from the shoreline to a depth of 200 m, where the continental slope begins. The shelf is commonly a wide, flat area with a slight seaward slope. Continental slope This is the seaward border of the continental shelf. Commissioning Preparatory testing work, servicing etc. usually on newly installed equipment prior to coming into full production. Completion Generic term used to describe the assembly of downhole tubulars and equipment required to enable safe and efficient production from an oil or gas well. Copepod A large family of aquatic belonging to the class Crustacea of the phylum Arthropoda, living in fresh water or sea water. Many are free living in the plankton or in seabed sediments, whilst others are parasitic. Cuttings pile A pile formed on the seabed as a result of the deposition of drill cuttings. Decibel (dB) A unit used in the comparison of two power levels relating to sound (one tenth of a Bel). Decommissioning Shutdown of the development with system cleaning and dismantling of facilities. Demersal Living or occurring in the water at the bottom of a water body. Development well Any well drilled in the course of extraction of reservoir hydrocarbons, whether specifically a production well or injection well. Drill bit A drilling tool used to cut through rock.
Drill cuttings Chips and small fragments of rock generated while drilling a well, which are brought to the surface by the flow of the drilling mud as it is circulated. Drilling mud Special clay, water and chemical additives, pumped downhole through the drill pipe and drill bit. The mud cools the rapidly rotating bit, lubricates the drill pipe as it turns in the well bore, carries rock cuttings to the surface, maintains downhole pressure and serves as a plaster to prevent the wall of the borehole from collapsing. Drill string Lengths of steel tubing roughly 10 m long screwed together to form a pipe connecting the drill bit to the drilling rig. It is rotated to drill the hole and delivers the drilling fluids to the cutting edge of the drill bit. Duty of Care The duty to avoid an act or omission which may have as its reasonable and probable consequence injury to persons to whom the duty is owed. Dynamic positioning Use of thrusters (instead of anchors) to maintain the position of a vessel. Echolocation The locating of objects using reflected sound. Ecosystem Consists of all the organisms living, including non-living physical components of the environment, with which they interact a biological community and its physical environment. Elasmobranch Elasmobranch refers to the sharks, rays and skates cartilaginous fishes. These animals have a skeleton made of cartilage rather than bone. Environmental Systematic review of the Impact Assessment environmental effects a proposed (EIA) project may have on its surrounding environment. Environmental System established to manage Management an organisations processes and System (EMS) resultant environmental impacts. Environmental Formal document presenting the Statement (ES) findings of an EIA process for a proposed project.
August 2011
Page xiii
Epifauna Benthic organisms that inhabit the surface of the seabed. Espoo Convention The Espoo (EIA) Convention lays down the general obligation of States to notify and consult each other on all major projects under consideration that are likely to have a significant adverse environmental impact across boundaries. Exploration Well A well drilled to test a potential but unproven hydrocarbon trap or structure where good reservoir rock and a seal or closure combine with a potential source of hydrocarbons. Faults A fracture in rock where there has been an observable amount of displacement. Fauna This is all of the animal life of any particular region or time. Fetch Oceanographic terminology that describes distance over a body of water that wind blows. Flare A vent for burning of unwanted gases or to burn off hydrocarbons which, due to temporary malfunction or maintenance of process plant, cannot be safely stored or retained in process vessels. Flowline Pipe laid on the seabed for the transportation of production or injection fluids. It is generally an infield line, linking a subsea structure to another structure or to a production facility. Its length ranges from a few hundred meters to several kilometres. Formation fluids Any fluid that occurs in the pores of a rock. Strata containing different fluids, such as various saturations of oil, gas and water, may be encountered in the process of drilling an oil or gas well. Formation damage Damage to the reservoir rock around a well due to e.g. plugging with mud, infiltration by water from the well or high flow rate. Fugitive emissions Small chronic escape of gas and liquids from equipment and pipework.
Habitat An area where particular animal or plant species and assemblages are found, defined by environmental parameters. Greenhouse gas Gases in the atmosphere that adsorb and emit radiation within the thermal infrared range. Primary greenhouse gases include water vapour, carbon dioxide, methane, nitrous oxide and ozone. Habitats Directive The Habitats Directive (together with the Birds Directive) forms the cornerstone of Europe's nature conservation policy. It is built around two pillars: the Natura 2000 network of protected sites and the strict system of species protection. All in all the directive protects over 1,000 animal and plant species and over 200 so called "habitat types" (e.g. special types of forests, meadows, wetlands, etc.), which are of European importance. Hydrocarbons Organic chemical compounds of carbon and hydrogen atoms. There are a vast number of these compounds and they form the basis of all petroleum products. They may exist as gases and liquids. Examples include methane, hexane and asphalt. Hydrographic The study, description and mapping of waterways, including seas, lakes, rivers. Hydrophones Underwater microphones used for recording subsea noise. Hydrostatics Is the science of fluids at rest. ICES rectangles A statistical area of the sea that is 0.5 North by 1 West, defined by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea. Each ICES rectangle covers 15 licence blocks i.e. one half of one quadrant. Littoral Coastal zone extending from the high water mark area to the zone that is permanently submerged under water. Macrobenthic Organisms living in or on aquatic substrates and large enough to be seen with the naked eye.
August 2011
Page xiv
Macrofauna Benthic organisms that are retained in a 0.3 mm sieve. Masking Perception of biologically important sounds is decreased due to interference by sound energy from other sources (including ambient noise). Migration Any regular animal journey along well-defined routes, particularly those involving a return to breeding grounds. Mitigation Process that would make a consequence less severe. Mud This is generally synonymous with drilling fluid and encompasses most fluids used in hydrocarbon drilling operations, especially fluids that contain significant amounts of suspended solids, emulsified water or oil. Mud includes all types of waterbased, oil-based and syntheticbased drilling fluids. Mysticete Any whale in the taxon Mysticeti; a mysticete is a whale that has baleen instead of teeth. Mysticetes are filter feeders, straining water through their baleen to capture prey items. Mysticetes include the largest of the whales, the fin and blue whales. Natura 2000 An EU wide network of nature protection areas established under the 1992 Habitats Directive. NORBRIT A joint counter pollution operation Agreement between Norway and the UK in the zone extending 50 nautical miles either side of the median line separating the UK and Norway continental shelf. Odontocete Any whale from the taxon Odontoceti, an odontocete is a toothed whale. Sperm whales and beaked whales are both examples. Pelagic Referring to the ocean water column and the organisms living therein. Phytoplankton Microscopic planktonic plants, e.g. diatoms and dinoflagellates. Pinnipeds Marine mammals that include the seals, sea lions and walruses.
Plankton Tiny plants and animals that drift in the surface water of seas and lakes. Of great economic and ecological importance as they are a major component of marine food chains. Plume Term used to describe the dispersion of oil in the water column following an uncontrolled oil release. Turbulence causes the oil to be broken up at the exit. As a result the oil spreads out as it rises, mixing with the water around it. Pollution The introduction by man, directly or indirectly, of substances or energy to the environment resulting in deleterious effects such as harm to living resources; hazards to human health; hindrance of marine activities including fishing, and impairment of the quality for use of seawater and reduction of amenities. Polychaete Bristle worms. A class of segmented worms belonging to the phylum Annelida, generally marine. Each body segment has a pair of fleshy protrusions called parapodia that bear many bristles, called chaetae, which are made of chitin. Production well A development well specifically for the extraction of reservoir fluids. Production is the full-scale extraction of oil and gas reserves. Ramsar site Statutory areas designated by the UK Government under the Ramsar Convention (the Convention on Wetlands of International Importance) especially as waterfowl habitat. Recruitment Young fish joining the main adult fish population. Reservoir A porous, permeable sedimentary rock formation containing quantities of oil and or gas enclosed or surrounding by layers of less-permeable or impervious rock; a structural trap; stratigraphic minerals. Riser A pipe that goes upwards from the seabed to the surface that is used to transfer produced fluids (oil, gas and water). Risers may be rigid or flexible.
August 2011
Page xv
Salinity The saltiness or dissolved salt content of a body of water. SCI Site of Community Interest Sedentary Remaining or living in one area, not migratory. Seismic survey A survey conducted to map the depths and contours of various rock strata by timing the reflections of sound waves. 2-D seismic surveys measure depths from the reflections. 3-D seismic takes simultaneous oblique measurements that provide a more accurate picture. 4-D seismic incorporates time as the 4th dimension to a standard 3-D seismic survey. Sessile An organism that is attached to another structure by its base and is unable to move freely. Shoal Sandbar (or just bar in context), or gravelbar is a somewhat linear landform within or extending into a body of water, typically composed of sand, silt or small pebbles. Slurry A thick suspension of solids in a liquid. Side scan sonar A form of sonar used to create an image of areas of the seafloor. Uses include creation of charts, identification of bathymetrical features and detection of objects on the seafloor. Sidetrack This term is used for drilling a directional hole to bypass an obstruction in the well that cannot be removed or damage, such as collapsed casing that cannot be repaired. Sidetracking is also done to deepen a well or to relocate the bottom of the well in a more productive zone, which is horizontally removed from the original well. Smolt One of the stages in the life cycle of a salmon. It is the stage at which the salmon becomes covered in scales and migrates from fresh water to saltwater.
Source level Defined as the sound intensity, in decibels with reference to specific level, at a point which is a unit distance from a source (1 m is often used). Spawning Reproductive stage of fish and other marine animals when eggs are released into the water column or deposited on to the seabed or other substrata. Special Area of Areas considered important for Conservation (SAC) certain habitats and non-bird species of interest in a European context. One of the main mechanisms by which the EC Habitats and Species Directive 1992 is implemented. In addition, there are four designations below full SAC status: Sites of Community Importance (SCIs) are sites that have been adopted by the European Commission but not yet formally designated by the government of each country; Candidate SACs (cSACs) are sites that have been submitted to the European Commission, but not yet formally adopted; Possible SACs (pSACs) are sites that have been formally advised to UK Government, but not yet submitted to the European Commission; and Draft SACs (dSACs) are areas that have been formally advised to UK government as suitable for selection as SACs, but have not been formally approved by government as sites for public consultation. Special Protection Sites designated under the EU Area (SPA) Birds Directive as a Special Protection Area. Stakeholder Any individual or groups of people who are affected by, or have interest in, the activities and/or outcome of the BP North Uist project. Sub-littoral An organism living near or just below the low tide level of a shore. Temporary A temporary decrease in hearing Threshold Shift sensitivity caused by exposure to (TTS) loud noise.
August 2011
Page xvi
Thermocline Oceanic water layer in which water temperature decreases rapidly with increasing depth. Thruster A propulsive device used by vessels for station keeping, attitude control, or long duration low acceleration. Tier 1 Response Local Response, within the capability of the operator at the project site. Tier 2 Response Regional, beyond the in-house capability of the operator. Tier 3 Response Response requiring national resources. Topsides Describes the equipment situated on a platform including, for example, the oil production plant, accommodation block and drilling rig. Trawling Method of fishing in which a large bag-shaped net is dragged or trawled. Mouth of the bag is kept open by a variety of methods including wooden beams (beam trawl) or a large flat (otter) board (otter trawl). Umbilical Any of various external electrical lines or fluid tubes which connect one portion of a system to another.
Viscosity The resistance of flow of a liquid. Well clean up Leaving the well bore clean after drilling by displacing mud and cuttings to bring on production. Well completion The work of preparing a newly drilled well for production, including cementing and valve work. Well control Well control is the technique used in oil and gas operations to prevent influx of formation fluids into the wellbore. Wellhead A top of casing and the attached control and flow valves. The wellhead is where a connection is made to the well by the blowout preventer and drilling riser. Well testing Testing in an exploration or appraisal well is directed at estimating of reserves in communication with that well, in addition to well productivity. Testing in a production well also monitors the effects of cumulative production on the formation. Zooplankton Animals that drift in the plankton, mostly microscopic.
August 2011
Page xvii
Contents
August 2011
Page xviii
Contents
4.3 4.4 4.5 4.6 4.7
Contents
Information Sheet ....................................... i Non-Technical Summary ........................... iii
Introduction ............................................................iii The development .................................................. iv The environment.................................................... v Assessment of potential impacts ........................... v
Likelihood .................................................. 39 Consequence ............................................ 39 Combining Likelihood and Consequences to Establish Risk ....................................... 39 Assessment of impacts ............................. 40 EIA integration with overall environmental management ............................................. 40
5
5.1 5.2
Physical Presence ........................... 41

Seabed impacts ........................................ 41 Interaction with other sea users ................ 43
Abbreviations ............................................. ix Glossary ................................................... xii Contents .................................................. xix 1 Introduction ........................................ 1
1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 Project background and purpose ................ 1 Regulatory context ...................................... 1 Key environmental legislation ..................... 2 BP environmental policy and requirements 2 Aim of the EIA process and scope of the environmental statement ............................. 4
6
6.1 6.2 6.3 6.4
Discharges to Sea ........................... 45

Introduction ............................................... 45 Regulatory control ..................................... 45 Drilling discharges .................................... 45 Management and mitigation ..................... 47
7
7.1 7.2 7.3 7.4 7.5 7.6 7.7 7.8
Underwater Noise ............................ 49

Introduction ............................................... 49 Regulatory control ..................................... 49 Marine mammals and sound .................... 50 Noise sources and potential impacts ........ 51 Noise modelling and potential impact ....... 54 Management and mitigation measures .... 57 Residual impacts ...................................... 57 European protected species (EPS) risk assessment ............................................... 58
2
2.1 2.2 2.3
The Development .............................. 5

Fields and reservoirs ................................... 5 Wells and drilling ......................................... 6 Decommissioning ........................................ 8
3
3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 3.7 3.8 3.9
The Environment ............................... 9

Introduction.................................................. 9 Environmental Legislation Protecting Habitats and Species ................................ 10 Hydrology .................................................. 12 Meteorology............................................... 14 Seabed sediments .................................... 15 Plankton .................................................... 18 Benthic communities ................................. 20 Fish............................................................ 23 Seabirds .................................................... 27
8
8.1 8.2 8.3 8.4 8.5 8.6
Atmospheric Emissions ................... 63

Introduction ............................................... 63 Regulatory control ..................................... 63 Environmental impact ............................... 64 Management and mitigation ..................... 65 Residual impacts ...................................... 65 Cumulative and transboundary Impacts ... 65
9
9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7
Accidental Events ............................ 67

Introduction ............................................... 67 Regulatory control ..................................... 67 Oil spills..................................................... 68 Behaviour and movement of oil at sea ..... 77 Environmental vulnerability to oil spill ....... 87 Residual risks............................................ 98 Oil spill response strategy......................... 98 Page xix
3.10 Marine mammals ....................................... 30 3.11 Socio-Economic Environment ................... 33 3.12 Overview ................................................... 38
4
4.1 4.2
The Environmental Impact Assessment Process ....................... 39

Overview ................................................... 39 EIA methodology ....................................... 39
August 2011
Contents
9.8 9.9 Cumulative and transboundary risk .........102 Chemical spills.........................................103
10.5 Commitments .......................................... 106 10.6 Final remarks .......................................... 107
10 Conclusions ................................... 105

10.1 Potential environmental issues................105 10.2 Key residual issues..................................105 10.3 Cumulative and transboundary impacts ..106 10.4 Protected areas and species ...................106
11 References ..................................... 109 Appendix A Summary of Environmental Legislation .............. A-1 Appendix B EIA Matrices .................. B-1
August 2011
Page xx
Introduction
Introduction
This chapter explains the background and purpose of the proposed project and describes the aim and scope of the environmental impact assessment (EIA) process carried out. The underlying Regulatory and BP environmental requirements are also outlined. This Environmental Statement (ES) presents the findings of the environmental impact assessment (EIA) conducted by BP for the proposed North Uist Exploration Well project. The project involves the drilling and abandonment of a single exploration well into the North Uist reservoir to determine the presence of hydrocarbons and to gain geological information. The project is located within Quadrant 213 of the United Kingdom Continental Shelf Area (UKCS, which includes the UK Exclusive Economic Zone) in a water depth of 1,291 m at the bottom of the continental shelf slope in the Faroe-Shetland channel (Figure 1-1).
gather data on reservoir age and characteristics, hydrocarbon presence, hydrocarbon water contact pressures and temperatures. This information will be used to form decisions on any future development and to optimise future drilling plans. The selected concept for the project was the drilling of the North Uist prospect using a single vertical exploration well, using the Stena Carron drillship. The selected project concept is described further in Chapter 2. There is also a very low likelihood of encountering a second shallower hydrocarbon prospect called the Cardhu prospect while drilling the North Uist well. The drilling tools will be closely monitored at the expected depth for any signs of hydrocarbon presence. If hydrocarbons were found in Cardhu, apart from some logging and sampling, no further evaluation would take place during execution of this well. The design of the well accounts for the possibility of encountering the Cardhu prospect.
1.2
Regulatory context
1.2.1 Requirement for an EIA

The EIA reported in this ES has been carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Offshore Petroleum Production and Pipelines (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations 1999 (as amended). These regulations require the
1.1
Project background and purpose
The main exploration objective of the well is to test the Pre-Cretaceous North Uist Prospect and to
Figure 1-1: Location of the North Uist prospect. August 2011 Page 1
Introduction
undertaking of an environmental impact assessment and production of an ES for certain types of offshore oil and gas project with the potential to have a significant effect on the environment. For this project, the criteria for a statutory EIA are not triggered. Nevertheless BP is submitting the ES on a voluntary basis. Once submitted, the ES undergoes the same regulatory process including consultation and the requirement for consent before the project can proceed. The undertaking of the EIA aims to consider all of the potential impacts from the project. The project and potential impacts have been discussed with external stakeholders. These included DECC, Marine Scotland and JNCC.
Offshore Marine Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 2007 (as amended) Merchant Shipping (Prevention of Pollution by Sewage and Garbage from Ships) Regulations 2008 Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation Convention Regulations 1998 (as amended) Offshore Installations (Emergency Pollution Control) Regulations 2002
In addition, key legislation and guidance relating to the main environmental issues associated with the project are presented in Chapters 6 to 9 of the ES.
1.3
Key environmental legislation
1.4
BP environmental policy and requirements
The project will be subject to the requirements of UK and EU legislation in addition to other international treaties and agreements such as the Oslo and Paris Commission (OSPAR). As the development lies outwith UK territorial waters (i.e. more than 12 nm from land), the majority of the activities undertaken will be governed under the applicable legislation regarding offshore oil and gas activities, rather than that governing inshore waters. The key environmental legislation applicable to the project is listed below and summarised in Appendix A. Onshore legislation is included in the Appendix in the unlikely event of a blowout resulting in beaching. Offshore Petroleum Production and Pipelines (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations 1999 Offshore Production and Pipelines (Assessment of Environmental Effects) (Amendment) Regulations 2007 Petroleum Act 1998 Petroleum Licensing (Production) (Seaward Areas) Regulations 2008 Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 Offshore Petroleum Activities (Oil Pollution Prevention and Control) Regulations 2005 (as amended) Offshore Chemical Regulations 2002 (as amended) Offshore Petroleum Activities (Conservation of Habitats) Regulations 2001 (as amended)
BP are committed to conducting activities in compliance with all applicable legislation and in a manner which contributes to BPs stated goals of no accidents, no harm to people and no damage to the environment. In order to achieve these goals, there is a hierarchy of common policies, commitments and expectations that identify policy and regulatory requirements and provide tools to assist in compliance and performance improvements. The project is subject to the following BP environmental requirements: BP North Sea Region HSE policy (Figure 1-2) BP Environment and Social Group Defined Practice (GDP) on Environment
During operations, the project will conform to the requirements of the Environmental Management System (EMS) established for the BP North Sea SPU, which is certified to ISO 14001.
Page 2
August 2011
Introduction
Figure 1-2: BP North Sea SPU HSE Policy. August 2011 Page 3
Introduction
1.5
Aim of the EIA process and scope of the environmental statement
The aim of the EIA process is to assess the potential environmental impacts that could arise from the project and identify measures that will be put in place to prevent or minimise these impacts. The EIA process is integral to the project, assessing potential impacts and challenging design and operational procedures to ensure that the residual impacts of the project are minimal. The process also provides for the concerns of stakeholders to be identified and addressed as far as possible at an early stage, and ensures that the planned activities comply with environmental legislative requirements and with BPs environmental policy. The ES is a report summarising the EIA process and outcomes. It also includes details of how the project decision-making was undertaken and how environmental criteria were incorporated into that process. The ES is submitted to DECC to inform the decision on whether or not the project may proceed, based on the acceptability or otherwise of the residual levels of impact, and is subject to formal public consultation. This ES reports the outcome of the EIA process and includes the following: A non-technical summary of the whole ES Justification for the project and the role of the EIA Description of the environment in the vicinity of the project and the key environmental sensitivities Methods used to identify and evaluate the environmental issues associated with the project and consultation undertaken to date Detailed assessment of each issue, including the potential for any cumulative or transboundary impacts Environmental management and control measures that will be in place during the project Conclusions and References.
Page 4
August 2011
The Development
The Development
This chapter provides an overview of the proposed project, which forms the basis of the EIA reported in Chapters 5 to 9 of this ES.
logging tools and the use of vertical seismic profiling. This information will be used to coordinate with previously gathered seismic survey information to estimate hydrocarbon volumes in place, and to inform future decisions about further appraising this prospect and determining if the surrounding acreage is prospective. If hydrocarbons are present then fluid sampling and determination of the hydrocarbon-water contact are key objectives for the calculation of hydrocarbon volumes in place and development planning. Depending on the outcome of the fluid sampling one or more sidetracks would be considered so that further information on the reservoir and the potential size of any accumulation of hydrocarbons may be gathered. Geological information will be recorded along the well trajectory to help plan any future development and optimise future drilling.
2.1
Fields and reservoirs
2.1.1 Overview
The North Uist prospect is located in an area where there is significant existing and planned exploration activity, and where BP successfully operates a number of fields, namely Clair, Schiehallion, Loyal and Foinaven. The fields and prospects located west of Shetland are illustrated in Figure 2-1.
2.1.2 Objective of the Project

The main exploration objective of the well is to test the Pre-Cretaceous North Uist Prospect. The most likely interpretation of North Uist is a sequence of Jurassic sediments overlying either Basement or Devono-Carboniferous sediments. There is potentially a secondary prospect in the overlying Cardhu reservoir at approximately 3000 m below the seabed that the well may encounter. If hydrocarbons were found in the Cardhu reservoir, apart from logging and sampling, no further evaluation would take place during execution of this well. There are several data gathering requirements. It is important to determine the reservoir age and characteristics. This information will come from downhole logging, using specially designed
2.1.3 Reservoir Characteristics

The most likely oil type to be encountered in either the Cardhu or North Uist prospects will be similar to the light crudes found in the Rosebank and Lochnagar discoveries. These are the nearest wells to North Uist with equivalent reservoir depth, geology and fluid samples. The Eribol well, although closer to North Uist did find evidence of hydrocarbons but no fluid samples were retrieved. There is a very low probability that any oil encountered would be as heavy as that found in the Clair Field, which could potentially have a greater impact on the environment. In order to fully understand the potential environmental impacts of the project, worst case scenarios have been used. In this case it has been assumed the
Figure 2-1 Field and prospects west of Shetland.
August 2011
Page 5
The Development
oil type will be similar to Clair. Maximum reservoir pressures are predicted to be between 7,582 psi for oil and 8,183 psi for gas. This well is not classified as a high-pressure hightemperature (HPHT) well. Due to the nature of an oil reservoir, which is essentially oil droplets held within a porous rock, similar to water held in a sponge, the rate that the oil flows up a well drillled into it will depend on how deep the well is drilled into the porous reservoir rock. The more the open hole or well bore is exposed to the reservoir, the higher the rate of flow possible. The rate will also depend on the how porous the rock is, the type of oil in the rock (whether it is light or heavy) and the pressure of the reservoir that is drilled into. To control the maximum rate of flow possible, the reservoir will be drilled in stages. Ongoing analysis will be conducted to ensure that a potential blowout rate is at no time created that exceeds the rating of the subsea capping system. The maximum blowout rate is therefore limited to 75,000 barrels per day. This is discussed further in Chapter 9.
2000 1800 1600 1400 1200 Depth 1000 m 800 600 400 200 0
ProposedNorth Uistwell
Figure 2-2 UK wells in water deeper than 1,000 m.

Source; UKDEAL database and recent environmental statements
2.2.2 Well programme

Drilling of the well is planned to commence in January 2012 but this may change depending on availability of the drillship and other operational matters. The project is expected to last three months but may take longer.
2.1.4 Seismic survey

Seismic surveys and shallow gas surveys have previously been undertaken for this project. A further shallow gas survey will be undertaken prior to drilling the well and a vertical seismic profile will be undertaken after drilling has been completed.
2.2.3 Rig selection

A number of rigs have been considered for use in this location, including; an anchored drilling rig suitable for this water depth, which uses multiple anchors and chains to control its position, and may also use thrusters for additional control; a dynamically positioned semi-submersible drilling rig, which uses only thrusters to control its position, which are managed by a geographic positioning system; or a drillship, which also uses only thrusters to control its position, which are managed by a geographic positioning system.
2.2
Wells and drilling
2.2.1 Overview
The North Uist well will be in a water depth of 1,291 m. According to the UKDEAL database, which is the mandatory database for all UK oil and gas wells, 37 wells have been drilled in water depth exceeding 1 km to date in UK waters. Several are deeper than the North Uist location and the range of depths is illustrated in Figure 2-2. The deepest well drilled to date in the UKCS is 1,886 m, which was drilled in 2001 by a third party. The deepest well in the UK drilled on behalf of BP, was undertaken in 1980 in a water depth of 1,373 m. Deepwater drilling has taken place for over 30 years in the UK and the operating conditions are well understood.
Dynamically positioned rigs do not require any anchoring on the seabed, hence they have less of an impact on the seabed than anchored drilling rigs. Drillships have higher use of fuel to maintain position compared to an anchored rig. However, they are generally designed to have higher operating tolerances in terms of maintaining position in bad weather. Therefore the time spent on the well is often lower, which acts to counter August 2011
Page 6
The Development
balance the higher fuel consumption rate. During periods of adverse weather conditions, fewer riser disconnections are typically required for DP vessels relative to anchored drilling rigs, hence producing a lower volume of waste bulk fluids. Irrespective of the rig type in exceptional cases, for example rapidly deteriorating and unexpectedly severe weather or a total failure of the DP system, an emergency disconnect may be required to safely secure the well. In this rare instance, the fluid in the riser would be released into the sea. A PON1 would be submitted. To date the Stena Carron (drillship) has never had to perform an emergency disconnect. The drillship chosen for this project is the Stena th Carron, a 6 generation drillship owned and operated by Stena Drilling (Figure 2-3). This is a dynamically-positioned vessel with twin drilling derricks and is designed and constructed for oil and gas exploration in ultra deep water (up to 3,000 m) and harsh environments such as the Norwegian and Barents Seas. It has a displacement of 97,000 tonnes, an overall length of 228 m and breadth of 42 m and it is one of the world's largest drillships. The drillship is designed to be able to maintain connection with the well in wind speeds up to 27 m/s (10-minute average) and wave heights up to 6.7 m (significant wave height) (Stena factsheet, 2011), which includes the vast majority of conditions encountered west of Shetland.
cuttings generated by the drill bit to the surface, lubricating and cooling the drill bit and string, and deposition of an impermeable cake on the wall of the well bore sealing and stabilising the formations being drilled. Drilling fluid requirements for a typical well design in this geology fall into three broad categories: Simple water based mud (WBM) for the surface and upper hole (36 and 26") sections WBM for the middle hole (17") section 1 and possibly the lower (12 /4) sections
Well Schematic
Description
SURFACE LOCATION Grid East (m) : 490430 Grid North (m) : 6 799 615
Latitude () : 3o 10' 43.63"W Longitude () : 61o 19' 44.60"N
MSL-RT Elevation (Estimated)
Water Depth
18-3/4" HP Wellhead Elevation 36" Housing Elevation Mudline
30" Shoe 36" Hole TD
TOC @
20" Shoe 26" Hole TD

Eocene Fan (Strachan)
LOT = 1.26sg
Eocene Sands
TOC @
Balder Sand Balder
13-3/8" Shoe 17-1/2" Hole TD LOT = 1.36sg
Cardhu
Secondary Target
Base Tertiary Upper Cretaceous Mid Cretaceous Fault
Figure 2-3 Stena Carron Drillship.
9 5/8" Shoe 12-1/4" Hole TD Base Cretaceous

North Uist
LOT = 1.66sg
Primary Target
2.2.4 Well design and drilling mud selection

The well design is shown in Figure 2-4. Drilling muds have a number of functions including maintenance of downhole pressure, removal of drill
Jurassic
Devonian Carboniferous
8-1/2" Hole TD (Well TD)

BOTTOM HOLE LOCATION Grid East (m) : 490 436.06 Grid North (m) : 6 799 520.6
Latitude () : 3o 10' 43.20"W Longitude () : 61o 19' 41.55"N
Figure 2-4 Well design. Page 7
August 2011
The Development
Typically, oil based mud (OBM) for the lower hole (12" and 8") sections suitable for drilling into the reservoir formation. Low toxicity mineral oil is used as the base fluid for these mud systems. OBMs reduce torque and drag as well as maintaining well bore quality and optimum conditions for high quality fracture identification, data acquisition and minimum formation damage.
a contingency plan to use a precision explosive, cutting charge. This latter option if employed would be performed with multiple mitigation measures to protect marine mammals as discussed in Section 7.
2.2.5 Drill cuttings handling

WBM cuttings from the tophole sections will be discharged to the seabed. Drill cuttings contaminated with WBM from the middle hole section will be discharged from the drillship into the sea following mud recovery operations. This is normal practice and is not considered to be a risk to the environment. OBM contaminated drill cuttings will be recovered and shipped to shore for treatment and disposal. A final decision as to whether to use OBM or WBM 1 for the 12 /4 section is still under technical review.
2.2.6 Cementing
Steel casings will be installed in the well during the drilling operation to provide structural strength and to isolate unstable formations and different formation fluids. Each casing will be cemented into place to form a seal between the casing and the formation. Most cement will remain in the well bore, however some cement will be discharged to the seabed during the setting of the top section and the cement unit is flushed to sea following the operation. This is normal practice and is not considered to have a significant impact on the environment.
2.3
Decommissioning
At the end of the operation the well will be abandoned, i.e. sealed with cement plugs. This is in line with the current DECC guidance on Decommissioning of Offshore Installations and Pipelines under the Petroleum Act 1998 (DECC, 2011) and the Oil and Gas UK Guidelines for the Suspension and Abandonment of Wells (2009) and BPs internal standards. During the abandonment WBM may be used to clean the hole and will be discharged to sea. Any fluids contaminated with OBM will be recovered and shipped to shore for disposal. In order to remove the wellhead at the end of the operation and thereby keep the seabed clear, it is intended that a mechanical cutter will be used with Page 8 August 2011
The Environment
3 The Environment
This chapter provides data on the key environmental sensitivities in the project area.
DECCs Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA4 assessment document and associated technical reports), the Atlantic Frontier Environmental Forum (AFEN) and the SERPENT (Scientific and Environmental ROV Partnership using Existing industrial Technology) project. AFEN was a body set up to manage an environmental programme for exploration and production activities in the sea area to the north and west of Scotland (Atlantic Margin), on behalf of the oil and gas industry and the governing regulators and advisors. SERPENT is a global project hosted by the DEEPSEAS group, within Ocean Biogeochemistry and Ecosystems (OBE) at the National Oceanography Centre, Southampton (NOCS). Remotely Operated Vehicle (ROV) technology and data made available by the oil and gas industry is used in the SERPENT project to promote the sharing of scientific knowledge and effecting progress in deep-sea research.
3.1
Introduction
The North Uist project is located within UKCS Block 213/25c in the Faroe-Shetland Channel, 125 km northwest of Shetland (Figure 3-1). The west of Shetland is an area already developed for hydrocarbon production with drilling commencing over thirty years ago. During this time, a wide range of environmental baseline and environmental monitoring surveys have been undertaken in the region (Figure 3-2). The distance of these surveys from the North Uist project site is given in Table 3-3. This chapter has drawn on this data as far as possible. In addition to reviewing the data obtained from the seabed surveys, information has been taken from
Figure 3-1 Location of proposed North Uist exploration well.
August 2011
Page 9
The Environment
Figure 3-2 Location of surveys carried out in the region of the North Uist Project.
3.2
Environmental Legislation Protecting Habitats and Species
Europe. Through the establishment of a network of protected sites these directives provide for the protection of animal and plant species of European importance and the habitats that support them. The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 replace all previous regulations and amendments and transpose the Habitats Directive into national law out to 12 nm. The Habitats Directive lists those habitats (Annex I) and species (Annex II) whose conservation requires the designation of special areas of interest. These habitats and species are to be protected by the creation of a series of Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), and/or other safeguard measures (SCIs) for particular species (Table 3-1). The Bird Directive requires member states to nominate sites as Special Protection Areas (SPAs). Together with adopted SACs, the SPA network form the Natura 2000 network of protected areas in the European Union.
This section summarises the current environmental legislation in place to ensure the environmental impacts of offshore activities remain within acceptable limits. Globally there exists a wide range of legal instruments to safeguard habitats and species against anthropogenic activities. Those relevant to the proposed project are summarised here. The European Community (EC) Directive on the Conservation of Natural Habitats and of Wild Fauna and Flora (92/43/EEC; the Habitats Directive), often referred to as the Habitats Directive and the EC Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds (79/409/EEC), often referred to as the Birds Directive are the main driving forces for safeguarding biodiversity in Page 10
August 2011
The Environment
Site
Description
Sites that have been adopted by the European Commission (EC) and formally designated by the government of each country in whose territory that site lies. Sites that have been submitted to the EC but not yet formally adopted. cSACs are considered in the same way as if they have already been designated. Therefore as with SACs, any activity likely to have a significant effect on the site of a cSAC must be appropriately assessed. Sites that have been formally advised to UK Government, but not yet submitted to the EC. Sites that have been formally advised to UK government but not yet approved by it.
(Section 3.9). Habitats Of the habitat types listed in the Habitats Directive (Annex I) requiring protection, four of them occur or potentially occur in the UK offshore area (EC, 1999): sandbanks which are slightly covered by seawater at all times reefs bedrock reefs; made from continuous outcroppings of bedrock which may be of various topographical shape (e.g. pinnacles and offshore banks) stony reefs; aggregations of boulders and cobbles which may have some finer sediments in interstitial spaces biogenic reefs; formed by cold water corals (e.g. Lophelia pertusa) and the polychaete worm Sabellaria spinulosa submarine structures made by leaking gases submerged or partially submerged sea caves.
SAC
Candidate SAC (cSAC)
Possible SAC (pSAC) Draft SAC (dSAC)
Sites of Sites that have been adopted by the Community EC but not yet formally designated by Importance the government of each country. (SCI) Table 3-1 UK SAC/SCI sites summary. The Offshore Marine Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c) Regulations 2007 and the 2009 & 2010 amendments (known as the Offshore Marine Regulations) alongside the Offshore Petroleum (Conservation of Habitats) Regulations 2001 (and amendments 2007) implement the requirement of the Habitats Directive. They extend the protection of marine habitats and species from 12 nm to 200 nm from the UK coast. Under these regulations it is an offence to deliberately disturb any European Protected Species (EPS) while it is within its SAC or to capture, injure or kill a EPS at any time. New oil and gas projects/developments must demonstrate that they will not significantly disturb an EPS in a way that will affect: the ability of the species to survive, breed, rear or nurture its young or affect its hibernating or migration patterns (termed the injury offence) the local distribution or abundance of any protected species (termed the disturbance offence).
Currently in UK Offshore waters there are five sites that are designated as cSACs/SCIs, six cSACs and four dSACs. None are in close proximity to the project site. The closest are the WyvilleThomson Ridge and the Darwin mounds, both cSACs located approximately 225 and 260 km respectively southwest of the project site (Figure 3-1). Wyville-Thomson Ridge The Wyville-Thomson Ridge is a rock ridge at the northern end of Rockall Trough rising from over 1000 m at its deepest point to 400 m at the summit. Along the ridge there are large areas of stony reef, thought to have been formed by the ploughing movement of icebergs through the seabed at the end of the last ice age. Bedrock reef is present on the flanks of the ridge and due to differences in water masses, there are different species compositions on either side. These reef communities support sea urchins, sea spiders, sea cucumbers and a range of colourful sponges and soft corals. Darwin Mounds At the Darwin Mounds site, sandy mounds on the seafloor are topped with thickets of the cold water coral Lophelia pertusa. This is a unique situation as the coral is growing on sand rather than attached to a hard surface. The thickets range in size from one to several meters in diameter and
EPS found in the area of the proposed development include cetaceans (Section 3.10) and some bird species such as the Storm-petrel, Leachs storm petrel and the Arctic tern August 2011
Page 11
The Environment
support many other species such as starfish and sponges. Species The designation of fish species that require special protection in UK waters is receiving increasing attention with particular attention being paid to large slow-growing species such as sharks and rays. At a national level The Wildlife and Countryside Act, 1982, which implements the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, lists seven protected species of marine and estuarine fish (European sturgeon, Allis and Twaite shad, basking shark, the whitefish Coregonus lavaretus, the Giant goby and the Couchs goby). Under the EC Habitats Directive there are six fish species (European sturgeon, Allis and Twaite Shad, River and Sea lamprey, basking sharks and the whitefish Coregonus lavaretus) that are afforded protection. In addition, the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN) has assessed the conservation status of a limited number of fish groups, and have recommended that two North Atlantic inhabitants; the basking shark (Cetorhinus maximus) and the common skate (Leucoraja batis), be added to the red list of endangered species. The porbeagle (a species of mackerel shark) is classified as vulnerable on the IUCN Red List. Few of the fish species listed above have distributions that extend into the area of the Faroe-Shetland Channel and are thus not vulnerable to human activity in the areas of Quadrant 213. Of the species listed, the basking shark (UK Biodiversity Action Plan & IUCN Red List Endangered), is most likely to occur in the FaroeShetland Channel. Although present within the Channel, basking sharks are uncommon and widely dispersed. Four species from Annex II of the Habitats Directive occur in relatively large numbers in UK offshore waters; Grey seal (Halichorerus grypus) Common seal (Phoca vitulina) Bottlenose dolphin (Tursiops truncatus) Harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena).
(EPS), along with several other marine fauna found in UK waters. As such, developers must consider the requirement to apply for the necessary licences should they consider there to be a risk of causing any of the potential offences to EPS species. Of the Annex II species occurring in large numbers in UK waters, the harbour porpoise, bottlenose dolphin and the grey seal have been sighted in the wider region of the project area, although observations of these species at these water depths would be a rare event.
3.3
Hydrology
Environmental Sensitivity: hydrology, current regime, waves and salinity are not particularly sensitive to offshore oil and gas activities. However, they are of importance in understanding the wider ecology of the area and the potential behaviour and effects of possible discharges and it is therefore important to understand how they may affect the project.
3.3.1 Bathymetry
The sea area to the west of Shetland is characterised by its complex bathymetry and oceanography and can be divided into three main regions: the West of Shetland Continental Shelf (100 to 200 m depth), the West of Shetland Continental Slope (200 to 1,000 m depth) and the Faroe-Shetland Channel (>1,000 m depth). The North Uist drill site is on the basin floor of the Faroe-Shetland Channel. The Channel is a narrow deep-water trough lying between the west Shetland shelf and the Faroe Islands platform. The trough narrows southward from about 190 km wide at 62o30 N to 90 km wide at 60oN. Over the same distance, the maximum water depth decreases from over 1,700 to 1,000 m with the water depth in the area of the North Uist project being approximately 1,291 m. The seabed at the project site is gently undulating with a very low slope gradient. The AFEN surveys (Bett 1997, 1999, 2007) and 3D seismic surveys undertaken by BP at the site indicate that no significant seabed features are present. This would therefore suggest an absence of methane-derived carbonates, notably because, if these were present, they would appear as shallow depressions on the seabed. Shallow hazard assessment of the seismic data August 2011
The hooded seal is also an Annex II species and although it is not present in large numbers in UK waters, it has been recorded in deep waters over the Faroe-Shetland Channel (Pollack et al., 2000). The bottlenose dolphin and harbour porpoise, like all the cetacean species found in UK waters are also categorised as European Protected Species Page 12
The Environment
acquired at North Uist did not indicate the presence of any gas seeps.
net flow of these two water masses is to the northeast (Turrell et al., 1999). Below the surface layers, Arctic Intermediate Water (AIW) flows anticlockwise along the southern edge of the Norwegian Sea Basin and around the Faroe-Shetland Channel, typically between 400 and 600 m water depth. Below the o AIW, two cold (typically 0 C) water masses; the Norwegian Sea Arctic Intermediate Water (NSAIW) and the Faroe-Shetland Channel Bottom Water (FSCBW), flow towards the south. This cold water flow escapes southward into the Atlantic by way of the Faroe Bank Channel. Currents in the upper water mass are typically 30 to 60 cm/s towards the northeast, and in the lower water mass 10 to 20 cm/s towards the southwest (Saunders, 1990). Internal waves may propagate the boundaries of the various water masses (Hughes et al., 2003) along with large scale eddy currents and storm generated surges (Grant et al., 1995). Such sporadic water movements can have an impact on seabed currents, increasing them by around 0.7 m/s for short periods of up to a few hours (BP, 2004).
3.3.2 Current regime

The oceanographic regime (Figure 3-3) of the Faroe-Shetland Channel consists of an upper layer of warm North Atlantic water flowing towards the northeast, overlying a lower layer of cold Norwegian Sea bottom water, flowing towards the southwest (Turrell et al., 1999). In detail, five separate water masses are recognised within the Faroe-Shetland Channel on the basis of their salinity and temperature characteristics (Turrell et al., 1999 and references therein) (Figure 3-3). The inflowing current on the Shetland side of the Faroe-Shetland Channel occupies the upper waters and is dominated by North Atlantic Water (NAW). The remaining surface water is occupied by the cooler, slightly less saline Modified North Atlantic Water (MNAW) which originates to the west of the Rockall Plateau. A branch of the MNAW flows over the Iceland-Faroe Ridge and circulates anticyclonically around the Faroe Shelf, entering the channel from the north. Typically the surface waters occupy the upper 200-400 m of the water column, being thickest under the core of the NAW closest to the west Shetland shelf edge. The
Figure 3-3 Left; Summary of the oceanographic regime around the Faroe-Shetland Channel. Right; section across the Faroe-Shetland Channel (located by black arrow) showing the water column structure in the vertical plane (Source; DECC SEA4 sediments report). August 2011 Page 13
The Environment 3.3.3 Waves

The deep waters to the west of Shetland are exposed to strong winds (particularly from the west and southwest) and a large westerly fetch which in turn generates a far more severe wave climate than that found in the northern North Sea. The conditions generate an extreme wave regime in the area with significant wave heights exceeding 2.5 m for 50% of the year and 4.0 m for 10% of the year (DTI, 2003). There has been a steady increase in significant wave heights of approximately 2 3 cm annually in the 30 years leading up to 2000 (AFEN, 2001).
that contaminant concentrations are at background levels (NSTF, 1993; OSPAR, 2000). This is likely to be due to the lack of any direct pollutant sources and the prevailing ocean current system which will disperse and dilute any pollutants. Nutrient levels are found to be most elevated near the coast and around estuaries, where there is a high level of anthropogenic activity. In offshore areas, nutrient levels are reduced and are seen to vary primarily with the season.
3.4
Meteorology
3.3.4 Salinity and temperature

Mean sea temperatures range between 7.5C in February and 13C in August at the surface but can be as low as -1.5C at 1300 m water depth. At water depths of 500 600 m temperature variations of several degrees may occur over a matter of hours to days (Ferguson et al., 1997). The mean salinity in the area varies annually, but is typically between 35.25 and 35.42 (BODC, 1998). UKMMAS (2010) report a slight increase in salinity in the northern regional seas, including that in which the project is located. A comparison of temperature and salinity for the different water masses in the Faroe-Shetland Channel are shown in Table 3-2.
Water mass North Atlantic Water Modified North Atlantic Water Arctic Intermediate/North Icelandic Water Norwegian Sea Intermediate Water Faroe-Shetland Channel Bottom Water Temperature (C) >7.5 6.0 7.5 Salinity >35.3 35.12 35.18
Environmental Sensitivity: The strength and direction of the wind will have a bearing on the direction and speed at which discharges will be dispersed. Wind speed and direction directly influence the transport and dispersion of atmospheric emissions from drilling rigs, support vessels etc. These wind characteristics are also important in terms of dispersion of marine releases, including oil spills, by affecting the movement, direction and break up of substances on the sea surface. The area of the Faroe-Shetland Channel generally has a mild maritime climate resulting from prevailing south-westerly winds and the warming influence of the Atlantic Continental Slope Current. As a result there is a significant variation in wind speed throughout the year. The weather in the area is strongly influenced by two semi-permanent weather systems; a low pressure region over Iceland and a high pressure area over the Azores. Generally, when these are in place, a stream of secondary depressions will pass between the two in an east or north-east direction. Such depressions occur with a similar frequency throughout the year, but in winter months they are more intense. For much of the year (July through to March) winds from the south and west predominate. By contrast, there is a greater evenness of wind distribution during the spring months (April to June), when winds originating from the ESE, NNW, N and NNE occur with a higher frequency than SW winds. The annual distribution of wind speed and direction is summarised in Figure 3-4. This data comes from the Meteorological Office K7 buoy located west of Shetland.
3.0 4.5
34.95 35.00
0.25 0.75
<34.92
<0.5
Not available
Table 3-2 Comparison of salinity and temperature (Heath & Jnasdttir, 1999).
3.3.5 Water quality

OSPAR (2000) reports a scarcity of data as regards the levels of contaminants in northeast Atlantic waters. Extrapolation from the limited data available for the source water masses suggests
Page 14
August 2011
The Environment
Figure 3-4 Annual wind speed and direction at Met Office K7 monitoring buoy.
3.5
Seabed sediments
3.5.1 Sediment and seabed features

Environmental Sensitivity: Potential discharges arising from the drilling activities could impact on the sediments causing increased contamination in the project area. The character of the local seabed sediments is an important factor in assessing the potential impacts associated with offshore operations (e.g. the discharge of drill cuttings). As well as being an important factor in determining the type of flora and fauna present, seabed sediment type is also important in relation to contaminant concentration e.g. finer sediments and sediments with high organic content are more likely to support higher concentrations of metals and hydrocarbons. A series of major regional surveys (Figure 3-2) were undertaken in the West of Shetland area in the late 1990s and early 2000s; these include the AFEN 1996 and 1998 surveys (both reported in AFEN, 2000), BIOFAR 1 and 2 (investigations of the benthic fauna of the Faroe Islands; BIOFAR, 2006), DTI 1999 White Zone and DTI 2002 Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) 4 surveys (DTI, 2003). These surveys have provided a broad overview of the sediment type of the Atlantic Margin area (Figure 3-5). Sediment characteristics are summarised in Table 3-3.
August 2011
Page 15
The Environment
. Figure 3-5 Regional sediment type.
Page 16
August 2011
The Environment
Site AFEN: TR900 TR1300 South Uist (213/25) AFEN : Z1-Z2 AFEN: X1 AFEN: X2 AFEN: X3 AFEN: Y3 Lochside (213/23) Aberlour (213/28) AFEN: U1 AFEN: Y4-Y5 213/27-1z Rosebank Lochnagar (RB-A) Rosebank Lochnagar (RB-G)
Distance from North Uist 8-28km N to SE 12km SE 17-19km N 15km SE 22km SE 30km SW 26km E 21km W 37km SW 33km SE 33km NE 34km SW 38km SW
Depth (m)
% Fines (<63m) -
% Coarse (>2mm) 17.6 2.78 8.56 12.18 0.8
Description
Reference
Very fine to fine muddy sand Medium silt to fine sand Sandy muds & mud Slightly pebbly sand and muddy sand Muddy & slightly pebbly muddy sands Fine silt to very fine sands with gravel of different sizes Fine silt and clay Slightly pebbly muddy sand Muddy & slightly pebbly muddy sands Very fine to fine silt Coarse sand , shell fragments & very fine silt
Bett (1999) Gardline (1998) Bett (1997) Gardline (1998) & Bett (1997) Bett (1997)
1,152
50.3 59.9 9.7 7.27 -
1,150 1,087
29 33 87
Chevron (2008) Bett (1997) Bett (1997) Chevron (2008)
1,200
70.7
Chevron (2008) 48km SW 1,200 47.5 14.2 Coarse sand , shell fragments & very fine silt
Table 3-3 Faroe-Shetland Channel sediment characteristics.
AFEN surveys of the floor of the Faroe-Shetland Channel shows the seabed at these depths to be made up of relatively featureless mud with some gravel which is overlain by a thin layer (<5 cm thick) of muddy sands (Graham et al., 1996). This is in contrast to the numerous seabed features that have been mapped along the margins of the Faroe-Shetland Channel including: along-slope furrows thought to represent erosion by water currents; down-slope channels associated with glacigenic debris fans; and randomly-orientated furrows resulting from iceberg plough marks. Plate 3-1 gives a representative view of the FaroeShetland Channel seafloor below 1,000 m. Figure 3-6 shows the seabed features in the immediate vicinity of the proposed well site.
Plate 3-1 Representative view of the FaroeShetland Channel seafloor at 1,050 m (Jones & Gates, 2010).
August 2011
Page 17
The Environment
Cross section showing no anomalies
Figure 3-6 Seabed features in the immediate vicinity of the proposed well site (Gardline, 2008).
3.5.2
Seabed contaminants
Deep-water marine environments generally show relatively low levels of contamination compared to coastal waters and industrial estuaries. Concentrations of hydrocarbons and heavy and trace metals in sediments have been recorded in the region by surveys conducted by the AFEN (Bett 1997 and 1999) and other Operators (Gardline 1998, Chevron 2008). Data indicates that total hydrocarbon concentrations (THCs) are low, ranging from: 0.3g/g to 1.7g/g at South Uist (Gardline 1998) 3.2g/g to 4.4g/g at AFEN stations X1, X2 and X3 (Bett 1997) 0.8g/g to 5.1g/g at Rosebank (Chevron 2008)
Uist, Rosebank, Aberlour and Lochside are in line with those recorded during the AFEN surveys (Chevron, 2008). Slightly elevated levels of chromium and vanadium were noted at South Uist, but this was thought to be due to natural concentrations found in sediments in the region (Gardline, 1998). All concentrations were within levels considered to be indicative of uncontaminated sediments.
3.6
Plankton
Environmental Sensitivity: Plankton are potentially sensitive to contamination from chemical or oil discharges. Plankton communities are vulnerable to continuous exposure to low levels of hydrocarbons. They are however less vulnerable to one-off incidents resulting in short term exposure. Plankton are drifting organisms that inhabit the pelagic zone of a body of water and include single celled organisms such as bacteria as well as plants (phytoplankton) and animals (zooplankton). The Continuous Plankton Recorder (CPR) survey provides a unique long-term dataset of plankton abundance in the North Atlantic and North Sea. August 2011
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon (PAH) concentrations were also low ranging from 92 ng/g to 173 ng/g at South Uist (Gardline 1998) to 238 ng/g at AFEN station X1 (Bett 1997). Both the THC and PAH results are indicative of uncontaminated sediments. Concentrations of heavy and trace metals at South Page 18
The Environment
The survey takes advantage of ships on regular routes to tow the CPRs at a depth of approximately 10 m. Data collection from the CPRs began in 1931 and allows long-term changes, as well as seasonal cycles, in the plankton community to be identified. Phytoplankton Phytoplankton are the primary producers of organic matter in the marine environment and form the basis of marine ecosystem food chains. The composition and abundance of phytoplankton communities varies throughout the year and is influenced by several factors, in particular sunlight and vertical mixing in the water column due to wind and currents. All these factors are at their optimum in the spring months, leading to a pronounced period of phytoplankton growth, known as the spring bloom. The size and timing of the blooms may vary from year to year depending on local weather and oceanographic conditions. Huthnance (1986) notes that phytoplankton distributions vary between areas due to effects of slope topography on the propagation of oceanic eddies and internal waves, differences in shelf edge tidal currents and slope currents, and seasonal and latitudinal variations in the degree of stratification across the shelf edge. However a broadly similar pattern of phytoplankton blooming is reported for the Northwest European shelf edge and adjacent Atlantic from the Rockall Trough through the Faroe-Shetland Channel to the northern North Sea. Robinson (1970) observed that, in deeper oceanic o waters north of 60 N, (which includes the area of the project), phytoplankton abundance is lower and the productive season is shorter than that seen in the central or southern North Sea. Information on phytoplankton specific to the FaroeShetland channel is limited. However phytoplankton species as a whole in the area extending out from the west of Shetland is similar to that encountered in the North Sea, with Table 3-4 listing some of the more abundant phytoplankton species recorded in the area. Zooplankton Zooplankton are divided into two distinct groups meroplankton, which refers to members of the plankton community that have a pelagic larval stage and a benthic adult stage (e.g. fish species), and holoplankton, which refers to organisms that are entirely planktonic.
Phytoplankton Ceratium fusus Thalassiosira spp. Chaetoceros (Hyalochaete) spp. Ceratium furca Chaetoceros (Phaeoceros) spp. Rhizosolenia alata alata Ceratium tripos Thalassionema nitzscioides Rhizosolenia styliformis Nitzschia delicatissima
Table 3-4 Some of the more abundant phytoplankton species found in the North Atlantic (DTI, 2003). Zooplankton are dependent upon phytoplankton as a food source and therefore show a similar temporal distribution pattern. Zooplankton are not restricted to the photic upper layers of the water column and as a rule undergo diurnal vertical movement, moving towards the surface to feed at night and sinking during daylight hours. The zooplankton of the Faroe-Shetland Channel is dominated by the oceanic calanoid copepods e.g. Calanus finmarchicus and C. Helgolandicus (Madden et al., 1999). Other abundant taxa present include cyclopoid copepods in particular Oithona spp., the euphausiids (or krill) e.g. Thysanoessa longicaudata and the chaetognaths. C. Finmarchinus overwinters in dense aggregations within the Faroe-Shetland Channel with overwintering populations being estimated at 14 4.5 x 10 individuals (Heath and Jonasdottir, 1999). The overwintering stocks in the FaroeShetland Channel originate from the Norwegian Sea or north of the Faroe Islands and are transported in by south-flowing cold Norwegian Deep Sea water. T. longicaudata is the numerically dominant euphausiid in the nearsurface waters of the North Atlantic. Euphausiids are an important group of zooplankton in the north Atlantic and in the FaroeShetland Channel being the main food source for several fish species on their feeding migration through the channel e.g. in blue whiting, krill have been shown to make up about 50% (by weight) of
August 2011
Page 19
The Environment
the diet (Bjelland and Monstad, 1997). Krill is also an important prey item for mackerel, redfish and other pelagic carnivores found in the FaroeShetland Channel. In addition krill are an important food source for cetaceans in the areas such as blue-whales and fin-whales as well as for several seabirds species e.g. fulmars and Stormpetrels (Debes et al., 2007). UKMMAS (2010) report that plankton communities are generally not subjected to anthropogenic pressures. This will be a result of a number of factors including their widespread distribution, However it should be noted that fluctuations in species numbers have been recorded as a result of rising temperatures, which can have knock-on effects on foodwebs and marine ecosystems.
Bacteria, plants and animals living on or within the seabed sediments are collectively referred to as benthos. Species living on top of the sea floor may be sessile (e.g. seaweeds) or freely moving (e.g. starfish) and are collectively referred to as epibenthic organisms. Animals living within the sediment are termed infaunal species (e.g. clams, tubeworms and burrowing crabs) while animals living on the surface are termed epifaunal (e.g. mussels, crabs, starfish and flounder). Semiinfaunal animals, including sea pens and some bivalves, lie partially buried in the seabed. As shown in Table 3-5 benthic species may also be classified in terms of their size. Bacteria and benthic organisms play a major role in the decomposition of organic material that originates from primary production by phytoplankton in surface water and settles on the seabed (North Sea Task Force, 1993). For example bacteria degrade hydrocarbons through their utilisation as a food source (Clark, 1996).
3.7
Benthic communities
Environmental Sensitivity: Seabed fauna are potentially sensitive to physical disturbance e.g. damage from anchors and the deposition of drill cuttings and chemical changes such as increased level of hydrocarbons. Each species has its own response and degree of adaptability to changes in the physical and chemical environmental.
Size Categories
Examples of Representative Groups Polychaeta (annelid worms) Crustacea (e.g. crabs) Echinodermata (e.g. sea urchins, starfish & brittlestars) Bivalvia (e.g. mussels) Gastropoda (e.g. limpets)
Feeding Notes Plankton, organic material, seaweeds. There are some specialised carnivores. Carnivores, scavengers. Some, such as barnacles, filter plankton & bacteria. Starfish & brittlestars are usually carnivorous. Sea urchins graze on algae. Bivalves may filter phytoplankton or feed on organic matter in the sediment. Gastropods graze using a radula. May be herbivorous or carnivorous. May eat algal cells, minute invertebrates or consume mud containing organic material. Algae, microbes. Foraminiferans eat tiny particles of food captured by pseudopodia which extend through holes in the chambers. The cilia allow tiny food particles or bacteria to be moved towards the mouth. Bacteria or tiny food particles. A variety of sources including organic compounds in sediments.
Macrobenthos (>1 mm)
Meiobenthos (50 m to 1 mm)
Nematoda (roundworms) Crustacea (e.g. benthic copepods) Foraminifera (single celled organisms encased in calcium carbonate chambers)
Microbenthos (<50 m)
Ciliates (single celled organisms covered in cilia, used for locomotion) Flagellates (single celled organisms using flagellae for locomotion) Bacteria
Table 3-5 Classification of benthic organisms based on size. Page 20 August 2011
The Environment
Benthic animals display a wide variety of feeding methods. Suspension and filter feeders capture particles which are suspended in the water column (e.g. sea pens) or transported by the current (e.g. mussels). Deposit feeders (e.g. sea cucumbers) ingest sediment and digest the organic material contained within it. Other benthic species can be herbivorous (e.g. sea urchins), carnivorous (e.g. crabs) or omnivorous (e.g. nematodes). Sessile infaunal species are particularly vulnerable to external influences that may alter the physical, chemical or biological community of the sediment as they are unable to avoid unfavourable conditions. Each species has its own response and degree of adaptability to changes in the physical and chemical environment. Consequently the species composition and relative abundance in a particular location provides a reflection of the immediate environment, both current and historic (Clark, 1996). In most deep water environments, faunal diversity and biomass decrease with depth as a result of food limitation. In the Faroe-Shetland Channel, this trend is evident in terms of biomass such that it does decline with depth. However the relationship between macrobenthic diversity and depth is not so evident. The presence of cold arctic waters in the deeper areas of the Faroe-Shetland Channel area appears to exert a marked influence (decrease) on the diversity of the deep-sea macrofauna of the region, most clearly seen when compared with the diversity of the benthos from the adjacent Rockall Trough which does not experience these arctic conditions (Betts, 2003, Campbell et al., 2010). Latitudinal trends in benthic community composition in the Faroe-Shetland Channel are relatively weak (Bett, 2003), indicating that local communities in the vicinity of the proposed well location will be comparable to those sampled regionally at locations in similar water depths. Benthic surveys undertaken in the deep waters surrounding the project area provide a good indication of the benthic community present at the proposed drill site. Surveys at South Uist (Gardline 1998), Greater Rosebank (Chevron 2008), Lochside and Aberlour (Chevron 2008) show that, although the benthos is relatively sparse it is generally consistent, dominated by species of polychaetes. At South Uist, 41% of the species identified were annelids, 36% as arthropoda, 14% as mollusca and 9% as spiunculids, cnidarians and nemerteans (Gardline 1998). This division of the community is similar at August 2011
Lochside and Aberlour with 42% of species being annelids, 34% crusteaceans, 10% mollusca and 2% echinoderms (Chevron, 2008).
Plate 3-2 Crossaster sp. Photographed at 1,050m in Faroe-Shetland Channel (Jones & Gates, 2010).
Plate 3-3 Stauromedusae, L. Bathyphila. Photographed at 1,125m in Faroe-Shetland Channel (Jones & Gates, 2010).
Page 21
The Environment
The dominant species in the region are typically polychaetes such as Myriochele oculata, M.fragilis, Clymaldane, Pseudeurythoe hemuli and Notomastus sp, Paramphinome jeffreysii, Notoproctus oculatus and Chaetozone setosa. The sipunculid worm Golfingia margaritcea is also present as are the amphipods Harpinia mucronata and Haroinia abyssi and the cumacean Eudorella sp (Gardline, 1998; Chevron, 2008). Photographs taken within the Greater Rosebank Area show epifauna such as: cold water fish (Arctic rockling, Arctic skate and various eelpout species); sea spiders (Boreonymphon abyssorum); amphipod crustaceans; sunstar (Solaster squamatus) brittle stars (Ophiopleura borealis); burrowing sea anemones and fan worms (Chevron, 2008). The AFEN surveys found no evidence of large reefs or colonies of cold water corals in the FaroeShetland Channel (Bett, 1997 and 1999). The protected coldwater coral Lophelia pertusa does occur to the west of Shetland and in the Atlantic Ocean but typically does not tolerate temperatures below 4 Celsius, whereas the temperature at the bottom of the Faroes-Shetland Channel is typically around zero Celsius. No evidence of species or habitats of conservation importance were identified (under the UKs Offshore Petroleum Activities (Conservation of Habitats) Regulations 2001) in the region (Gardline, 2007).
Plate 3-5 Atlantopandalus propinqvus is common in Faroe-Shetland Channel (Jones & Gates 2010).
Plate 3-6 Cerianthus vogti in the FaroeShetland Channel (Jones & Gates 2010).
Plate 3-4 Nudibranchs are commonly observed in Faroe-Shetland Channel (Jones & Gates 2010).
Page 22
August 2011
The Environment
3.8
Fish
Environmental Sensitivity: Juvenile and adult fish species present in the area around the project are potentially sensitive to chemical and oil discharges. Demersal laid fish eggs are particularly sensitive to seabed disturbance during spawning seasons. Fish communities consist of species that have complex interactions with one another and the natural environment. They consume a wide range of benthic invertebrates and/or act as predators at higher trophic levels, while themselves being a source of prey for larger animals. For convenience, fish can be split into finfish and shellfish, with the former being broadly split into pelagic and demersal species. Pelagic species (e.g. herring, mackerel, blue whiting and sprat) are found in mid-water and typically make extensive seasonal movements or migrations. Demersal species (e.g. skates and rays, red mullet, and monkfish) live on or near the seabed and similar to pelagic species, many are known to passively move (e.g. drifting eggs and larvae) and/or actively migrate (e.g. juveniles and adults) between areas during their lifecycle. Fish occupying areas in close proximity to offshore oil and gas activities could be exposed to aqueous discharges and may accumulate hydrocarbons and other contaminating chemicals in their body tissues. The most vulnerable stages of the life cycle of fish to general disturbances (such as disruption to sediments) and oil pollution are the egg and larval stages. Hence recognition of spawning and nursery times and areas within a development area is important. Fish are a conspicuous element of the megafauna of the Faroe-Shetland Channel; however there is relatively little published information on the distribution of fish populations and abundance within the locale. Fish communities below about 500 m in the FaroeShetland Channel differ from those in similar depths in other areas. This is due to the rapid change in temperature between the warmer Atlantic waters and the colder Norwegian Basin water. The community comprises species seldom seen in the warmer Atlantic water that are in quantities of limited commercial interest e.g. skates and rays, Greenland halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides), Arctic skate (Amblyraja
hyperborea), Roughead grenadier (Macrourus berglax), Arctic rockling (Gaidropsarus argentatus), blue whiting (Micromesistius poutassou) and deepwater species of eelpout (Zoarces viviparus) (DTI, 2003). This assessment is supported by fish traps undertaken during the AFEN surveys, which caught Arctic rockling and eelpouts below 1,000m (Bett, 1997). The Arctic skate is one of the most abundant fish species in the Faroe-Shetland Channel and is found at depths from 600 m to below 1,500 m (Fowler, 2004).
Plate 3-7 Amblyraja hyperborean photographed at 1,125 m in the Faroe-Shetland Channel (Jones & Gates, 2010). The Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Sciences (CEFAS) provides information on spawning grounds (the location where eggs are laid) and nursery areas (the location where juveniles are common) for several fish-stocks in the UK waters in the format of fisheries sensitivity maps (Coull et al., 1998) (Figure 3-7 and Figure 3-8). In general, the spawning and nursery grounds of individual species cover large areas of the North Sea and cannot be defined with absolute accuracy as they are found to shift over time. For those species for which this data is available, few have identified spawning or nursery grounds in the deeper regions of the Faroe-Shetland Channel. However due to the unfixed nature of the grounds, the available information for species occurring north of Scotland is presented.
August 2011
Page 23
The Environment
Figure 3-7 Identified spawning grounds for a number of fish species occurring in the northeast Atlantic. (Coull et al., 1998).
Page 24
August 2011
The Environment
Figure 3-8 Identified nursery grounds for a number of fish species occurring in the northeast Atlantic. (Coull et al., 1998).
August 2011
Page 25
The Environment
As mentioned, the most vulnerable stages of the life cycle of fish to oil pollution are the egg and larval stages. For many fish species the eggs and larvae are planktonic and are found floating throughout the water column. The eggs of the anglerfish (Lophius piscatorius and L. budegassa commonly referred to as monkfish or banjos in Scotland) (Plate 3-8) are also pelagic. However unlike most species, the eggs are not independent of each other. Rather the female produces a large buoyant gelatinous matrix known as an egg mass, ribbon, raft or veil which can measure over 10 m x 25 cm (Fulton, 1898) and contain over a million eggs (Fulton, 1891) (Plate 3-9). The ribbon is pelagic and floats in surface waters as the embryos develop. In northern British waters, Lophius species spawn in deep water usually during late winter and early spring with peak spawning occurring in February (Hislop et al., 2001). Prior to hatching, these egg masses are vulnerable to any oil that may be on the surface. Hatching in northern British waters occurs between early February and late May (Hislop et al., 2001) after which the larvae are found throughout the water column. During the last 30 years, numbers of wild Atlantic salmon returning from the sea have fallen by more than half (Atlantic Salmon Trust). These mortalities at sea have been linked to climate change and fishing. Climate change affects the salmons ability to grow and survive at sea while many salmon are taken inadvertently as by-catch by fishing vessels. In addition, sea and coastal interceptory mixed stock fisheries take fish from more than one river. In the northeast Atlantic, Atlantic salmon smolts leave fresh water and migrate to the deep sea feeding areas in the ocean during late spring and summer (Thorpe, 1989). Tagging results suggest that a large number of salmon smolts from
northwest Scotland, Ireland, Spain and France migrate north along the northwest Continental Shelf including the Faroe-Shetland Channel (Shelton et al., 1997). These smolts occupy the surface waters (Marine Directorate; pers comm.) suggesting the release of drill cuttings at around 10 m depths should not affect smolts that may be present during drilling operations.
Plate 3-9 Part of a fertilised L. piscatorius egg mass washed up on a Shetland coastline. Photography courtesy of Chevonne Laurenson.
Plate 3-10 Careproctus spp. Photographed at 1,080 m in the Faroe-Shetland Channel (Jones & Gates, 2010). Elasmobranchs; Sharks, Rays and Skates In the colder waters of the Faroe Shetland Channel, the most abundant elasmobranch species are likely to be cold deep-water species such as the Arctic skate (Raja hyperborea) and Greenland shark (Somniosus microcephalus). Other species, which can occur above the coldwater interface (<500m), include the round ray (Raja fyllae), R. lintea and R. radiata. There are numerous species of deep-water sharks or dogfish present in the Channel mostly belonging to two families; the catsharks (Scyliorhinidae) and the squalid sharks (Squalidae) (Gordon and August 2011
Plate 3-8 Anglerfish (Lophius spp) SERPENT Project 2006.
Page 26
The Environment
Swan,1997). Pelagic sharks such as porbeagle (Lamna nasus), blue shark and basking sharks (Cetorhinus maximus) also occur over deep water. Little is known about their abundance and distribution in the Faroe-Shetland Channel, although there is probably a general west-east (offshore-onshore) movement of most of these animals in spring, timed to take advantage of the high zooplankton abundance that occurs in coastal areas along tidal thermal fronts (DTI, 2000). Basking sharks have been sighted at the surface off the west coast of Scotland between April and September, with greatest abundance from May to July. Basking sharks are considered a pelagic shark, however they are capable of sustained feeding in deep waters, and have been recorded diving to depths of 1264 m (Gore et al. 2008). Basking sharks can migrate over long distances to forage for the most productive food sources and have been recorded undertaking oceanic migrations. Tagged sharks in the UK having been recorded off Newfoundland (Gore et al. 2008). Finally, much of the data available on fish species in UK waters relates to the commercially more important species and as the deeper waters of the Faroe-Shetland Channel have yet to become a targeted fishery, information is limited. However, it is clear from projects such as SERPENT, that a variety of fish species do occupy these depths.
Channel and the coastal waters to the north and west of Scotland hosts internationally important concentrations of seabirds. Twenty three bird species have been found to breed in colonies on the islands in the region and a further 25 species occur in the area at various times of the year. The temporal and spatial distribution of seabirds is largely influenced by their lifecycle. The species lifecycle stage will determine whether they are concentrated around breeding colonies or more widely dispersed over offshore waters. The distances that birds will travel from their colonies for food varies greatly between species and this influences offshore distribution. The remote offshore location of the North Uist project is beyond the maximum foraging range of many species during the breeding season. This section summarises the information from a number of reports produced on seabirds present in the waters west of Shetland. The JNCC Seabirds At Sea Team (SAST) conducted boat based surveys of the Atlantic Frontier region over a 20 year period from 1979 to 1999 (Stone et al., 1995). The survey coverage extended into Faroese waters, with the results of the 20 year study being published in Taylor and Reid (2001). Birds over the waters between the Faroe Islands and Shetland were furthered surveyed as part of a two year study by Bloor et al. (1996). Further seabird survey coverage was commissioned as part of the AFEN project. The survey effort within the Faroe-Shetland Channel region is varied, a reflection of the large area and the difficulties of surveying these waters. The aim of the JNCC Atlantic Frontier surveys was 2 to survey a minimum of 20 km in each ICES rectangle that contained an oil and gas licence block, for each month of the year, as it was a primary intention to provide environmental data that was most applicable to oil and gas exploration activities. Since the dedicated SAST monitoring programme stopped in 1999 there has been little at sea data collected on seabird distributions in the area.
3.9
Seabirds
Environmental Sensitivity: Seabird populations are particularly vulnerable to surface pollution. The vulnerability of birds to oil pollution varies considerably throughout the year and is dependent on a variety of factors including: time spent on the water, total biogeographical population, reliance on the marine environment and potential rate of population recovery. Species considered most vulnerable to sea surface pollution are those which spend a relatively large amount of time on the sea surface, e.g. auks. Species considered to be at lower risk are those which spend the majority of time in the air and include species such as the Fulmar, the most abundant species in the North Uist project area. Seabird densities at the North Uist project site are lower than those at the shelf and coastal areas which are closer to the breeding colonies.
3.9.2 Distribution and abundance

Several species of seabird have breeding populations in the Faroe Islands, Shetland and Orkney which exceed 1% of their European population. These include Fulmars, gannets, shags, Arctic skuas, great skuas, great blackbacked gulls, kittiwakes, common and Arctic terns, guillemots, razorbills, black guillemots and puffins. European and Leachs storm petrels are also
3.9.1 Introduction
The marine environment of the Faroe-Shetland August 2011
Page 27
The Environment
summer visitors to important breeding colonies in the region, while Icelandic and glaucous gulls and little auks are winter visitors. Great and long-tailed skuas are known to migrate through the region (Pollock et al., 2000). The main species occurring in the region of the North Uist project are listed in decreasing abundance in Table 3-6. Several gull species (herring, great black-backed and lesser black backed), and Arctic skua, all of which breed on Shetland and Orkney tend to be limited to, coastal shelf waters throughout the year. Black guillemots, Divers, Grebes and several
Species Distribution
The northern fulmar is the most abundant and widespread seabird in the Faroe-Shetland Channel. From January to April, prior to the breeding season, high densities of fulmars are o concentrated along the continental shelf slope south of 60 N and around Shetland. During the breeding season from May to July, higher densities are concentrated over the continental shelf with moderate to high densities over the deep waters of the Norwegian Sea and following the shelf break north and west of Scotland. Northern gannets are widely dispersed over the Faroe-Shetland Channel in March, following their return from wintering grounds as far south as west Africa. In summer adults are concentrated closer to breeding colonies at Shetland. Studies from Bass Rock SPA colony have indicated a maximum foraging range of 540 km, and it is possible that most areas of the Faroe-Shetland Channel are potentially within the foraging range from the gannet colonies (Hamer, 2000). Immature birds may occur over deep water throughout the year, although most disperse southwards in winter. Kittiwake are present in the offshore Faroe-Shetland Channel in significant numbers during the pre-breeding season, although concentrations are highest along the shelf break (on both sides of the Faroe-Shetland Channel) and over the Faroese banks. Moderate concentrations recorded from May to June in the Faroe-Shetland Channel were probably Faroese birds (Pollock et al., 2000). Puffins are the most abundant auk species over the deep water in the Faroe-Shetland Channel. During pre-breeding and breeding seasons, only low to moderate concentrations of probably non-breeders are present in the area. Puffins are most widespread in deep water during August and September, with moderate densities recorded south and west of the Faroe Islands. Low to moderate densities have been recorded over the Faroe-Shetland Channel during winter. Widespread over the Faroe-Shetland Channel during the breeding season, with important colonies at Sule Skerry and Shetland, and high numbers of non-breeders in the area from the end of June. Highest densities around the south of the Faroe-Shetland Channel in August. Birds from Shetland and more northern collonies are still breeding in September, before dispersing from the area. Common guillemots are primarily a shelf species preferring waters less than 100 m deep, but are recorded along the shelf break at low densities throughout the year. In the breeding season very high concentrations are found in near shore waters, after the breeding season birds disperse from their colonies and gather in large flocks in inshore waters. At this time (August September) they undergo a moult . In October and November they disperse further offshore, with low densities recorded over Faroe-Shetland Channel, with birds possibly migrating out of the area to areas in the Irish or North Seas. The razorbill is primarily a shelf species and is less widespread than the common guillemot, with few birds recorded beyond the 200 m isobath. During the breeding season, highest densities were found inshore off the west coast of Scotland. Birds were not present in areas of deep water over the slope and channel during this time. During August highest densities of razorbills occur off the west coast of Scotland, where they congregate to moult with very few birds being recorded in deep water (>200 m) at this time. During September to December low densities of birds have been recorded along the shelf edge, with higher densities recorded inshore. During winter, razorbills disperse widely; some birds winter in the North and Irish Seas and there is also immigration into the area from the north with birds being evenly distributed predominantly over the shelf edge. The little auk is a winter visitor to Britain from the islands of Arctic Europe. Low densities have been observed in the Faroe-Shetland Channel from September to December and over the continental shelf edge north-west of the Western Isles in November. Little auks over winter in
species of sea duck are primarily coastal species and are unlikely to be found in the vicinity of the project area. Of the bird species found in the area of the Project the European Storm-petrel, Leachs storm petrel and the arctic tern are all considered Annex I species within the Bird Directive, i.e. they are subject to special conservation measures concerning their habitat in order to ensure their survival and reproduction in their area of distribution.
Overall vulnerability to oil pollution
Northern fulmar
Low
Northern gannet
Low
Black legged kittiwake
Moderate
Puffin
High
European Storm-petrel
Moderate
Common guillemot
High
Razorbill
High
Little Auk
High
Page 28
August 2011
The Environment
Species
Distribution
shallow areas of the northern North Sea. In January to May, little auks are found along the shelf with few sightings in deep water. In spring months little auks leave for breeding colonies located in Arctic waters.
Overall vulnerability to oil pollution
Leachs storm petrel
Important colonies at Ramna Stacks and Gruney (Shetland), North Rona and Sula Sgeir. Leachs storm-petrels are most abundant south of the Faroe-Shetland Channel during the breeding season in May, June and July; with higher numbers in August, over the Ymire and Wyville-Thomson Ridges and along the Faroe-Shetland Channel, prior to departing to winter in the tropics. Great skuas are present in low densities along the shelf break in April and May, with an area of higher concentration south-west of the Faroe-Shetland Channel associated with fishing vessels. Widespread inshore, they are present at low densities in the Faroe-Shetland Channel in June-July, and widely dispersed from August to October. This species is present in low densities between October and April over the Faroe-Shetland Channel. Species breeds in the South Atlantic and is thought to complete a clockwise migration circuit of the Atlantic Ocean. They are widely distribution at low densities throughout the region, Low densities of Arctic terns have been observed around the shelf break south of the Faroes in August, prior to migrating to the South Atlantic. They have a predominantly coastal distribution adjacent to breeding colonies between May and October.
Moderate
Great skua
Moderate
Glaucous gull Sooty shearwater Arctic tern
Moderate
Moderate
Low
Table 3-6 Main seabird species located in the North Uist project area listed in relation to abundance (Stone et al., 1995; Pollack et al., 2000). the biogeographic population. In contrast, the aerial habits of the fulmar and gulls, together with large populations and widespread distribution, reduce the vulnerability of these species. Overall vulnerability to surface pollutants across the whole year in the region of the development is shown in Figure 3-9. The monthly vulnerability rankings for licence block 213/25 and surrounding blocks are shown in Table 3-7. Seabird vulnerability is low (4) in winter. The high seabird vulnerability ranking in September (2) can be attributed to the presence of post-breeding moulting seabirds and higher densities of auks (e.g. razorbills and guillemots) in the area. The closest areas of Very High vulnerability are located in coastal waters off Shetland over 100 km away.
3.9.3 Seabird vulnerability

Seabird species are vulnerable to surface pollutants such as oil. Their vulnerability is dependent upon a number of factors and can vary on a species specific level throughout the course of the year. The seasonal vulnerability of seabirds to surface pollutants in the project area has been derived from the Offshore Vulnerability Index (OVI) which was developed by the JNCC to assess the vulnerability of birds to surface pollution, considering factors such as reliance on the marine environment, proportion of time spent flying, biogeographical population and their potential rate of population recovery (Williams et al, 1994). The vulnerability of seabirds in each oil and gas licence block is ranked on a four point scale; Very High (1), High (2), Moderate (3) and Low (4). Of the species commonly present offshore in the Faroe-Shetland Channel, auk species (including puffins, common guillemots, razorbills and little auks) may be considered to be most vulnerable to oil pollution due to a combination of heavy reliance on the marine environment, low breeding output with a long period of immaturity before breeding and the regional presence of a large percentage of
August 2011
Page 29
The Environment 3.9.4 Migrating species
The UK lies on some of the major migratory flyways of the east Atlantic, with large numbers of water birds attracted each year by the relatively mild winter climate and extensive estuarine and wetland habitats (DECC, 2009a). Large numbers of birds cross the North and Irish Sea during the spring and autumn migrations on their way between breeding and wintering grounds. These birds include passerines, near passerines, raptors and owls. There are no known fixed corridors preferred by the migratory birds and migration usually takes the form of a broad-front. Migration can be temporally variable and flight heights will vary depending on the species and weather conditions involved; this can range from just above the water surface to several thousand metres. There are several migrant seabird species in the Faroe-Shetland Channel region, inluding the great shearwater (Puffinus gravis), long-tailed skua (Stercorarius longicaudus), pomarine skua (Stercorarius pomarinus) and sooty shearwater (Puffinus griseus) (DECC, 2009a). Figure 3-9 Overall Oil Vulnerability Index rankings for each UKCS licence block. Non seabird species migrate through the area each spring and autumn to and from their breeding grounds, mainly in the Faroe Islands, Iceland and Greenland (including dunlin, knot, lapwing). Although the species may occur in the area during migration, the majority of them will not spend any time on the sea surface. The islands off the west and north coasts of Scotland are of importance for migrant waterfowl in spring and autumn since they lie on the major migratory flyway of the east Atlantic. Many waterfowl, especially geese, can be found on passage or overwintering in the region (DECC, 2009a).
September
November
December 4 4 4 4 4 -
February
October
January
Block Number
August
213/ 19 213/ 20 213/ 24 213/ 25 213/ 29 213/ 30 214/ 16 214/ 21 214/ 26
3 3 2 2 2 2 3 2 2
4 3 4 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3
2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 4
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
Overall
March
June
April
July
May
3.10 Marine mammals

Environmental Sensitivity: marine mammals are vulnerable to the direct effects of oil and gas activities such as noise, contaminants and oil spills. They are also indirectly affected by any processes that may affect prey availability. Many of the activities associated with the oil and gas offshore industry have the potential to impact on marine mammals. The factors which could cause disturbance include noise or obstruction. However, the impact will depend on the scale and type of activity. Activities with the potential to cause disturbance include drilling, seismic surveys and vessel movements (JNCC, 2010 draft). As marine mammals feed on fish and/or plankton, contamination of the water column affecting this food source could have a negative impact on
Note; no data available for January
Table 3-7 Monthly seabird vulnerability in block 213/25 and surrounding blocks.
Page 30
August 2011
The Environment
cetaceans, either directly as a result of lack of prey or indirectly as a result of bioaccumulation of contaminants. However, as most marine mammals tend to have large feeding grounds, any localised contamination associated with the normal activity of oil and gas installations is unlikely to have a major impact on populations.
3.10.2 Pinnipeds
The JNCC SAST has also been recording seals during surveys in the Atlantic margin (Pollock et al., 2000). There are three species of seals which regularly occur to the west of Shetland of which only two of these are likely to be encountered in the vicinity of the project, namely the grey seal (Halichoerus grypus) and hooded seal (Cystophora cristata), both of which are protected under the EC Habitats and Species Directive. The Sea Mammal Research Unit (SMRU) regularly monitors local seal populations using aerial survey techniques around the Scottish coastline. These surveys also extend to offshore regions. The use of satellite telemetry has shown that grey seals which are usually found in coastal areas can undergo long distance migrations to the Faroe Islands from the east coast of the UK. The grey seal is a resident breeder mainly in the Western Isles, Orkney and Shetland. Grey seals tend to be present all year round in water depths of less than 200 m and have been recorded in all months by SAST, with lowest numbers between October and December when animals were ashore to pup and mate. Only low densities of grey seals have been observed in the wider area. Higher densities may be observed during periods of migration between their breeding sites in the Faroe and Shetland islands (BP, 2004; McConnell et al., 1992, 1999). Hooded seals breed and moult on the packed ice of Arctic waters, but are also known to range extensively outwith their breeding and moulting periods of March and July (Folkow et al., 1996). Hooded seals have been recorded in deep waters over the Faroe-Shetland Channel with no records in water depths of less than 200 m (Pollock et al., 2000) and may therefore be encountered in the vicinity.
3.10.1 Cetaceans
Marine mammal species in the Faroe-Shetland Channel and surrounding areas can be broadly grouped according to distribution, habitat and ecology, as illustrated in Table 3-8 (DTI, 2003, MacLeod et al., 2003). The waters of the Faroe-Shetland Channel support important and diverse populations of whales, dolphins and porpoises. A confluence of ocean currents results in upwelling waters rich in food, enabling several species to live in the area throughout the year. These resident species include minke, killer and long-finned pilot whales, Atlantic white-sided, white-beaked and Rissos dolphins, and also harbour porpoises. Other cetaceans, including northern bottlenose, blue, fin, sei, sperm and right whales are thought to use the Faroe-Shetland Channel as a migratory pathway, swimming through the area to summer feeding grounds in the north, before returning to more southern overwintering and breeding grounds.
In terms of spatial distribution in the Faroe Shetland area, the highest numbers of baleen whales and dolphins (in particular the Atlantic white sided) are found in the deep water channels of the Faroe Bank and the Faroe-Shetland Channel. The channels, shelf break and slope are important habitats for sperm, beaked and pilot whales and are also used by killer whales and harbour porpoises, which have a more widespread distribution (MacLeod et al., 2003). The seasonal sightings data of marine mammal species in the Faroe-Shetland Channel indicate peak occurrence of most species (with the exception of harbour porpoise) in late spring and summer. However, it is a possibility that the sightings effort is biased towards the seasonal (mostly summer) distribution of survey effort and so this data should be used with caution. Acoustic monitoring carried out by AFEN demonstrated the presence of fin and blue whales throughout the year; these species were previously thought to undertake seasonal migrations from the Arctic regions to the Atlantic (Clark and Charif, 1998). August 2011
Page 31
The Environment
Species Distribution
Blue Deep water baleen whales Shelf baleen Deep water squid eating baleen whales Deep water dolphins Shelf dolphins Generalist cetaceans Vagrants
Very rare species, although acoustic monitoring has shown individuals to occur in the deep water of the channel during autumn and spring. Most sightings occur from July to October, and most acoustic detections take place during November and December, coinciding with breeding season. Fin whales are mainly seen in deeper waters off the continental shelf edge. Most sightings occur between May and October, although passive acoustic monitoring has shown the whales to be present year round. Observed in relatively high numbers (four to five individuals) between May and October in the area around the proposed well. Sei whales migrate between summer northern feeding grounds and lower latitude overwintering grounds. Arrive in Scottish waters between April and July, leaving late August and September. Deepwater species, observed in relatively high numbers (four to five individuals) between May and October in the area around the proposed well. Considered relatively rare, humpback whales have been regularly reported from recent sightings and acoustic detections. There have been few sightings along the shelf break, with most during summer but they may be present in the region all year round. Generally seen singly or in pairs, rarely exceed groups of four or five. Most sightings of the minke whale occur within the 200 m depth contour but there have been sightings in the Faroe-Shetland Channel. This species is resident in UK shelf waters, although peak sightings occur from May to October. These whales are generally seen in pairs, but can form aggregations of up to 15 individuals.
Fin
Sei
Humpback
Minke whale
Sperm
Beaked
Pilot
Found on and beyond the continental shelf break. The highest densities are observed in deeper waters. May be present year-round, offshore sightings peak in July. Forms dispersed groups of tens of individuals. Evidence suggests that only males migrate to northern latitudes. The northern bottlenose whale is the most frequently sighted beaked whale, followed by those belonging to the genus Mesoplodon, a group of small taxonomically similar whales. It is probable that most unidentified beaked whale sightings to the north and west of Shetland are of the Sowerbys beaked whale. Most pilot whale sightings occur along the shelf break and in deep waters of the FaroeShetland Channel. Sightings peak during the summer, especially July and August. Surveys to north and west of Scotland have recorded an average pod size of just over ten. Widely distributed in shelf water not associated with the shelf break. Both the common dolphin and white sided dolphin are Pelagic feeders with differing species specific distributions. This species is often recorded in the deeper reaches of the Faroe-Shetland Channel, and is regularly sighted in large pods numbering in the tens to hundreds. White-sided dolphins are seen year round in the Channel with spring and autumn peaks. Widely distributed on the continental shelf to the west of Shetland and Orkney but is rare in deeper waters such as those around the proposed well. Most frequently observed between June and October in UK waters. Generally found in groups of less than ten individuals, although they have been observed in larger aggregations. Gregarious species, forming small groups of up to around ten individuals. Although often regarded as an offshore species preferring deeper continental slope waters, most sightings around Scotland have occurred over the continental shelf. Small numbers have been recorded off Orkney and Shetland. Uncommon in the Atlantic margin area. Mostly recorded on the Atlantic margin shelf ridge and over the Wyville Thompson Ridge. Widely distributed over deep and shelf waters, killer whales have a broad diet, probably mainly piscivorous offshore, with seals, small cetaceans and birds near shore. Widely distributed in water depths <200 m. The harbour porpoise is expected to be present in higher densities in deep water, and more commonly in winter that visual sighting suggest. Has been detected in small numbers off the shelf edge in the Faroe Shetland channel. All these species have been recorded in the Atlantic Frontier area and are probably vagrants to the area.
Common
Atlantic white sided
White beaked
Rissos
Bottlenose dolphin Killer whale
Harbour porpoise
Striped dolphin, narwhal, false killer whale
Table 3-8 Cetacean distribution found in the Faroe-Shetland Channel and surrounding area.
Page 32
August 2011
The Environment
3.11 Socio-Economic Environment

The need for socio-economic assessment comes directly from the EIA regulations which require that all qualifying activities consider both positive and negative socio-economic impacts in terms of benefits to the local communities and the country along with the potential interface with existing industries and communities. DECCs remit to review Field Development Programmes ensures that licensees take into account implications for other offshore oil and gas developments in the area, and the interests of other users of the area.
30 nm by 30 nm. Each ICES rectangle covers one half of one Quadrant i.e. 15 licence blocks. The importance of an area to the fishing industry is assessed by measuring the fishing effort which may be defined as: the number of days (time) X fleet capacity (tonnage and engine power). Due to the requirement by UK fishermen to report catch information such as total landings (includes species type and tonnage of each), location of hauls and catch method (type of gear/duration of fishing), it is possible to get an idea of the value of an area (ICES rectangle) to the UK fishing industry. Information regarding fisheries in the FaroeShetland Channel is available in a report by Gordon (2003). While there are deep water fisheries, particularly for high value species, such as Greenland halibut in the area, these are restricted to water depths of less than about 700 m. It is considered that commercial deepwater fisheries are unlikely to develop in water depths greater than 700 m as fish biomass is too low. Given the water depth at the North Uist site, it is not expected that commercial fishing will take place in the immediate vicinity. Block 213/25 lies within ICES rectangle 51E6 and it can be seen from Figure 3-10 UK fish landings from this area are very low. Only landings of demersal fish (species that live on or near the seabed) were recorded from this ICES rectangle and even then the landings were relatively insignificant, valuing less than 1,000 per annum. Consideration should also be given to the commercial fisheries in neighbouring ICES rectangles, particularly in terms of the potential effects of a large oil spill resulting from a blowout at the project site. Modelling suggests that oil on the surface would move primarily in an easterly and north easterly direction. In such an instance, the impacts on shellfish and cephalopod (e.g. squid and octopus) landings would remain insignificant while it is possible that some areas fished for demersal and pelagic (found in midwater) species would be closed. Over flight sightings of vessels at the Clair Ridge and Foinaven/Schiehallion project sites suggest that Faroese vessels in the area are limited to less than 1% of those vessels fishing the locale while UK vessels at the two sites make up approximately 80% and 55% respectively (Brown and May, 2009).
3.11.1 Social Impacts

Socially the impacts of this development will be minor as it is a relatively small project superimposed on a social system that is already changed due to the oil industry. The main social benefits will be short term and relate to continuation of jobs on the drillship and associated support vessels.
3.11.2 Fishing Activity

Environmental Sensitivity: Commercial fisheries are sensitive to natural changes in stocks and the loss of access to areas of the sea through the establishment of exclusion zones. The potential also exists for demersal fishing gear to be snagged on obstructions on the seabed. In the event of an oil spill there may be economic impacts in terms of closure of fishing grounds and loss of confidence in the quality of fish being caught in the area. One of the main areas of potential adverse impacts associated with the development of the offshore oil and gas industry is in relation to fishing activities. Offshore structures have the potential to interfere with fishing activities as their physical presence may obstruct access to fishing grounds. Knowledge of fishing activities and the location of the major fishing grounds is therefore an important consideration when evaluating any potential environmental impacts from offshore developments. In terms of marine ecosystems, ICES (International Council for Exploration of the Sea) is the primary source of scientific advice to the governments and international regulatory bodies that manage the North Atlantic Ocean and adjacent seas. For management purposes, ICES collates fisheries information for individual rectangles measuring August 2011
Page 33
The Environment
Figure 3-10 Value of reported fish landings into UK ports (Source: Marine Directorate).
Page 34
August 2011
The Environment 3.11.3 Shipping

Anatec (2010) identified numerous shipping routes passing through the area. Levels of shipping in the waters to the north of Scotland are relatively low when compared with other parts of the UK, e.g. the English Channel and North Sea. The most heavily used routes are the Pentland Firth, Fair Isle
Channel and waters west of Shetland (Figure 311). Commercial traffic in the area is typically comprised of vessels en route to and from Sullom Voe Terminal and vessels in transit across the Atlantic (Figure 3-11 and Table 3-9).
Figure 3-11 Shipping routes passing the area of the project (Source; Anatec, 2010).
Route Lerwick-Torshavn Smyril Line Faeroes-Kattegat Faeroes-Boknafjorden Iceland-Sognefjorden Faeroes-Marstein Marstein-Iceland Total *CPA Closest Point of Approach
CPA (nm)* 1.3 3.9 4.8 5.9 3.2 9.0 -
Bearing () 199 24 21 181 15 183 -
Ships per year 115 110 45 5 5 15 295
Table 3-9 Shipping routes identified within 10 nm of the project (Anatec, 2009).
August 2011
Page 35
The Environment 3.11.8 Marine noise 3.11.4 Wrecks

The UK Hydrographic Office (UKHO) records do not identify any wrecks in the vicinity of the project.
3.11.5 Existing oil and gas activity

There is a long history of oil and gas activity north and west of Scotland, with the first well being drilled in 1972 and the first potentially commercial discovery (the Clair field) made in July 1977. To date, the Foinaven, Schiehallion/Loyal and Clair fields are the only producing fields in the region, with first oil in 1997, 1998 and 2005 respectively. In 2002, the West of Shetland Pipeline System (WOSPS) was installed to transport surplus gas from the Foinaven and Schiehallion fields to the Magnus field in the northern North Sea, via Sullom Voe Terminal. The Clair field came on stream in early 2005 and produced fluids from the field are transported to Sullom Voe Terminal through a 105 km pipeline constructed specifically for the Clair field with gas being exported through the WOSPS. Recently, the development of the Laggan and Tormore gas fields by Chevron has been approved, where drilling operations are due to commence in 2012. In addition, there are a number of other recent finds and on-going appraisals to the west of Shetland, including Chevron Rosebank which was drilled in 2007, the large gas find in the Glenlivet field, successfully drilled in 2009 and a recent gas discovery located in Block 204/13a and 14b known as Tornado at a depth of 1,048 m.
The principal sources of manmade noise in the area are likely to be nearby shipping and oil and gas activity. The main sources of natural background noise in the region of the project include wind, waves, precipitation and tectonic activity as well as noises produced by cetaceans (US National Research Council, 2003). For many marine species, sound is important for communication, locating potential mates, searching for prey, avoiding predators and hazards and for short- and long- range navigation (UKMMAS, 2010). Noise at an inappropriate volume and frequency can mask biologically relevant signals that can lead to a variety of behavioural reactions. Hearing organs can be adversely affected, and at very high levels, sound can injure or even kill marine life. The impacts of noise are reviewed in Chapter 7.
3.11.6 Military activities

There are no charted military exercise areas or other specified sites in the area, although the area may be occasionally used by aircraft and surface or submarine craft during training and NATO exercises (DTI, 2003). Hydrophones to track submarines are present on the seabed in the Atlantic Margin area, although information on their location is confidential. The nearest practice and exercise area (PEXA) is located over 110 km to the south.
3.11.7 Submarine cables

There is a cable located 7 km southeast of the well. This is a submarine telecommunications cable connecting Scotland and Iceland called Farice Scotland-Iceland (Figure 3-12).
Page 36
August 2011
The Environment
North Uist
Figure 3-12 Military practice and exercise areas and cables in the region of the project.
August 2011
Page 37
The Environment
3.12 Overview
The North Uist project site is located on the floor of the Faroe-Shetland Channel at a depth of 1,291 m. The seabed at the project site is gently undulating with a very low slope gradient. The oceanographic regime consists of an upper layer of warm North Atlantic water flowing towards the northeast, overlying a lower layer of cold Norwegian Sea bottom water, flowing towards the southwest. The area is exposed to strong winds from the west and south west while significant wave heights exceed 2.5 m for 50% of the year and 4.0 m for 10 % of the year. Surveys of the floor of the Faroe-Shetland Channel show it to be made up of relatively featureless mud with some gravel, overlain by a thin layer (<5 cm thick) of muddy sands. Phytoplankton data specific to the Faroe-Shetland Channel is limited; however phytoplankton species as a whole on the Atlantic Frontier are similar to those in the North Sea. The Channel serves as an important area for aggregations of overwintering Calanus species (zooplankton). Benthic communities at the bottom of the Faroe-Shetland Channel are less diverse than those in shallower waters or in neighbouring deep water areas with warmer currents. No spawning or nursery grounds for commercial species are known within the area of the project. Overall seabird vulnerability to oil pollution in the area is low. A large number of cetacean species occur in the area of the Faroe-Shetland Channel with the area being an important habitat for sperm, beaked and pilot whales. The proposed development occurs within ICES rectangle 51E6. Fish landings data for UK ports from 2005-2007 suggest that the area is not commercially important with over all landings from this rectangle valuing < 1,000 per annum. The development is outwith any known areas of renewable energy or military activity. The proposed development is within an area of current oil and gas activity.
Page 38
August 2011
The EIA Process
The Environmental Impact Assessment Process
Duration of planned activity One year to many years One month to a year
Likelihood of unplanned event (accidental event) Likely: More than once a year Possible: Less than once per year and more than one every 10 years
Likelihood Category 5
This chapter describes how the Environmental Impact Assessment process is undertaken.
4.1
Overview
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) is a process which identifies the environmental effects (both negative and positive) of development proposals and aims to prevent, reduce and offset any adverse impacts (Scottish Government, 1998). The Council Directive (85/337/EEC as amended by Directives 97/11/EC and 2003/35/EC) defines the requirements for an EIA. Within the UK the Offshore Petroleum Production and Pipelines (Assessment of Environmental Effects) (Amendment) Regulations 2007 implement the Directive. Central to EIA is the requirement to identify issues that could have an impact on the environment, other users of that environment, and potential cumulative and transboundary impacts. Once identified, these issues must be assessed to define the level of potential risk they present to the environment. If these risks are deemed significant, they should be removed or reduced through design or the adoption of operational measures (mitigation). Following mitigation, there may be residual impacts that must be described.
Unlikely: Less than One week to a once every 10 years month and more than once per 100 years Remote: Less than once every 100 years and more than once per 1,000 years Extremely remote: Less than once every 1,000 years and more than once every 10,000 years
One day to a week
Less than a day
Table 4-1 Likelihood of Realisation of an Impact.
4.4
Consequence
4.2
EIA methodology
The magnitude of each potential environmental effect is also rated on a scale of one to five, five being the most severe, as shown in (Table 4-2). Where magnitude appears to fall within 2 categories, the higher category is selected to provide a worst case scenario for the purposes of assessment.
Potential effects are assessed both in terms of their likelihood, (how often they occur) and their potential significance (their magnitude) as described below.
4.5 Combining Likelihood and Consequences to Establish Risk

The overall environmental hazard of each environmental aspect is assessed using the combination of the magnitude and likelihood scores in Table 4-3.
4.3
Likelihood
The likelihood of each potential effect is given a score between 1 and 5 (Table 4-1). Planned activities are assessed according to their duration and accidental events as the likelihood of them happening. However irrespective of the likelihood of them occurring following DECC guidelines, the impacts of hydrocarbon releases are assessed.
August 2011
Page 39
The EIA Process
Level
Severe (5)
Definition
Change in ecosystem leading to long term ( greater than 10 years) damage with poor potential for recovery to an area 2 hectares of more, or to internationally or nationally protected populations, habitats or sites. Likely effect on human health. Long term, substantial loss of private users or public finance.
This process was undertaken for all identified aspects with the results presented in Appendix B. Those issues given a final environmental ranking of minor or negligible were considered insignificant and were therefore not considered further in the EIA. For those aspects identified as of moderate risk, additional mitigation measures were considered to demonstrate that the risk was as low as reasonably practicable (ALARP). The aspects identified as moderate risk are discussed in Sections 5 to 9. Key issues identified for detailed impact assessment are: Physical presence Discharges to sea Atmospheric emissions Underwater noise Accidental events.
Major (4)
Change in ecosystem leading to medium term (greater than 2 years) damage with recovery likely within between 2 and 10 years to an area 2 hectares or more, or to internationally or nationally protected species, habitats or sites. Short term loss to private users or public finances.
Moderate (3)
Change in ecosystem leading to short term damage with likelihood for recovery within 2 years to an area 2 hectares or less, or to protected or locally important sites. Possible but unlikely effect on human health. May cause nuisance. Possible short term minor loss to private users or public finances.
Subsequent sections of the ES (Chapters 5 to 9) contain the findings of a more detailed assessment of each issue and how it will be managed.
4.6
Assessment of impacts
Minor (2) Negligible (1)
Change is within scope of existing variability but potentially detectable. Effects are unlikely to be noticed or measured.
In each chapter, the impacts are described and quantified, using predictive modelling methods as required. The potential cumulative and transboundary environmental impacts from the project are considered within these chapters.
4.7
EIA integration with overall environmental management
Table 4-2 Definition of Magnitude of Environmental Effects.
To ensure that the design and operational procedures intended to minimise the environmental impact from the proposed project prove successful, the measures identified in Chapters 5 to 9 will be entered into BPs action tracking system to ensure delivery.
Magnitude of Effect
5 5 Likelihood of occurrence 4 3 2 1 High High High High High
4 High High High High Moderate
3 Moderate Moderate Moderate Moderate Low
2 Moderate Moderate Low Low Low
Low Low Low Low Low
Table 4-3 Environmental Risk Classification Matrix.
Page 40
August 2011
Physical Presence
Physical Presence
5.1.3 Potential impacts

Introduction A number of seabed surveys have been carried out in the vicinity of the project, such that it is possible to describe the benthic environment present in the area and therefore estimate the degree of potential impact from the activities described. Survey data for the project area are presented in Chapter 3 and it should be noted that no potential Annex I habitats are recorded in the area and repeatedly there has been no significant evidence of deepwater corals in this area (DTI, 2003). Drilling A single well will be drilled at the North Uist location from a dynamically positioned drilling rig, the drillship Stena Carron. Drilling of the well may result in the direct physical injury or mortality of benthic organisms that are present in the immediate area in which drilling will occur. The seabed is inhabited by numerous organisms including sessile organisms and animals that are unable to move rapidly. As such, some species, both infaunal and epifaunal, will be unable to move out of the area affected by drilling activity. In addition, infaunal species may be able to move through the sediment and emerge outwith the affected area. Despite this, it is likely that some individual organisms will be lost from the environment. In addition, interference with the seabed also has the potential to cause resuspension of seabed sediments, which can exert negative effects on habitats/species outwith the immediate area of activity. The likelihood of sediments becoming resuspended and the speed at which they will settle out of the water column will depend on the nature of the seabed sediments found in the area being developed and on the prevailing sediment transport system in the area. Larger particles will settle out of the water column more quickly than smaller particles and sediment resuspension is likely to persist for a longer period in areas with a high percentage of fine sediments compared to areas with a coarser sediment composition (Hitchcock et al., 1996, in Gubbay, 2003). The resuspension of sediments can result in the smothering of epifaunal benthic species (Gubbay, 2003). Whilst some species may be exposed to settlement of only a small layer of sediments and be unaffected, others may experience thicker smothering or be unable to tolerate any covering at all. Infaunal species that are found within the sediment may be less susceptible to negative impacts of smothering. Conversely, resuspension of fine particulate matter may clog the Page 41
This chapter discusses the potential environmental impacts associated with the physical presence of the well and the management and mitigation measures employed in order to adhere to the applicable legislation and achieve BPs goals. The potential impacts are divided into those that may impact the seabed and those that may impact on other sea users.
5.1
Seabed impacts
5.1.1 Introduction
Activities being conducted during the project which have the potential to impact the seabed are the drilling of the well, including discharge of cuttings, and the installation and subsequent removal of the wellhead. Impacts from these activities may result in very localised effects including direct physical injury of benthic species, the loss of seabed habitat and the resuspension of sediments. OSPAR (2009a) report that, in recent years, there has been an improvement in the technology used to place infrastructure on the seabed and that there is greater awareness of the potential environmental impacts that these activities may cause. The Commission also stated that an assessment of the direct physical impact of placing a structure on the seabed should be included within an environmental statement for a development (OSPAR, 2009a). Therefore the impacts identified for the project are discussed here, along with relevant mitigation measures.
5.1.2 Regulatory control

The key Regulatory requirements that relate to the activities described in this section and which will assist in reducing the possible impact on the seabed are described in Appendix A and summarised here as follows: The presence of the well on the seabed is described under the appropriate PON15B permit for drilling which will be submitted to DECC. The Energy Act 2008, as amended by the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 regulates the locating of drilling rigs (formerly under the Coast Protection Act 1949). BP will apply to DECC for a consent to locate the drillship in line with the Energy Act 2008 Part 4A.
August 2011
Physical Presence
delicate filtering apparatus of suspension feeders. Resuspension of sediments
5.1.4 Management and mitigation

Since a dynamically positioned vessel will be used for drilling, no anchor mounds will be created as a result of the activities and seabed disturbance will be limited to the installation of the well and will be very localised. The impact of drill cuttings deposition is discussed in Section 6. Direct physical injury of benthic species As described in Section 3, surveys undertaken in the project area have found a benthic community that is relatively sparse and generally consistent, dominated by species of polychaetes. A survey at South Uist (1,152 m depth), 12 km SE of the North Uist project Site, found 41% of the species identified were annelids, 36% as arthropoda, 14% as mollusca and 9% as spiunculids, cnidarians and nemerteans. No species or habitats that qualify for protection have been recorded in the area and the coldwater coral Lophelia pertusa is not expected due to the very cold water temperature. As such, the limited seabed area that may be affected is unlikely to contain species that are of conservation significance or that would be unable to recover in a short time period. Biological communities are in a continual state of flux and are able to either adjust to disrupted conditions or rapidly re-colonise an area that has been disturbed. The seabed sidescan sonar survey conducted by BP at the well site revealed no evidence of anthropogenic disturbance or anomalies that might harbour unusual fauna. As such, it is anticipated there that there would no significant negative residual impacts related to the direct physical injury of benthic species as a result of drilling the well. DTI (2003) suggest that recovery of affected areas of seabed from transient operations is expected to be rapid in the West of Shetland region. Recovery can be expected in less than five years through the actions of sediment mobility, faunal recovery and recolonisation. Localised loss of seabed habitat The seabed type found across the project area is common to the muddy plain in the centre of the Faroe-Shetland Channel. In the context of the area of seabed of this type available, the extent of seabed habitat impacted is negligible. Considering the nature of the habitat and species present and the small area impacted, it is therefore unlikely that there will be any significant residual impacts related to loss of seabed habitat.
It is likely that interference with the seabed during drilling will result in some sediment resuspension and resettlement. The use of ROVs close to the seabed may also cause minor disturbance to the seabed and localised resuspension of sediments. It is reported that the sedimentary environment of the area seaward of the continental shelf edge is dominated by low sediment input and deposition rates, and by reworking of surficial sediments by bottom current (DTI, 2003). It is therefore likely that the benthic species present will be tolerant, to some extent, of disturbance and resuspension of the seabed. If sedimentation does impact negatively on species, consequences are likely to be short-lived since most of the smaller sedentary species (such as polychaete worms) have short lifecycles and recruitment of new individuals from outside the narrow corridor of disturbance will be rapid. As such, recovery from the settlement of the fine particles will begin almost immediately. Residual impacts related to sediment resuspension are therefore likely to be negligible.
5.1.5 Residual impacts

No significant residual impacts are predicted.
5.1.6 Cumulative and transboundary impacts

Cumulative impacts In the strategic environmental assessment (SEA) undertaken for the West of Shetland area in which the project site is located, cumulative effects are reported as those effects of other oil and gas activity including both existing activities and new activities that have the potential to act additively with each other or those of other human activities (DTI, 2003). Potential sources of physical disturbance to the seabed were identified as rig and laybarge anchoring, wellheads and templates, jacket footings, and pipelay activities including trenching and rockdumping (DTI, 2003). The area of seabed likely to be directly impacted is extremely small relative to the Faroe-Shetland Channel area. DTI (2003) reported no negative cumulative impacts from seabed disturbance, considering only the positive impact from exclusion of fishing activities. Considering the effects of seabed disturbance are generally short-lived with the habitat rapidly returning to a similar state to which it was in predevelopment, cumulative seabed impacts are considered to be negligible.
Page 42
August 2011
Physical Presence
Transboundary impacts As the project is located approximately 30 km southeast of the UK-Faroe median line, the activities described are unlikely to result in any transboundary impacts on the seabed. The recent Offshore Energy SEA for UK waters (DECC, 2009b) reports that seabed impacts are unlikely to result in transboundary impacts and, even if they did, the scale and consequences of environmental effects in adjacent state territories would be less than those in UK waters and would be considered unlikely to be significant.
Notice to Mariners may be issued regarding the location of all associated vessels and rigs.
5.2.3 Potential impacts

Introduction Three types of vessels may be present at the well site at any one time, being the Stena Carron drillship continuously, the standby vessel continuously and visits from supply vessels approximately 3 times per week. Fishing interaction Since the well is being abandoned to below the mud line, no area of seabed will be permanently removed from use. The sea area in the immediate vicinity of the drillship (i.e. the 500 m safety zone) will be unavailable for use by other sea users during the installation period. This area of 0.785 km2 is of relatively low fishing intensity (Section 3.11.2) and this represents an insignificant loss of access in the context of the fishing resources available in the wider area. Dropped objects There is the potential for objects to be lost overboard during the drilling activities. If immediate retrieval is unsuccessful or unsafe, and a residual hazard is left behind to any other user of the sea, a PON2 notification will be made to DECC and associated notifications will be made to the FishSafe database and Kingfisher notification system. Actions to find and recover any such material will be discussed with the Regulator and appropriate actions will be agreed. As a result, there are likely to be no residual impacts associated with the presence of debris on the seabed.
5.2
Interaction with other sea users
5.2.1 Introduction
Drilling of the well will present a temporary obstacle to other sea users, and there is the potential for dropped objects. The potential risk of fishing gear and catch being damaged through interaction with the well will not occur since the wellhead will be cut and removed before leaving the site.
5.2.2 Regulatory control

The key Regulatory requirements that relate to the activities described in this section and which will assist in reducing the possible impact on other sea users are described in Appendix A and summarised here as follows: Part 4A of Energy Act 2008 covers navigational safety in UK waters in relation to offshore works programmes. This Act provides that where obstruction or danger to navigation is caused or is likely to result, the prior written consent of the Scottish Ministers is required for construction, alteration or improvement of any works, and the deposit or removal of any objects or materials below the level of Mean High Water Springs. The Act also requires that where materials are lost or discarded at sea, including any materials deposited under conditions of force majeure, which were not legally deposited in accordance with the Act, every reasonable attempt must be made to recover them. In the event of objects being dropped from an offshore installation, a PON2 must be submitted to DECC, MCA and SFF. Following the guidelines of the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS) Convention and the Merchant Shipping (Safety of Navigation) Regulations, information will be provided to the UK Hydrographic Office in order that a
5.2.4 Management and mitigation

Increased vessel presence Alongside the Stena Carron drillship, there will be a standby vessel. One of its functions will be surveillance and guard duties in the area to help prevent any conflict arising with other vessels in the area. The standby vessel will be present in the area at all times. The drilling activity will be notified in advance through the Kingfisher notification system so that other users are aware of the activity taking place.
August 2011
Page 43
Physical Presence
Dropped objects Dropped object prevention is an important and routine part of safety planning. A structured approach to the work will ensure safe and reliable operations and reduce the potential for objects to be dropped overboard.
5.2.5
Residual impacts
No significant residual impacts are expected.
5.2.6 Cumulative and transboundary impacts

Cumulative impacts The increased vessel activity associated with the project activities is of a nature similar to routine commercial shipping within an established development area of which the fishing industry and other sea users that use the region are well aware. Considered alongside the low levels of shipping in the project area and the wide expanse of water available to navigation in the West of Shetland region, it is not expected that there will be any cumulative impacts related to increased vessel presence. The additional and temporary exclusion zone for the project will represent only a minor increment to the existing area covered by exclusion zones to the west of Shetland. Considering the mitigation measures to be applied, it is very unlikely that there will be any cumulative impacts resulting from dropped objects. Transboundary impacts The Offshore Energy SEA for UK waters (DECC, 2009b) reports that impacts related to physical presence are unlikely to result in transboundary impacts and, even if they did, the scale and consequences of environmental effects in adjacent state territories would be less than those in UK waters and would be considered unlikely to be significant. No transboundary impacts resulting from dropped objects are predicted.
Page 44
August 2011
Discharges to Sea
Discharges to Sea
This chapter assesses the planned and permitted marine discharges from the project and the management and mitigation measures employed in order to adhere to legislation and achieve BPs goals.
also have a low environmental hazard profile. Chemicals will only be used in accordance with the PON15 permit conditions and according to BPs internal requirements. The Offshore Petroleum Activities (Oil Pollution Prevention and Control) Regulations 2005 (OPPC) (as amended) were implemented in order to meet the OSPAR goal of reduction in discharges of oil to the marine environment from offshore industries, and to ensure Best Available Techniques and Best Environmental Practice is used to minimise discharges of oil to sea. These regulations require a permit to be in place prior to the discharge of any reservoir oil to sea. During drilling operations, this can apply, for example, if any drill cuttings are discharged that contain reservoir hydrocarbons, or during well testing and cleanup if there are discharges of water. If the decision is taken to drill 1 the 12 /4 section, which may contain the Cardhu reservoir, with WBM, a request for an OPPC permit will be submitted. In this case, the main reservoir section (81/2) is being drilled with OBM and a discharge of drill cuttings from this section will not be made to sea as they will be taken ashore for treatment and disposal.
6.1
Introduction
Discharge to sea of drill cuttings and associated water-based drilling mud is planned and permitted as are discharges of cement associated with cementing the well casings. Discharges associated with vessel operations e.g. sewage discharges (regulated by MARPOL) and machinery space drainage (regulated under the Merchant Shipping Regulations) are considered to have a negligible environmental impact and are therefore not considered further.
6.2
Regulatory control
DECC has implemented the OSPAR Decision, relating to the Harmonised Mandatory Control System for the Use and Discharge of Offshore Chemicals, in the UK under the Offshore Chemicals Regulations 2002 (OCR). Under these Regulations, operators require a permit to use and discharge chemicals to sea. Operators need to assess the risks to the environment which might arise from the individual chemical use or discharge. A formal process of risk assessment is required, such as can be undertaken using the Chemical Hazard Assessment and Risk Management (CHARM) algorithms. Substances posing little or no risk (PLONOR) to the marine environment do not need a risk assessment. These assessments are detailed in the Operators application to DECC known as a PON15. Those chemicals that have less favourable toxicity, biodegradation and bioaccumulation properties are known as candidates for substitution, and their use is more strictly controlled and requires detailed justification. Once final engineering details and chemical requirements are known, and prior to the commencement of any drilling operations, BP will submit the relevant PON15 applications, supported by appropriate detailed chemical risk assessments, to DECC under the OCR in order to obtain approval prior to chemical use and discharge. As part of the PON15 process, BP will target candidates for substitution to ensure that chemicals are chosen that are fit for purpose but August 2011
6.3
Drilling discharges
6.3.1 Description
Planned and permitted discharges to sea during drilling operations include WBM, cuttings, cement and associated chemicals. OBM is generally used for the lower sections (12" and 8" sections) as it is more suitable for drilling through the shales typically found at this depth, for lubricating the longer drill string and for better well performance properties when drilling through the reservoir formation. Low toxicity mineral oil is planned to be used as the base fluid for these mud systems. OBMs reduce torque and drag as well as maintaining well bore quality and optimum conditions for high quality fracture identification, data acquisition and minimum formation damage. A final decision as to whether to use WBM or OBM for the 121/4 section is still under review. Chemicals are used in drilling a well to maintain the desired technical composition of the mud to facilitate the drilling of the well. Chemicals are included in mud formulations to lubricate the drill bit and in circumstances such as those that occur during lost circulation and stuck pipe. During the cementing phase of drilling a well, a number of chemicals are added to the mixwater (used to form the cement composition) to ensure the final cement has the necessary physiochemical (e.g. corrosion resistance, viscosity, pore size, etc) and Page 45
Discharges to Sea
mechanical properties (e.g. tensile and compressive strength) to achieve the desired performance. There are routes for these chemicals to be discharged to sea e.g. either as part of a drill mud formulation or cement mix water. Cementing operations may involve small discharges of cement when cementing the tophole sections back to the surface and when the cement unit is cleaned between each cementing operation. It is anticipated that the majority of cement will be mixed and used as required, and as a result there should be limited discharges of any mixed cement or mixwater. The following impacts are possible: Alteration to the seabed topography and sediment structure by settlement of the cuttings and mud on the seabed. Alteration of the seabed environment which can result in a change to the benthic community. This can be due to smothering and lack of oxygen as a result of deposition; impairment of feeding and respiratory system of organisms resulting from mud and cuttings deposition and increased concentrations of suspended
Section Diameter (inches) Section Length (m)
particles near the seabed; and toxic impact from the mud and additive chemicals used in the drilling operation.
6.3.2 Quantification
Approximately 1,502 tonnes (694 m3) of cuttings will be generated from drilling the well, as summarised in Table 6-1. Cuttings from the 36" and 26" sections (an estimated 835 tonnes) will be discharged directly at the seabed. The riser will be installed after the 26" section. WBM will be used to drill the 171/2" hole and possibly the 121/4" hole sections. If WBM is used for both sections, the mud and cuttings from the 17 and 12 (approximately 532 tonnes or 236m3) will be brought back to the rig and run over the shale shakers to reclaim as much of the WBM as possible and the cuttings will be discharged at the sea surface. If WBM is used in the 121/4" section an OPPC permit application will be submitted. If the 12" section is drilled with OBM, 153 tonnes of OBM and cuttings will be generated. The 8" section will be drilled with OBM and 135 tonnes of cuttings will be generated. For both OBM sections the drill cuttings and associated OBM will be
Weight of Cuttings (tonnes) 172
Discharge at seabed Fate of cuttings
Volume of Cuttings (m3)
36 26 17
92 692 943
86 316 172
663 379
Discharge at sea surface If drilled using WBM cuttings will be discharged at sea surface. If drilled using OBM cuttings will be skipped and shipped ashore, zero discharge. Skipped and shipped ashore, zero discharge -
121/4
743
64
153
8 main Total1
1,445 3,915
56 694 Contingency
135 1,502
8 bypass core sidetrack 8 /2 geological sidetrack

1
503 1604
20 62
47 149
Skipped and shipped ashore, zero discharge
Totals are from drilling of the 36", 26", 17", 12" and 8" sections - contingency sections are not included.
In the event of one or more additional sidetracks being drilled cutting quantities would increase.
Table 6-1: Mud types and quantity of cuttings for the well. Page 46 August 2011
Discharges to Sea
returned to the rig through the riser and run over the shale shakers to reclaim as much of the OBM as possible. The reclaimed OBM will remain in the active mud system and will be re-circulated. The cuttings and any OBM still adhered to them will be contained in skips onboard the installation and shipped to shore for treatment and disposal. On completion, OBM will also be contained and shipped to shore. At no point, will OBM be discharged into the marine environment. If the main bore through the reservoir shows that there are sufficient hydrocarbons in place, a decision may be taken to perform a bypass core sidetrack and a geological sidetrack. OBM would be used for both these sections if they were to be drilled and an additional 196 tonnes of cutting would be generated. These OBM cuttings would be handled as described above. In any hole section there is a low risk that the section will be lost due to hole collapse or getting a drilling assembly stuck. If this were to happen that hole section would have to be re-drilled and would use the same mud type as the original hole section and generate the same amount of cuttings. Cuttings would be handled as described above.
Cuttings contaminated with OBM (including the reservoir section) will be retained onboard for appropriate treatment and disposal onshore Reuse of mud system to reduce discharges.
The environmental impact of any chemical use during well operations will be addressed in the PON15B chemical permit application which will be submitted at the appropriate time for the project well. Typical types and volumes of chemicals are given in Table 6-2. BP policy on chemical use requires that the use and discharge of each chemical should be considered at least once a year and discussion will be held with suppliers about the availability of more environmentally benign chemicals.
6.4.1 Impact assessment

Burial of benthic organisms can result in mortality depending on the depth of cuttings deposition. Filter feeding organisms (for example, hydroids and bryozoans) that rely on suspended particles as a source of food may be more vulnerable to the smothering effects of the drilling discharges than scavenger organisms that rely on the deposition of suspended material. Barite consists of barium sulphate, an insoluble, chemically inert mineral powder that normally contains measurable concentrations of several trace metals. Barium is considered biologically unavailable and is unlikely to have a measurable effect on the benthic fauna (Jenkins et al, 1989; Hartley, 1996). The environmental impact of other trace metals will depend on their concentration in the WBM contaminated cuttings, which in turn depends partially on the geological source of the barite. However, Neff et al. (1989), found that metals
Completion/ clean-up Used 274 8 0.1 2 36 0 0 Discharged 9 1 0 2 0 0 0 Used 3,493 18 0.2 2 225 0 2,450 Totals Discharged 553 1 0.1 2 9 0 0
6.4
Management and mitigation
In line with BP policy, the following will be addressed during detailed well design and final chemical selection for all drilling related operations: Selection of WBM chemicals with least potential for environmental impact Environmental risk assessment on the use and discharge of chemicals and identification of measures to reduce risk
Category
Drilling chemicals Used Discharged 462 0 0 0 1 0 0
Cementing chemicals Used 2,707 0 0.1 0 188 0 0 Discharged 82 0 0.1 0 8 0 0
PLONOR (E) Other E D C Gold Silver Z
512 10 0 0 1 0 2,450
Table 6-2: Summary of generic chemical use and discharge during well operations August 2011 Page 47
Discharges to Sea
associated with drilling muds have a very low bioavailability to the marine organisms that might come into contact with discharged drilling fluids. The water column is likely to be impacted for short periods during the discharge of fine solids associated with WBM, namely fine barite and bentonite particles in the lower water column from the riserless drilling of the 36 and 26 sections of the well. There is likely to be a smaller impact from 1 drilling of the 17 section and possible the 12 /4 section (drilled with a riser and discharge at the sea surface) which can disperse more widely through the water column. In both cases, no significant and lasting environmental impact is predicted. The water column impacts are expected to be short term and localised which aligns with the findings published from impact studies for drilling (such as the 1,000 fold dilution that is expected within 10 minutes of discharge (Neff, 2005) and the DREAM-related research (e.g. 2006 TNO report regarding the potential environmental impact on the water column of weighting agents in drilling mud). The area is not used widely as a fish spawning or nursery area. Therefore it is not predicted that there is any significant impact on commercial fish species from the drilling activities. Near the well, the tophole cuttings can be expected to lead to deposition with a thickness of between 1 mm and 200 mm centred on the well and these thicknesses typically only occur within less than 500 m of the well site, and this is supported by published studies (Neff, 2005) which show localised accumulation of solids near the well. Discharge from the drillship of WBM cuttings from the 17 hole section and possibly the 121/4 hole section would be extremely well dispersed through the water column over a wide area. Smothering or burial will be limited to the areas of sediment with the higher deposition, e.g. 1 cm thickness and above. SINTEF (2006) concluded that in general, a thickness of 6.5 mm can be adopted as a threshold at which 5% of the most sensitive species would be affected, which is deemed a tolerable risk level in EU Guidance on chemical discharges. In the areas where there is less deposition, the infaunal organisms will not be smothered and it is expected that they would move through this surface layer of deposition. With regard to the benthic organisms present, although some smothering is likely to result in mortalities, there are species present that will tolerate and recover from the impacts. Page 48
As there will be no deposition of an impermeable layer on the seabed, the infaunal species are expected to be able to relocate through the deposited material to their preferred depth. Studies at the Laggan drill site west of the Shetland Islands, in around 600 m water depth, on the impact of physical disturbance on the megabenthic species by drilling activities (Jones et al. 2007) showed that there were high levels of physical disturbance (smothering) of the seabed 50-120 m from the drill site, and that this resulted in variable levels of disruption to the megabenthic community. Measurable effects on the megabenthos have been recorded up to 200 m from the drill site, however the data suggest that these effects are limited (Jones and Gates, 2010). The diversity of the megabenthic community was reduced towards the drill site, as is typical of areas of physical impact. The magnitude of the changes in diversity and abundance were dependant on the mobility of the species investigated (Jones and Gates, 2010). The recovery of the seabed will start immediately once the deposition is finished. The benthic infauna e.g. the burrowing brittlestar Amphohiura sp and the burrowing suspension feeding amphipod Haploops sp. will start bioturbation immediately. Re-colonisation of smothered sediments will also start immediately from mobile organisms moving into the impacted area. The impact from the deposition is expected to be localised and is not expected to result in significant adverse impacts. There is likely to be a good potential for recovery of any seabed impacted by sedimentation of drilling solids due to the species present.
6.4.2 Residual impacts

No significant residual impacts are predicted.
August 2011
Underwater Noise
Underwater Noise
The methodologies available for assessing the potential impacts that man-made underwater noise may have on marine mammals have seen a period of rapid development in recent years, although the scientific evidence remains incomplete and inconclusive. This EIA has utilised up-to-date scientific information and applied the most recent JNCC guidelines in an attempt to assess the significance of any potential impacts from the project. This chapter also includes an assessment of whether or not the project will cause disturbance of European Protected Species (EPS) as defined in the Offshore Marine Regulations.
to communicate and to determine the presence of predators, food and underwater features (OSPAR, 2009b). The potential impact of sound upon marine receptors has received increased attention in recent years. This has primarily focused on the potential effect that sound has on marine mammal species, although effects on fish are also being looked at. There are a number of activities associated with the project that will be notable sources of underwater noise. These include the drillship, seismic survey (Vertical Seismic Profile),vessel activity and the potential explosive noise associated with the removal of the wellhead, should use of a mechanical cutting tool be ineffective. These activities have the potential to increase underwater sound levels and cause acoustically induced noise impacts upon marine mammals and other acoustically sensitive species in the vicinity of the project. The UK oil and gas industry recognises that more information is required concerning the effects of sound emissions and currently has a joint industry project in place to better define and understand the environmental risk of offshore operations with respect to noise (OGP, 2010).
7.1
Introduction
Underwater sound is generated by a number of natural sources including plate tectonics, rain, breaking waves and also to a lesser extent biological sources for example the vocalisations of marine-life. The combination of all hydrological, physical and biological noise sources contributes towards the ambient noise, or background noise. Globally, ambient noise levels have increased. This has been particularly associated with increases in the utilisation of the oceans for shipping and other industrial activities, including oil and gas. A number of oil and gas activities can generate high levels of underwater sound. Research in this area has focused primarily on the activities which generate impulsive sound, notably seismic surveys and piling of offshore structures. In addition the use of underwater explosives in decommissioning activities has also been studied. Any form of offshore development will invariably require the use of vessels. In this project, a specialist deep water drillship will be used which will be supported by supply vessels and a standby vessel. Sound from vessels is fundamentally different to piling or seismic sounds in that it is categorised as a continuous noise, and that there are no sudden rises or falls in pressure. Sound produced by vessels is the dominant contributor to background noise levels in the North Sea. Marine mammals (including the baleen and toothed whales) use sound to communicate with members of their own species. Toothed whales also use sound to build up an image of their environment and to detect prey and predators through echolocation (Tyack, 2008). The introduction of additional noise, man-made or otherwise, into the marine environment has the ability to interfere with the ability of these animals August 2011
7.2
Regulatory control
The Habitat Regulations (HR) and Offshore Marine Regulations (OMR) prohibit the deliberate capture, injury, killing or disturbance of any wild animals of a European Protected Species. Certain animals, including all species of cetaceans, are listed in Annex IV as in need of strict protection (called European Protected Species, EPS). The OMR 2009 amendment revised the existing disturbance offence. Specifically, Regulation 39(1) of both the HR and OMR provide that a person is guilty of an offence if he deliberately captures, injures, or kills any wild animal of an EPS or deliberately disturbs wild animals of any such species. The legislation defines an act of disturbance as any which is likely to impair the ability of the affected species to survive, breed or reproduce, or to rear or nurture their young. In the case of animals of a hibernating or migratory species, any activity which might interfere with these activities is classed as a disturbance. In addition, any activity that may significantly affect the local distribution or abundance of the species to which they belong constitutes a disturbance.
Page 49
Underwater Noise
Figure 7-1: Typical cetacean audiograms showing a number of species for which such data are available (based on Nedwell et al., 2004). Annex II species (i.e. Annex II of the Habitats Directive) previously recorded in the area of the project include the harbour porpoise, the bottlenose dolphin and the grey seal, with sightings of each being very rare. In general these animals are more associated with shallower waters. porpoise, with a bandwidth of 200 Hz to 180 kHz (Southall et al. 2007). Typical audiograms for odontocete species are shown in Figure 7-1. The odontocete species occurring around the project area with the most regularity and highest densities include the longfinned pilot, killer and sperm whales. Midfrequency cetaceans will predominate at the project area. Baleen whales (mysticetes) appear to be more sensitive to low and moderate frequency sounds (this species group has an estimated auditory bandwidth of 7 Hz to 22 kHz) and lack the high frequency echolocation system common to toothed whales (Southall et al. 2007). Recent evidence suggests that some vocalisation may occur at higher frequencies (e.g. humpback whale, Au et al. 2006) and that functional hearing capabilities may extend up to 30 kHz (Ketten et al. 2007), but these are likely to be exceptions for this group. An estimated audiogram for a baleen whale, few of which exist for this group of species, is shown in Figure 7-1. The sensitivity of baleen whales to lower frequencies could make them more susceptible to effects from industrial noise than toothed varieties whose sensitivity seems poor at the lower frequencies (Southall et al. 2007) where most industrial noise is concentrated (Marine Mammal Commission, 2007). The baleen whales likely to be present with any regularity in the wider project area are the sei and fin whales with humpbacked and blue whales occurring less frequently (see Chapter 4). August 2011
7.3
Marine mammals and sound
Marine mammals use sound for a variety of purposes, including foraging and communication. The communication calls of toothed whales (odontocetes) are mainly in the moderate to high frequencies between 1 kHz and tens of kHz, producing sounds across the widest frequency bands that have been observed in animals (Southall et al. 2007). Toothed species also have highly developed echolocation systems that operate at intermediate to very high frequencies (tens of kHz to 100+ kHz, Southall et al. 2007). As a result of the wide range of sounds emitted, estimated auditory bandwidths are likely to cover a relatively wide frequency range. Toothed whales can be divided into two broad categories based on their auditory bandwidths: Mid-frequency cetaceans, including common, bottlenose and Rissos dolphins and killer, sperm and long-finned pilot whales, with an auditory bandwidth of 150 Hz to 160 kHz High-frequency cetaceans, including
Page 50
Underwater Noise
Activity/Vessel Source noise level (peak dB re1Pa @ 1m unless specified) 195 dB (rms) re1Pa @ 1m Dominant frequencies produced (Hz) 100-400
Temporal nature
Drillship
Duration of the operation Short-term 24 hours
Seismic operations
224- >240 dB but highly dependant on specifics of seismic array and airgun, low frequency 136 dB (rms) re1Pa @ 1m 1/3rd octave broad band source level 191.5 dB re 1 Pa 149 dB (rms) 100-200
Guard vessel
Duration of the operation
Supply vessel (with thrusters)
20 1,000
Duration of the operation
Helicopters (Bell 212 altitude 152 m) Explosives well head removal
22 (tonal)
Short term drilling activity
Charge weight specific 232 dB 1Pa @ 300m
6-21
Instantaneous
Table 7-1: Noise sources relevant to the project (Breitzke et al., 2008; Wyatt, 2008; McCauley, 1998; Nedwell et al, 2001; Nedwell and Edwards, 2004; Nedwell et al., 2007; ITAP, 2005; Nedwell et al., 2002; Richardson et al., 1995). Seals (Phocids) are unlikely to be found with any regularity in the project area due to its offshore location and will not be considered further in this assessment. primary sources of uncertainty stems from difficulties in determining the effects of behavioural or physiological changes on an animals ability to survive grow or reproduce (NRC, 2005). To date, no universal conclusion on the effect of sound can be drawn or is likely to emerge in the near future (OSPAR, 2009b). The problems of investigation and study of marine animals is compounded given the inherent difficulties of observing them in their natural environment. Given the above constraints, it is highly unlikely that the effects of sound on marine animals, particularly at the population level, will ever be fully understood. However, it is generally accepted that exposure to anthropogenic sound can induce a range of adverse effects on marine life. These range from insignificant impacts to significant behavioural changes and also include non-injurious type effects including masking of biologically relevant sound signals, such as communication signals. Activities that generate very high sound pressure levels (SPL) can cause auditory injuries and other types of physical injury and, in some circumstances, lead to the death of the receiver (Richardson et al. 1995, Southall et al. 2007). Organisms that are exposed to sound can be adversely affected over a short time-scale (acute effect) or a long time-scale (chronic effect). When evaluating the effects of underwater sound sources the key properties of the waveform that are important are peak pressure, received energy, signal duration and frequency range. Sound can cause a number of distinct auditory Page 51
7.4
Noise sources and potential impacts
7.4.1 Noise sources from the Project

Vessel activity is generally regarded as the main source of anthropogenic noise in the ocean but oil and gas shipping represents a considerable proportion of the gross vessel tonnage and is therefore also a significant contributor to ocean noise. The sources of noise that are applicable to the project are presented in terms of their relative sound pressure level and dominant frequencies in Table 7-1. Shipping sounds are continuous type sounds so the measurements of these are usually presented as root mean square (rms) values which provide an average of the sound of a measuring period, whereas impulsive type sounds (e.g. explosives) are best presented as peak sound pressure levels. Scientific studies have documented both the presence and absence of behavioural responses of marine life to various sound signals from anthropogenic activities. Biological significance of sound signals has not been well defined in many animal groups that are much more amenable to research than marine species on which there is considerably more data available. One of the August 2011
Underwater Noise
effects on marine receptors. These include either inducing a temporary reduction in hearing sensitivity (termed Temporary Threshold Shift, TTS) which is recoverable with time, or cause a permanent reduction in hearing sensitivity (termed Permanent Threshold Shift, PTS). This is a nonrecoverable auditory impact. A number of the impact criteria put forward for marine mammals specify thresholds capable of causing both TTS and PTS. The basic concept in deriving these values is to measure the faintest sound an animal can hear, then expose the animal to a noise stimulus and retest hearing. Measuring the noise just loud enough to cause a temporary reduction in hearing sensitivity gives a conservative estimate of the exposure that could pose a risk of injury if sustained or increased. Sound can also potentially induce a range of nonauditory effects, such as damaging body tissues, especially air filled cavities including swim bladder and muscle tissues (reviews in Richardson et al. 1995). However, research and understanding of non-auditory effects of sound on marine receptors is still in its infancy (OSPAR, 2009b).
form of rotatable propeller. This sound is caused by vacuum bubbles that are generated by the collapse of bubbles created by the spinning of the propellers. Cavitation noise includes both broadband noise due to bubble collapse, and tonal components that are related to blade passage frequency (Hildebrand, 2009). The thrusters will be used at all times to maintain position and will have to work at a higher output during periods of rough seas and high winds. Consequently the sound produced is expected to increase in line with activity of the thrusters. As a backup system to DP, GPS positioning transponders will be used. They consist of a hydroacoustic positioning system composed of both a transducer (that combines a transmitter and receiver/hydrophone) and beacons (transponders). A signal (pulse) is sent from the transducer on the ship to the seabed transponders. This pulse activates the transponders, which respond immediately, either with a single- or multi-phase response, to the vessel transducer/hydrophone. The exact position of the ship is calculated by determining the distance from the transponders. Six transponders will be used by the Stena Carron drillship. The exact sound characteristics of the Stena Carron have yet to be measured, however several studies have conducted measurements of sound from drillships which can be used as approximations for expected sound levels. It should be noted that the acoustic signature produced is typically vessel specific and highly dependent upon vessel activity at the time the measurement was recorded. Underwater noise measurements of the drillship West Navion, when drilling in deepwater west of the Hebrides, found that it had a broadband noise source in the range of 100 to 400 Hz with a source level of approximately 195 dB re1Pa (Nedwell & Edwards, 2004). Noise measurements indicated that within the 40 to 600 Hz frequency band there was a significant contribution of noise from the drillship at distances of 2 km and less, and at distances of 5 km and greater, the noise from the drillship in this frequency range had fallen to below background noise levels. In the frequency band of 600 to 1,000 Hz, the noise from the drillship was much lower than in the 40 to 600 Hz frequency band, but was dominating over a greater range, perhaps up to 10 km or more. During Passive Acoustic Monitoring (PAM) measurements made onboard the Stena Carron in 2009 prior to conducting VSP operations, the following observations were made (Chevron, 2010): August 2011
7.4.2 Assessment of noise sources

The noise sources detailed in Table 7-1 that may interact with marine life in the project area are discussed in further detail in the following sections. Drilling Ship The principal noise source from the drillship will be the system thrusters of the DP positioning system that is used to keep the drillship on station. Other sources of noise include sound radiating from the ships engines and the machinery used in the drilling process. As the hull is in contact with the water, sound levels can easily radiate into the water column. Studies have shown that underwater sound levels are higher nearer drillships than semi-submersibles, where the equipment is above the water line. Noise levels produced from drilling ships change depending upon the specific activity being performed and the types of machinery being used. For instance, noise levels from drilling itself are generally lower than noise levels from tripping which is when the drilling string is pulled out of the hole to change the drill-bit (Richardson et al., 1995). Given the similarity of drillships to vessels, it is reasonable to believe that many of the same sources and radiation mechanisms are common. All forms of propeller have the potential to produce cavitation noise including thrusters which are a Page 52
Underwater Noise
There was a constant background hum which was estimated to be operational noise emanating from the vessel. This elevated sound levels across frequencies below 12 kHz but did not significantly mask other sounds occurring in this frequency range. The vessel's GPS positioning transponders emitted a pulsed blip at around 23 kHz approximately every 3 seconds. The thrusters which were used to keep the vessel geostationary were making noise intermittently and the noise level was heavily dependent upon prevailing weather and power level of thrusters. During periods of high seas, thrusters would emit noise for approximately 30s to 1 minute 3 to 5 times every 10 minutes or so. Thrusters sound consisted of a series of loud pulsed oscillating signals spanning the frequency spectrum (2-24 kHz). This sound source was not present when thrusters were not activated.
will cause a transient increase in underwater sound levels along flight corridors and landing areas. Vessels A number of vessels will be involved in the project execution. The drillship itself is a source of vessel noise. Other vessels used include a standby vessel and supply vessel. Acoustic broad band source levels typically increase with increasing vessel size, with smaller vessels (< 50 m) having source levels 160-175 dB (re 1Pa), medium size vessels (50-100 m) 165180 dB (re 1Pa) and large vessels (> 100 m) 180190 dB (re 1Pa) (OSPAR 2009b, Richardson et al. 1995). Sound emanating from shipping and vessel movements is predominantly low frequency being below 1 kHz (Ulrick, 1983). It is recognised that there is potential for shipping generated sounds to mask the hearing of marine mammals that produce and receive sounds in this range. The group of marine mammals of most concern are the baleen whales. The potential for masking at higher frequencies (1 to 25 kHz) exists when the vessel is in close proximity to the animal, as beyond this range higher frequency sounds have attenuated in power and are not of concern. The potential for permanent hearing damage from occasional exposure is very low. The vessel noise associated with the guard vessels and support vessels will be present for a limited time period only. However they will contribute to background noise levels in the area during that period. Seismic survey Airguns used in geophysical surveys can produce high levels of predominantly low frequency sound. Upon drilling the well a vertical seismic profile (VSP) may be conducted. The VSP is required to provide better information on the reservoir structure, including wellborn data and highresolution imaging of the subsurface rock strata. A VSP survey involves the firing of several airguns at various time intervals to produce a distinct, short-duration source of relatively high intensity impulse noise, which is detected and recorded by a number of geophones/hydrophones installed at controlled depths within the well. The VSP source configuration is expected to consist of two airguns, each being 250 cubic inch array with a total capacity of 500 cubic inches. Upon drilling the well, the geophones will be lowered into the well and the seismic source suspended over the side of Page 53
Noise from the drillship is not expected to cause any injury or hearing loss to cetaceans present or passing the site. Any disturbance will be localised both spatially and temporally. Helicopter flights There is an abundance of information of airborne sound levels from commercial helicopter flights. However there have been only a few studies which have taken measurements of the underwater noise generated by helicopters. Low-flying helicopters used to transfer personnel will increase underwater noise levels especially during take-off and landing when flight heights are lower. Helicopter sound originates from the disturbance of the sea surface by the down wash from the blades and by coupling of blade noise directly into the sea. Although helicopter sound is fairly broad band (0-20 kHz), the lower frequency sound is much more pronounced (up to 200 Hz). Levels and durations of sounds received underwater from passing aircraft depend on the altitude and aspects of the aircraft, receiver depth and water depth. In general, peak received level in the water as an aircraft passes directly overhead decreases with altitude (Richardson et al. 1995). The number of helicopter flights will increase for the transportation of personnel and equipment to the project area during drilling activities and this August 2011
Underwater Noise
the drillship and the airgun array activated. The shot point interval will vary during the planned seismic programme and will be between 10-20 seconds apart with 5-10 minute gaps between shot groups when downhole tool is moved. Shots will be fired downhole into the well at intervals of 5-10 minutes as the downhole tool is moved. The seismic programme will typically take less than 24 hours to complete. Explosive use decommissioning Should mechanical removal of the wellhead not be successful, BP will use an explosive charge to cut the well head casing so that it can be lifted from the seafloor. The final decommissioning plan has yet to be determined and the information relating to explosive use is provisional. If explosives are used, a similar procedure will be followed to the Alligin wellhead removal. This is likely to comprise of an explosive charge being placed into the centre of the wellhead at a depth of 3-4 m below the mud line. The wellhead charge will comprise a 16 diameter fabricated cylinder, prefilled with a mixture of Nitromethane (UN Class 3 Flammable Liquid) and Diethylenetriame (UN Class 8 Corrosive), which together form the explosive compound diazomethane. The charge size in terms of mass is approximately 86 lb based on 40 litre capacity of the charge volume. The understanding of underwater explosions and the effect on the surrounding environment is a well documented topic. When an explosive is detonated in deep water, the energy released is mainly divided into the radiating shock wave and a pulsating gaseous bubble. In general, the partition of the energy into these two mechanisms is dictated by the explosive type. The primary shock wave radiates spherically outwards from the explosion source greater than the speed of sound (~1500 m/s in water) and then attenuates over distance to a pressure wave at sonic velocity. This is characterised at a set distance by an extremely rapid (near instantaneous) rise in pressure to a peak value at its leading edge followed by a more gradual decline back to the static pressure. The sound pressure levels generated by explosives detonated in the water can be very high. Nedwell (2001) measured sound pressure levels during a well head decommissioning campaign in the North sea and recorded received sound pressure levels as high as 232 dB (zeropeak) re1Pa@300m from the well head, but
would be far higher at closer distances to the wellhead.
7.5
Noise modelling and potential impact
7.5.1 Introduction
In order to estimate potential sound levels, various modelling scenarios will be provided using appropriate source levels for the activity in question. To determine the consequences of the received levels on any marine mammals which might experience such noise emissions, it is necessary to relate the levels to known or estimated impact thresholds. There have been various impact criteria proposed for marine mammals, although the Southall criteria appear to have gained the widest acceptance within the regulatory and scientific community in the UK. Southall and his co-workers produced a comprehensive review of the evidence for impacts of underwater noise on marine mammals and proposed criteria for preventing injury to mammals based on both Peak Sound Levels and Sound Exposure Level (SEL) and also thresholds for pulsed and non-pulsed sounds (Southall et al. 2007) (Table 7-2). As there are always two choices of impact criterion that can be used (Peak or SEL) for any situation, when applying these criteria, Southall recommends the use of more conservative exposure criteria (i.e. whichever criteria is exceeded first). Vessel noise The principal sound sources will be the drillship and other vessels present permanently during activities including a standby vessel and supply vessels. In order to present a prediction of the underwater sound levels from the vessels used at the project area, the two vessels that were expected to generate the loudest levels of sound were modelled. These were the drillship and the supply vessel. The source levels of the standby vessel are expected to be comparable, albeit lower than the supply vessel. The source characteristics used in the modelling were obtained from underwater noise measurements of the supply vessel Supplier III given in Brueggeman et al. (1990) and the Drillship Canmar Explorer II provided in Greene (1986).
Page 54
August 2011
Underwater Noise
Marine Mammal functional hearing group Sound Type Single pulses (e.g. explosive use) Multiple pulses (e.g. piling)
Non-pulses (e.g. shipping noise)
Low-frequency cetaceans Sound pressure level 230 dB re: 1 Pa (0-peak) 230 dB re: 1 Pa (0peak) 198 dB re: 1 Pa -s (Mlf)
2
230 dB re: 1 Pa (0-peak)
Sound exposure level
198 dB re: 1 Pa -s (Mlf)
215 dB re: 1 Pa -s (Mlf)
Mid-frequency cetaceans Sound pressure level 230 dB re: 1 Pa (0-peak) (flat) 230 dB re: 1 Pa (0peak) 198 dB re: 1 Pa -s (Mmf)
2
198 dB re: 1 Pa -s (Mmf)
215 dB re: 1 Pa -s (Mmf)
High-frequency cetaceans Sound pressure level 230 dB re: 1 Pa (0-peak) (flat) 230 dB re: 1 Pa (0peak) 198 dB re: 1 Pa -s (Mhf)
2
198 dB re: 1 Pa -s (Mhf)
215 dB re: 1 Pa -s (Mhf)
Pinnipeds (in water) Sound pressure level 218 dB re: 1 Pa (0-peak) 218 dB re: 1 Pa (0peak) 186 dB re: 1 Pa -s (Mpw)
2
186 dB re: 1 Pa -s (Mpw)
203 dB re: 1 Pa -s (Mpw)
Table 7-2 Southall et al. noise assessment criteria. they were taken reflect temporary situations (e.g. standby vessel under way rather than stationary, installation/maintenance vessel operating), this makes the composite picture conservative. Long term exposure would be based on a representative mixture of such activities over time, rather than the snapshot illustrated here. The model results for a 30 km square around the Drillship, with the supply vessel offset 1 km away from the drillship are shown in Figure 7-2. The results of the modelling indicate a decrease in the sound pressure level with distance from the vessels. The higher frequencies components of the sound attenuate more quickly, and at a distance of 10 km away the sound signal is expected to fall below the ambient sound level, Figure 7-3 illustrates the decrease in the signal in relation to ambient levels. The noise from the vessels can be seen to have little effect on the noise climate of the deep water environment of the Faroe-Shetland Channel. However the contribution that vessels make will increase dependent upon vessel activity and during periods where dynamic positioning is used.
The modelling of vessel sound applies the parameters developed by Marsh and Schulkin (1962). The approach allows prediction of varying levels throughout the water depth. It does not take account of variations in salinity and temperature over depth. Given the uncertainties inherent in the source data, it is unlikely that incorporating reflection, refraction and sound speed effects from such variations would make a material difference to the conclusions, but if more accurate source and ambient noise levels were to be available in the future, such modelling should be undertaken to enable the noise field to be better understood. The modelling used has been run for a muddy sediment environment in a water depth of 1,300 m. As the model was developed to take into account variations in the sound speed profile with depth, it is able to provide an indication of received sound levels with varying depth. The model is able to take into account sea state and weather conditions and, for the purposes of the modelling, a calm sea was chosen when the model was run. In some respects these source levels might be interpreted as being upper bounds on the sources present in that, although the operations from which August 2011
Page 55
Underwater Noise
It can be concluded that vessel noise is a significant part of the noise landscape within tens of kilometres of the drillship. Beyond this distance the sound from the vessels is expected to be indistinguishable from other ambient source. There is no evidence to suggest these impacts are significant, but it is also the case that some of the source levels, particularly the Drillship, are not well characterised, and the science of predicting sound exposure over time (versus short term threshold levels) is quickly emerging.
dB re1Pa@1m and it can be expected the airgun array will generate a similar source level (Roth and Schmidt, 2010). Seismic surveys are subject to permitting requirements (through the PON14a application process), therefore an impact assessment (including an EPS assessment) for the VSP will be undertaken once the full seismic programme details are known. Explosive use The prediction of the sound pressure level has applied the underwater sound equations that are applicable to explosives. Following an explosive detonation the pressure reduction takes the form of an exponential decay and can be represented by the following equation: P (t) = Pmax e Where:
P (t) = Pressure as function of time Pmax = maximum peak shock pressure = time constant t = time
- t/
Figure 7-2 Noise predictions for operational noise from drillship and supply vessel.
180 160 140

Noise level dB
This empirical law has been developed by systematic experiments. It is widely accepted that the pressure-time curve of a shock wave can be quantified using these scaling laws which were established and presented in Underwater Explosions by Robert H. Cole. In his textbook, Cole describes the following equations for a chemical explosion in open water. Pmax = K1 ( W1/3 / R )
120 100 80 60 40 20 10 100 1000 Frequency Hz 10000 100000
Predicted noise level
Where:
Drill Ship Sound Levell Ambient Noise
Pmax is the maximum peak pressure (psi) K1 is a constant W is the explosive charge weight (lb) R is straight line distance between explosive charge and structure (ft) is an exponent
Figure 7-3 Sound frequency spectrum produced by Drillship at source (blue line) and predicted frequency spectrum at 10km (orange line) compared to ambient sound level of the North Sea (red line). Seismic survey The seismic array being used has not been characterised, although airguns with similar volumes have been. A three gun Sercel array with a greater total cubic inch volume (1150) produced a peak sound pressure level of 236 Page 56
The U.S. Naval Surface Warfare Centre scientist William Faux, measured the shocks resulting from mud-buried explosive charges used to sever subsea well conductors during oilfield abandonment procedures in the Gulf of Mexico. The constant K and the exponent were adjusted to agree with the measured shock data and have been applied in the model. Fauxs Law has been universally accepted in the explosives wellhead abandonment service for over 20 years and are recognised in the UK by the Institute of Explosives Engineers entrance examinations. Using the formulae applied in Fauxs Law for a 86 lb charge, the approximate water pressure August 2011
Underwater Noise
pulse at various distances from the charge location can be modelled. This is converted to decibels by log transformations and then referenced to the standard unit of measurement of sound in water (1Pa). Figure 7-4 shows the results of applying this approach to the charge size and water depth at the North Uist location.
7.6
Management and mitigation measures
7.6.1 Vessel noise

The generation of vessel noise is largely unavoidable and no practical measures are possible to reduce this, although the sound levels are not considered to be significant.
7.6.2 Seismic Survey

The JNCC seismic survey guidelines (2010) will be followed during the VSP operation. The measures taken are likely to include; Use of Marine Mammal Observers Use of Passive Acoustic Monitoring Increased length of pre-shooting search in deep waters
7.6.3 Explosive use

If explosive charges are required for wellhead removal operations, these will be carried out in accordance with the guidelines for minimising the risk of disturbance and injury to marine mammals whilst using explosives, (JNCC, 2010). The mitigation measures likely to be used include Use of Marine Mammal Observers Use of an absolute minimum of explosives for the operation but enough to ensure a repeat operation is not necessary. Consideration will be given to the use of an Acoustic Deterrent Devices (ADD), deployed at the well head location prior to the use of explosives. However, BP are not aware of any commercially available ADDs that have operating depths suitable to a deep water environment.
Figure 7-4 Peak pressure modelling for explosive wellhead severance.
The sound pressure levels are very high in the immediate vicinity of the explosive source ~260 dB re1Pa@1 m. The sound pressure levels progressively decrease in both a lateral direction and vertical direction from the source. Peak sound pressure levels are expected to exceed the physical impact criteria as proposed by Southall (2007) out to a distance of 1 km. Peak sound pressure levels are not expected to be greater than 230 dB in waters shallower than 350 m, or a lateral distance of 300 m from the source. Therefore it would only be marine mammal species capable of diving to deep depths (e.g. sperm whale, beaked whales and pilot whales) that are expected to be at potential risk of physical injury, Other marine species such as fish and benthic fauna could potentially be injured by the blast, although there are no formally agreed impact thresholds to apply. The potential impact ranges may be similar to cetaceans, in that risk of physical injury is restricted to areas in close proximity <1 km to the wellhead. The dominant frequencies of the sound pulse are expected to be low frequency <100 Hz. Due to the low frequency components the underwater sound pulse from an explosion could be detectable tens of kilometres from the wellhead location.
Prior to any explosive use, BP will submit an environmental narrative describing the project and proposed mitigation measures to DECC and JNCC to obtain feedback on the proposed activity and mitigation measures. An end of wellhead removal report, detailing the marine mammals sighted, methods used to detect them and any problems encountered will be submitted to the JNCC.
7.7
Residual impacts
7.7.1 Vessel noise

The sound from vessels is not expected to cause any physical injury to marine mammals and it is
August 2011
Page 57
Underwater Noise
unlikely that there will be any hearing damage as a result of vessel noise. Vessel noise will, however, continue to form the largest element of the local ambient for the duration of drilling activity.
particularly busy region for shipping and that vessel presence is temporary, the additional noise from vessels linked to the project is unlikely to increase the baseline noise signature significantly.
7.7.5 Transboundary impacts

The project area is approximately 30 km from the UK-Faroe median line. Although the modelling has indicated it is unlikely, there is a possibility that underwater noise from the project may be detectable above ambient levels in Faroese waters. DECC (2009c) report that there is the potential for underwater noise on the UK to exert transboundary effects. Whilst this same sentiment is noted by DTI (2003) in the SEA for the area in which the project is sited, DTI (2003) conclude that there are no identified transboundary effects in which environmental consequences in a neighbouring state are overwhelmingly due to activities resulting from licensed activity in the region. Overall the level of any sound received in Faroese waters will be very low and not anticipated to result in any adverse impacts.
7.7.2 Seismic survey

Providing the mitigation measures are followed, there should be no risk to marine mammals from physical injury and therefore no residual impacts.
7.7.3 Explosive use

Providing the mitigation measures are followed the risk to marine mammals from physical injury is very low, and there are not anticipated to be any residual impacts.
7.7.4 Cumulative impacts

Cumulative effects can result from a situation where two or more sound sources are operational at the same time. This could occur if a number of vessels are simultaneously operating using DP (e.g. where two support vessels come together). The potential for impact is limited by the number of vessels operating, which is restricted to a drillship and a standby vessel, while the period over which use will occur is relatively short. There are not anticipated to be any cumulative impacts as a result of the contingency use of explosives. The modelling has indicated that the sound levels from the drillship will largely attenuate to background levels within approximately 10 km and it is not likely that noise sources will overlap with other oil and gas activities in the Faroe-Shetland region. There are also likely to be inputs from other anthropogenic sources that are unrelated to the oil and gas industry including shipping, fishing vessels and military exercises. Operations that are part of the project will add to background noise levels but the nature of the anticipated noise sources, the short duration of activities and low levels of shipping suggest that significant cumulative noise effects are unlikely. The recent Offshore Energy SEA environmental report (DECC, 2009c) concluded that cumulative acoustic effects are more likely to result from continuous operational noise (presumably including vessel activity) than from pulse noise. Considering that the project area is not a
7.8
European protected species (EPS) risk assessment
7.8.1 Background
BP must assess whether or not the noise emitting operations for the project may cause an injury or disturbance offence to any species designated as an EPS. If this is the case, BP will be required to apply for an EPS licence. The process for determining the likelihood of an offence occurring, and consequently the requirement for an EPS licence is described by JNCC (2010b) and involves a two-stage approach of risk assessment for the offences detailed above. The first step (a Stage I EPS risk assessment) requires an assessment of the likelihood of committing an offence, where alternatives and mitigation measures are taken into account. The Stage I EPS risk assessment will itself consist of two main components: determination of the likelihood of an injury offence and determination of the likelihood of a disturbance offence. This will require a review of: The duration and frequency of the activity;
Page 58
August 2011
Underwater Noise
Figure 7-5: The two-stage EPS licence application process (After JNCC, 2010b). The intensity and frequency of sound and extent of the area where injury/disturbance thresholds could be exceeded, taking into consideration species-specific sensitivities; The interaction with other concurrent, preceding or subsequent activities in the area (in-combination effects); The Southall et al. (2007) thresholds for injury and behavioural responses, and other relevant published studies; Whether the local abundance or distribution could be significantly affected.
7.8.2 Stage I EPS risk assessment

Noise assessment methodology The most recent JNCC guidance regarding assessing the likelihood of noise impacts on cetaceans (JNCC, 2010 draft) proposes that physical injury, such as a permanent threshold shift in hearing to an EPS would constitute an injury offence. The guidance also proposes that a disturbance offence may occur when there is a risk of animals incurring sustained or chronic disruption of behaviour or when animals are displaced from an area, with subsequent redistribution being significantly different from that occurring due to natural variation. The risk of either offence will be higher in areas where EPS occur frequently and/or in high densities. Conversely, the risk will be negligible in areas where EPS are unlikely to occur, occur irregularly or where the same individuals are unlikely to remain in the same area for long periods of time (JNCC, 2010 draft), as is considered the case for the project area. Injury offence To assess the possibility of an injury offence, it is necessary to consider both the likelihood that the sound will exceed injury thresholds and the likelihood that the sensitive receptors will be exposed to that sound (Figure 7-6). As detailed, certain activities that produce loud sounds in areas where animals of an EPS could be present have the potential to result in an injury offence unless appropriate mitigation measures are implemented. It is important to consider the Page 59
If the Stage I EPS risk assessment concludes that an offence of either form is still likely, and the applicant determines that there are no other available options or methods, the EPS licence assessment process (a Stage II EPS licence assessment) must be initiated. This comprises three tests which are used to determine the likely consequences of any activity for which an EPS licence is sought. The two-stage EPS licence application process is summarised in Figure 7-5. In accordance with the regulations, and following the methodology outlined by JNCC (2010b), a Stage I EPS risk assessment will be conducted for the relevant activities. The following sections assesses if an EPS licence is required for the explosives activity only.
August 2011
Underwater Noise
levels of sounds emitted and the distance from the sound source within which species could be injured.
circumstances of the situation of concern with empirical studies that have carefully controlled variables. The guidance (JNCC, 2010 draft) suggest that a score of 5 or more on the Southall et al. (2007) behavioural response severity scale (Table 7-3) could be significant. The more severe the response on the scale, the lower the amount of time that the animals will tolerate it before there could be significant negative effects on life functions, which would constitute disturbance under the relevant regulations.
Figure 7-6: Approach to risk assessment for injury (After JNCC, 2010b). The injury offence is only applicable to seismic surveys and explosive use as vessels are unlikely to cause high levels of sound capable of causing physical injury. Disturbance offence To assess the possibility of a disturbance offence, it is necessary to consider both the likelihood that the sound could cause non-trivial disturbance and the likelihood that the sensitive receptors will be exposed to that sound (Figure 7-7).
Figure 7-7: Approach to risk assessment for disturbance (After JNCC, 2010 draft). Southall et al. (2007) recommended that the only currently feasible way to assess whether a specific sound could cause disturbance is to compare the Page 60 August 2011
Underwater Noise
Response score 0 1 2 Corresponding behaviours in free-ranging subjects No observable response Brief orientation response Moderate or multiple orientation behaviours Brief or minor cessation/modification of vocal behaviour Brief or minor change in respiration rates Prolonged orientation behaviour Individual alert behaviour Minor changes in locomotion speed, direction, and/or dive profile but no avoidance of sound source Moderate change in respiration rate Minor cessation or modification of vocal behaviour Moderate changes in locomotion speed, direction, and/or dive profile but no avoidance of sound source Brief, minor shift in group distribution Moderate cessation or modification of vocal behaviour Extensive or prolonged changes in locomotion speed, direction, and/or dive profile but no avoidance of sound source Moderate shift in group distribution Change in inter-animal distance and/or group size (aggregation or separation) Prolonged cessation or modification of vocal behaviour (duration > duration of source operation) Minor or moderate individual and/or group avoidance of sound source Brief or minor separation of females and dependent offspring Aggressive behaviour related to noise exposure (e.g., tail/flipper slapping, fluke display, jaw clapping/gnashing teeth, abrupt directed movement, bubble clouds) Extended cessation or modification of vocal behaviour Visible startle response Brief cessation of reproductive behaviour Extensive or prolonged aggressive behaviour Moderate separation of females and dependent offspring Clear anti-predator response Severe and/or sustained avoidance of sound source Moderate cessation of reproductive behaviour Obvious aversion and/or progressive sensitization Prolonged or significant separation of females and dependent offspring with disruption of acoustic reunion mechanisms Long-term avoidance of area (greater period of time than source operation) Prolonged cessation of reproductive behaviour Outright panic, flight, stampede, attack of conspecifics, or stranding events Avoidance behaviour related to predator detection
7.8.3 Stage I EPS risk assessment conclusion

The underwater noise modelling determined the changes in the sound pressure levels with increasing distance from the source. Modelling was carried out on noise associated with the drillship, supply vessel and the use of explosives for the removal of the wellhead during well abandonment. The Southall impact criteria, specifically the peak sound pressure levels were used in the assessment of the likelihood of causing an auditory injury to a cetacean. Modelling of the noise associated with the drillship and supply vessel, showed no exceedance of levels capable of causing any form of physical injury to a cetacean. For the explosive operation, sound levels in excess of 230 dB were produced up to a depth of 350 m and out to a lateral distance of 300 m from the wellhead. This indicates a potential risk of causing physical injury to any cetaceans present within that depth and distance from the explosion. At 350 m above the sea bottom at the site of the project, it is only the deep diving cetacean species that would be at risk. The use of mitigation measures such as MMOs and PAM will minimise the risk of cetaceans being within the area of potential physical injury during well abandonment. During vertical seismic profiling (VSP) operations the airguns are deployed from the surface hence the zone of injury is expected to be within the first couple of metres below the surface. The use of MMOs and PAM will mitigate the risk of any injury from VSP operations. In the assessment of the likelihood for a disturbance offence, the temporal nature of the activities is considered. The sound from vessels will remain for the duration of the drilling programme. Other activities such as the VSP and explosive use will occur over very short durations (24 hours for VSP and instantaneous for the explosion). Although the sound from the project activities does have the potential to cause disturbance to marine mammals it is not expected to cause any prolonged impacts. Providing that the mitigation measures are applied, there will be a negligible risk of injury or disturbance offence and therefore BP considers that an application for an EPS licence is not required.
Table 7-3: Southall et al. (2007) behavioural disturbance scale (scores 5 and upwards).
August 2011
Page 61
Underwater Noise
Page 62
August 2011
Atmospheric Emissions
Gaseous emission Direct greenhouse gas Carbon dioxide (CO2) Methane (CH4) Nitrous oxide (N2O) Indirect greenhouse gas Carbon monoxide (CO) Indirect greenhouse gas Oxides of nitrogen (NOx)
Environmental effect Inhibits the radiation of heat into space affecting temperatures at the Earths surface. May contribute to climate change. May contribute indirectly to climate change. Acts as a precursor to low-level ozone formation. Contributes to acid deposition which impacts both freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems. Can affect human respiratory systems. Influence climate through their production of organic aerosols and their involvement in photochemistry, i.e. production of ozone (O3) in the presence of NOx and light.
This chapter details the expected atmospheric emissions from the project and models the dispersion of emissions from the major operational sources, i.e. the drillship and supporting vessels.
8.1
Introduction
Atmospheric emissions need to be examined for any potential effects at local and regional levels, at transboundary levels (Norway and Faroe) and on global scales. Local air quality issues relating to human health are not expected to be an issue given the highly dispersive nature of the environment and the lack of receptors in the vicinity of the project. The environmental effects of the most common combustion gases, which can be split into direct and indirect greenhouse gases, are summarised in Table 8-1. Direct greenhouse gases have an effect on radiotive forcing within the atmosphere while, through atmospheric chemistry, indirect greenhouse gases impact upon the abundance of the direct greenhouse gases, thereby increasing the overall greenhouse effect. The potential sources of atmospheric emissions associated with the project are: Main power generation system on the drillship, using diesel Emissions from vessel operations, including standby vessel and supply vessels and Helicopter emissions.
Indirect greenhouse gas Volatile organic compounds (VOC) include non-methane hydrocarbons (NMHC) and oxygenated NMHC (e.g. alcohols, aldehydes and organic acids) Indirect greenhouse gas Sulphur dioxide (SO2)
Contributes to acid deposition (wet and dry) which impacts both freshwater and terrestrial ecosystems. Can cause health impacts through respiration.
Particulate matter (PM)
Table 8-1: Environmental effects of atmospheric emissions.
8.2
Regulatory control
The key regulatory requirements that relate to activities described in this section are summarised here; The Merchant Shipping (Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships) Regulations 2008 implement MARPOL Annex VI in the UK and establish controls on marine engines and marine fuel in order to limit emissions, in particular NOx and sulphur oxides (SOx). The project will require various installation and support vessels and all vessels will have the appropriate UK Air Pollution Prevention Certificate (UKAPP) or International Air Pollution Prevention Certificate (IAPP) in place as required. Current legislation governing flaring from offshore operations, implemented by DECC, is the Energy Act 1976 and the Petroleum (Production) (Seaward Areas) Regulations 1988. Consent is required for flaring, venting or reinjection of gas unless permitted under specific terms of the Page 63
August 2011
Atmospheric Events
production licence. In the context of drilling a well, an extended well test consent is required for flaring for more than 96 hours continuously or more than 2000 tonnes of oil. No well test is planned for North Uist. The Environmental Emissions Monitoring System (EEMS) will be used to report emissions to the regulator. This system is designed to enable the analysis of offshore oil and gas industry environmental data. EEMS provides the vehicle for offshore oil and gas industry emissions to be incorporated into UK Inventories of atmospheric emissions. The dataset acts as the primary data storage and reporting resource for both UK Government and the offshore industry.
movements of these supply vessels are actively optimised by the BP Logistics team to maximise the efficiency of operations and minimise fuel use and emissions. Typically a single supply vessel will service five installations in a single trip. Consequently, the emissions estimate is based on a shared use in line with observed annual average data for BP drilling operations west of the Shetland Islands. Emissions estimates are illustrated in Figure 8-1 and shown in Table 8-2. In terms of local air quality, the emissions from this operation are consistent with emissions from normal commercial shipping in the area, and will not be distinguishable from those emissions. For example, Section 3.11.3 describes the existing shipping activity in the area. Given the distance to any receptors, there is no likelihood that emissions will result in a deterioration of local air quality. The impact on acid deposition onshore will be negligible, as a result of the negligible additional contribution of these emissions to the overall input to the atmosphere in the region, and as a result of the emissions taking place near sea level and the washing effect of the intervening marine environment between the source and any receptor. The additive effect on climate change is also negligible given the very small proportion these emissions would form in relation to the total emissions in the region. The emissions predicted here are in line with levels of emissions from other shipping activities in the region.
8.3
Environmental impact
8.3.1 Drilling and vessel operations

Atmospheric emissions will occur from fuel use on the drillship and supporting vessels, and from helicopter traffic to and from the drillship. As discussed in Section 2, the choice of a robust drilling platform in the form of the Stena Carron brings higher fuel usage during normal operations than for typical anchored rigs, but it also brings more stable operations and overall a shorter drilling period can be expected. Power on the Stena Carron comes from six 16cylinder Wrtsil 32 diesel engines. These drive the main generators that provide the full power requirements for dynamic positioning, propulsion, drilling, and accommodation. These engines were chosen to have the lowest specific fuel consumption among the engine options considered for the vessel design, and they have a proven track record in reliable operations in deepwater dynamically-positioned drilling units. A standby vessel will attend the drillship and will normally operate in a low power mode but will sometimes need to increase power to respond to weather conditions and to navigate around the rig to undertake patrol duties and exercises. Supply vessels will attend the drillship a number of times per week to bring new materials and supplies (food, fuel, water, equipment, drilling chemicals, utility chemicals, drill pipe and casing, drilling tools, etc.) and to offload wastes and returns of materials no longer required. The
986 655 4234
19140
Rigdiesel Safetyvessels
Supplyvessels Helicopters
Figure 8-1 CO2 emissions (tonnes) by activity.
Page 64
August 2011
CO2
Emission factor t/t Drillship diesel Supply vessels Safety vessel Helicopters 3.2 19,140 4,234 986 655
CO
0.008 47.85 10.58 2.47 1.64
NOx
0.059 352.89 78.06 18.18 12.08
N2O
0.00022 1.32 0.29 0.07 0.05
SO2
0.004 23.93 5.29 1.23 0.82
CH4
0.00027 1.61 0.36 0.08 0.06
VOC
0.0024 14.36 3.18 0.74 0.49
Main assumptions: Emission factors are from EEMS guide to atmospherics reporting. Rig diesel based on 1500 tonnes per month usage. Supply vessels based on BP recorded annual average data for offshore supply vessel traffic for vessels servicing multiple installations west of the Shetland Islands, with 25% uplift to allow for greater journey time to North Uist. Standby vessel usage from annual average BP recorded data with 25% uplift. Helicopter emissions based on fuel usage of Eurocopter Super Puma AS332L2, 24 hours per week operational flight time.
Table 8-2: Estimated atmospheric emissions.
This project will lead to emissions to the atmosphere from the vessels and helicopters involved. These will be quickly dispersed, with no significant air quality impact or any significant impact on acid deposition or climate change. These emissions are kept to a minimum by regulatory controls and by minimising the well duration. It is predicted that atmospheric emissions from the project will not have a significant impact.
MARPOL and European Union controls on the quality of diesel limit the sulphur content of fuel to very low levels, thereby controlling acid gas emissions in the form of sulphur dioxide. Ozone depleting substances No ozone depleting substances will be used except hermetically sealed domestic-type appliances (e.g. refrigerators) with an inventory <3 kg. The Stena Carron is three years old and does not contain any older-type refrigeration systems containing CFC or HCFC gases.
8.4
Management and mitigation
Since no significant impact is predicted, no mitigation or management is required under the EIA process. Nevertheless it is relevant to note the following measures. Vessel activities All vessels employed during drilling and installation activities will comply with the Merchant Shipping (Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships) Regulations 2008, which controls the levels of pollutants entering the atmosphere. All combustion equipment will be subject to regular monitoring and inspections and an effective maintenance regime will be in place, ensuring all combustion equipment runs as efficiently as possible. The time spent drilling the well is the predominant factor in overall emissions and this is minimised through the careful planning of the well and by executing the well with a robust drilling platform, using state of the art combustion plant.
8.5
Residual impacts
No significant residual impacts from atmospheric emissions are predicted.
8.6
Cumulative and transboundary Impacts
As identified above, the effects of atmospheric emissions are not predicted to be significant and transboundary impacts will be negligible. In SEA 4, DECC stated that: Potential environmental effects of acid gas and greenhouse emissions are, respectively, regional and global in nature. Local environmental effects of atmospheric emissions are not expected to be significant in view of the high atmospheric dispersion associated with offshore locations. Page 65
August 2011
Atmospheric Events
Combustion emissions from power generation would represent only a minor contribution to oil and gas production industry, other industry and national totals. That incremental contributions to regional and global effects will not be significant (DTI, 2003).
Page 66
August 2011
Accidental Events
Accidental Events
This chapter describes the measures that will be put in place during the project to prevent spills arising from accidental events, and proposed contingency measures that will be employed to ensure an effective response in the event of a spill.
scenarios at sea and linked to specific oil spill response measures. A detailed spill response strategy will be finalised prior to the commencement of drilling operations and this will be documented in the Oil Pollution Emergency Plans (OPEP) for the activity which will be submitted to DECC for approval.
9.2
Regulatory control
9.1
Introduction
The potential sources of oil or chemical spills to sea from the project are identified in the EIA matrix (Appendix B). The most significant oil spills which could occur are associated with uncontrolled blowout during drilling or a total loss of drillship fuel inventory. However it is considered that the likelihood of such events occurring is extremely low. Potential sources of smaller spills include bunkering of diesel fuel and muds and release of hydrocarbons via grated decks on the drillship. There is not a linear relationship between spill size and the extent of environmental impact. In the offshore environment, the likelihood of impact of an oil spill will be determined by the direction of travel of the slick, its weathering properties and whether environmental sensitivities are present in its path. These environmental sensitivities will have spatial and temporal variations. The likelihood of any oil spill having an impact on the coastal environment is more complex as it is dependent upon the likelihood of the oil spill occurring against the probability of that oil beaching and the environmental sensitivities present at the time of oil beaching. In addition to comprehensive prevention measures, integral to any drilling operation conducted by or on behalf of BP and its partners is the formulation of detailed and fully tested contingency response plans appropriate to local environmental sensitivities. The EIA process has identified the key environmental sensitivities related to oil spills. Modelling has been conducted showing the movement of the crude and diesel oil spill August 2011
The key regulatory requirements relevant to oil or chemical spills are described in Appendix A and summarised as follows: The Merchant Shipping (Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation Convention) Regulations 1998 implement the International Convention on Oil Pollution, Preparedness, Response and Cooperation (OPRC), which has been ratified by the UK. These Regulations require the UK Government to ensure that operators have a formally approved OPEP in place for each offshore operation, or agreed grouping of facilities. Offshore Installations (Emergency Pollution Control) Regulations 2002. These Regulations give the Government power to intervene in the event of an incident involving an offshore installation where there is, or may be a risk of significant pollution, or where an operator has failed to implement proper control and preventative measures. These Regulations apply to chemical and oil spills. EC Directive 2004/35 on Environmental Liability with Regard to the Prevention and Remedying of Environmental Damage. The Environmental Liability Directive enforces strict liability for prevention and remediation of environmental damage to biodiversity, water and land from specified activities and remediation of environmental damage for all other activities through fault or negligence.
Page 67
Accidental Events
9.3
Oil spills
and Gas UK, 2011).
The sections below include the background and risk assessments for those project activities where oil could accidentally be released into the environment. The historical data for spill events in UK waters are reviewed and used to inform oil spill modelling. This in turn, is used to build oil spill response plans and emergency procedures to aid in reducing any potential impacts in the unlikely event of a significant spill. These plans and procedures will be incorporated into the OPEP. Analysis of the historical data between 1975 and 2005 (UKOOA, 2006) shows that the majority of spills from offshore oil and gas operations are small i.e. less than 1 tonne. UKOOA (now Oil and Gas UK) reports that since 1975 46% of spill records relate to crude oil, with 18% relating to diesel, and the other 36% relating to other hydrocarbons such as condensates, hydraulic oils, oily waters and unknown types of oil. Tina Consultants Ltd (2010) reports that in UK waters during the period 1975 to 2007 a total of 17,012 tonnes of oil (excluding regulated discharges from produced water systems, but including spills of base oil and OBM) were discharged from 5,826 individual spill events. Figure 9-1 shows the amount and number of spills in UKCS waters between 1991 and 2009. In 2009, 0.000082% of oil produced was spilled (Oil
9.3.1 Blowouts
Background Primary well control is the process which maintains hydrostatic pressure in the wellbore greater than the pressure of the fluids in the formation being drilled, but less than the formation fracture pressure. If formation pressure is greater than the pressure of the fluid in the wellbore (i.e. mud hydrostatic pressure) the well will flow and an influx will enter the wellbore. One option to arrest such a situation is by closing the blowout preventer (BOP) which is the initial stage of secondary well control. Secondary well control is completed by circulating out the influx and displacing the wellbore with a fluid sufficiently dense to kill the well. If primary and secondary well control fails a surface blow out may occur. A surface blowout is defined as an uncontrolled flow of formation fluids from the reservoir to the surface which occurs as a result of loss of primary and secondary well control, resulting in the potential for release of hydrocarbons to the environment. An underground blowout is when downhole pressure exceeds the fracture pressure of a formation and fluids flow into the weaker formation. Sources and likelihood of occurrence
900 800 700 600 500 400 300 200 100 0
500 450 400 350 300 250 200 150 100 50 0
Spilled amount (tonnes)
Totalamountspilled(tonnes)
Totalnumberofoilspillreports
Figure 9-1 Number of oil spills and amounts spilled in UK waters (DECC, 2011). Page 68 August 2011
Number of spills
Accidental Events
When considering the potential for a blowout, there are three possible situations in which it could occur: When the reservoir is first penetrated. The first time the reservoir is penetrated is while drilling 121/4 hole. Due to the overbalance of the drilling mud (i.e. the excess of pressure applied by the mud) it is extremely unlikely that the well would flow at this stage, and very little reservoir is exposed from which hydrocarbon could flow. While drilling the reservoir. The majority of the reservoir is drilled via the 81/2 hole section and an increasing amount of the reservoir is exposed. Well control barriers are in place to prevent hydrocarbons entering the well, but in the event that well control barriers are lost and hydrocarbons enter the well in large quantities and underbalance the well, and if response measures are unsuccessful, a blowout could occur and reservoir fluids would be 5 released via the 9 /8 casing. When the reservoir section is completed. Once drilling to the required depth has finished, the well control barriers will remain place while testing and sampling is undertaken. In the unlikely event that the well control barriers are lost then as the maximum amount of reservoir is exposed, maximum flow rates could occur. The frequency of blowouts based on historic data can be deduced from the SINTEF database of offshore well blowouts, which is a recognised industry reference of blowouts that have occurred worldwide since 1955. Statistical analysis of this data is routinely carried out by Scandpower (2011) who generate blowout frequencies for the latest 20 years data. The Scandpower analysis does not, however, indicate whether the blowout led to an oil spill and SINTEF (2010) notes that most blowouts cause relatively little
damage. Wells with a gas to oil ratio (GOR) of 1,000 (higher than the expected GOR for North Uist) or greater have a higher probability of blowout (Scandpower, 2010). The conclusion from the Scandpower analysis is that for exploration oil wells in the North Sea area (UK and Norway), a -4 blowout frequency of 1.2x10 per operation is expected, and there have been no blowouts in this category in the last 20 years. There is a separate statistic for blowouts from shallow gas, i.e. gas trapped in shallow sediments, which would not be expected to result in oil pollution, and there is no indication of shallow gas at the North Uist site.
9.3.2 Blowout duration and flow rate

The environmental impact of a blowout depends crucially on the flow rate and the duration of the release. Figure 9-3 is adapted from Scandpower (2011) and illustrates how long a blowout might be expected to last for, based on statistical analysis of the historical records for the UK, Norway and Gulf of Mexico. For example, this analysis shows that more than 50% of blowouts are arrested in 3 days, and more than 90% are arrested in 15 days. The longest blowout in this group is 120 days. As a conservative estimate, so that a worst case scenario can be considered, a blowout duration of 140 days has been used for this environmental impact assessment as the maximum time it would take to drill a relief well in the North Uist location. This includes time for the rig to suspend its own operation and move to the relief well location, to drill the relief well to the required depth, perform ranging runs and finally drill into the well and perform kill operations.
August 2011
Page 69
Accidental Events
Figure 9-3 Success in arresting blowouts using different methods There are a number of factors which will influence the blowout rate, in the very unlikely event of loss of primary and secondary well control. They can be summarised as follows. The conduit through which the reservoir fluids can flow to get to surface : for the North Uist well this is assumed to be the 9 5/8" casing unrestricted all the way to surface, this is viewed as the worst case. If drill pipe were present in the well bore it would act as a choke to the flow. The pressure of the reservoir: the higher the pressure the more energy is available to push the fluids to surface. The maximum reservoir pressure for this well is predicted to be 8,183 psi, which has been used for the calculation of the worse case blowout rate. The type of rock in the reservoir: different rock types will allow fluids to be produced from them at different rates in the event of a blowout. For the North Uist well it is believed the most likely interpretation is a sequence of Jurassic sediments overlying either basement or DevonoCarboniferous sediments. However for the worse case it has been assumed a much more unlikely formation of a 200 m thick Devono - Carboniferous reservoir is present. This is the same type of reservoir found in the Clair field where the thickest ever reservoir found was approx 100 m thick. This type of rock would allow fluids to flow through it more easily than the Jurassic type rock and represents the worse case for a blowout event. The type of fluid present in the reservoir: the mobility of the hydrocarbons in the reservoir will dictate how much will flow through the well bore for a given pressure and rock type. The reservoir is most likely a light crude similar to the Rosebank and Lochnagar discoveries, however there is a possibility that a heavier crude similar to Clair could be present if Clair type rock is encountered. For the worse case event it has been assumed the heavier Clair type crude would be present. The amount of open hole drilled into the reservoir: this will dictate how much fluid can be channelled up into the well bore and to surface in the event of a blowout.
A model has been built that simulates the August 2011
Page 70
Accidental Events
worse case blowout rate and will be used to limit the amount of openhole exposed in the reservoir to ensure a maximum flowrate of 75,000 barrels per day is not exceeded. This is the nameplate rating of the well capping system that would be deployed (the industry cap built by OSPRAG- the Oil Spill Prevention and Response Advisory Group). The model will be continuously updated as live drilling information on reservoir pressure, rock type and fluid type becomes available from the down hole tools. If, at any time while drilling the well results indicate that maximum flow rate would exceed the 75,000 barrels per day limit, drilling would be stopped. This would indicate potentially a highly productive reservoir and in this case suspension of the well would be considered, in line with BP and industry standards, subsequent to approval by DECC. The shallower Cardhu reservoir is Palaeocene in age and if hydrocarbons were encountered the maximum blowout rate is calculated to be 45,000 bbls per day, therefore Cardhu is covered by the worst case scenario.
A minimum of two float valves will be incorporated into casing shoes to minimise potential for any flow through the casing system after installation. The well is designed with drilling fluid densities that provide primary well control at all times during connected riser operations. The planned cement design meets the requirements of UK Oil and Gas Guidelines on the Suspension and Abandonment of Wells and BPs Engineering Technical Practice on Zonal Isolation (GP 10-60). Seal assemblies will be locked to the wellhead. While drilling, the primary well control barrier in the main conduit (i.e. the annulus immediately around the drill pipe) will be weighted mud and the secondary barrier is the BOP equipment. In addition, previous casings in the next annulus out also have barriers, i.e. seal assemblies in casing hangers, and cement isolation between reservoir and surface. The well will be abandoned as per the isolation requirements specified in the UK Oil and Gas recommended practice (and BPs Group Practice: GP 10-60) with drilling fluid remaining in the well until the last cement plug is in place and verified. Well control procedures A well control interface / bridging document is currently being prepared with Stena Drilling to ensure there is clear understanding of responsibilities in the event of a well control incident. This document will form part of the overall Operations Management System interface document and will reference documents and procedures to be used in a well control situation, such as BPs Well Control Response Guide and Well Control Manual. This interface document will be in place before operations begin on the well. All BP drilling and well operations personnel, and personnel acting on behalf of BP, who are directly involved in the planning and execution of the well, plus any Stena Drilling personnel who may take control of well activities (such as tool pushers, drillers, assistant drillers and subsea engineers) will have a valid and recognised well control certificate. Other well control measures additional to Page 71
9.3.3 Blowout prevention and source control

The following provides a high level overview of proposed areas of planning and preparation that either reduce the probability of a failure of well control and/or reduce the consequence of a failure of well control. An OPEP will be submitted to DECC for consideration and approval in advance of the commencement of drilling at North Uist. Well design The well is designed to the requirements of BPs Engineering Technical Practices. Based on the geological prognosis and nearby well results, this prospect is not high pressure or high temperature. The well is designed with a conventional 36 x 30 conductor and three conventional casing strings (20, 13-3/8 and 9-5/8). No liners are planned. All the strings are designed to withstand a burst load of gas to surface.
August 2011
Accidental Events
those that may be employed for shallow water wells, are: A dedicated pore pressure monitoring service will be provided to detect changes in formation pressure. A Coreolis mass balance meter is installed on the flowline to give accurate return flow rate information to aid early kick detection. This will be used along with the mudlogging service providers enhanced kick detection service to aid monitoring of the well.
of operations to ensure the crew are familiar with the specific risks and procedures which will be used for the well. BOP management The following elements of robust BOP management will be in place; The BOP (Figure 9-4) system will meet all of the requirements specified in BPs Group Practice on Well Control (GP10-10). The BOP stack is rated at a higher pressure, 15,000 psi, than the maximum anticipated wellhead pressure of approximately 7,330 psi. The BOP will incorporate 15,000 psi kill and choke lines, two Cameron TL Type 15,000 psi double ram preventers, one Cameron TL Type 15,000 psi single ram preventer, two Cameron DL 10,000 psi annular BOPs and 15,000 psi Cameron double failsafe valves on choke and kill inlets. An emergency disconnect system that makes the well safe in the event that the rig has to move off location. An Acoustic system that allows BOP ram functions to be activated remotely via acoustic controls. An ROV system that allows BOP ram functions in the event that surface activated controls have failed. An Autoshear function that closes one blind shear ram if the riser is disconnected unexpectedly from the BOP stack. A Deadman system / trigger which allows the Autoshear system to close one blind shear ram on loss of electrical and hydraulic signals even if the riser is still connected. This system is intended to ensure the well is secured in the event that a catastrophic surface failure makes the BOP controls inoperable while the riser is still connected to the BOP. The BOP control operating pressure is 5000psi to enhance drill pipe shearing capability in deep water application.
Risk assessment to identify risks and mitigating actions for periods where nonshearable components are across the BOPs will be conducted, as per BPs Engineering Technical Practice requirements. Rig selection The well will be drilled with the Stena Carron, a dynamically positioned DP3class station keeping ability drillship, owned and operated by Stena Drilling. It is designed for operations in up to 3000 m water depth in harsh environments. The drillship has a safety case which has been accepted by the HSE and is class certified by a recognised certifying authority. The Stena Carron has been operating in UK waters since late 2008. During that time it has drilled 5 deepwater wells for other operators in water depths of 1,079 to 2,600 m. The water depth at the North Uist location is 1,291 m. BP will perform assurance audits prior to the Stena Carron drillship performing any work for BP and its partners to confirm all critical systems such as subsea and surface blowout prevention equipment and drilling fluid circulating and processing systems are fully certified and working as designed. This audit will also include an assessment of the competence of the crews and the management systems in place to safely manage use of the rig. Any safety critical gaps identified will be actioned and closed out before the Stena Carron begins operations. Crew engagement sessions will be held both onshore and offshore prior to the start Page 72
The BP Well Control Response Guide, for which training sessions are carried out every year, details the action to be taken August 2011
Accidental Events
in response to a well control event and defines the roles and responsibilities for all responders to the event and details technical and operational support for different scenarios. This includes the requirement for bridging documents defining the respective actions to be taken by BP and contractors in the event of an incident. Well capping and containment
BP will have subsea capping and containment capability available for the duration of the well and scenario plans to enhance response effectiveness and reduce response time. BP will have access to vessels capable of deploying ROVs and carrying out subsea lifting operations in 1300 m of water. BP will have access to capping support tools in the event of an emergency. These tools will provide the capability to inject dispersant subsea, cut and remove debris from around the BOP / wellhead area, hot-stab into the BOP functions, including LMRP (lower marine riser package) connector release and back off bolts or cut bolts to gain access to flanges. The North Uist Containment Response Plan, developed with BPs global deepwater response project team, will cover well capping and containment.
Figure 9-4 Diagram of Blowout Preventer.
It is estimated that it would take 10 to 35 days to be in a position to install a cap on a flowing well at North Uist. The duration will vary depending upon the complexity of the situation and the subsequent degree of planning and equipment preparation required. There also has to be an allowance during this period for vessels to suspend their current activity and be mobilised to North Uist with the appropriate equipment. The operations will also be very weather dependent. A capping device, built for the industry by OSPRAG is estimated to be available through Oil Spill Response from September 2011. This device will be stored in Aberdeen. As a member of OSR, BP will have access to the OSPRAG capping device in the event of a blowout at North Uist as well as access to knowledge and additional equipment from the BP global deepwater project team in Houston. BP will utilise the OSPRAG cap as their primary capping device. Chevron have a separate capping stackNeptune-which is stored locally. Pending the final completion of the manufacturing
August 2011
Page 73
Accidental Events
and testing of the OSPRAG capping device BP has an arrangement with Chevron that would allow BP the use of the Neptune capping stack if needed. Relief well planning The project will comply with BP requirements for relief well preparedness, and candidate rigs operating in the UK or Norway Continental Shelves have been identified. A specific BP North Uist Relief Well Plan has been completed which provides details of preparedness with respect to initiation of a relief well in a blow out situation and background information required for more detailed well-specific relief well planning. Areas addressed within the Relief Well Plan include organisational capability, field and well data, process and project management, relief well design, time estimate for drilling a relief well, equipment and rig availability. BP has reached an agreement with the operators of the SeaDrill West Phoenix semi-submersible drilling rig which would allow its use to drill a relief well if required. This rig is capable of drilling in this water depth and has recently been operated in UK waters by BP. The rigs suitability for use at this location has been confirmed. Well control response BPs response to a well control event and any subsequent escalation to a loss of well control are provided in BPs Well Control Response Guide. This document defines roles and responsibilities for persons at the well site, within BPs emergency response centre and within the various areas of well incident response. It provides details on how to conduct operational and
technical support for various situations including dealing with a blowout.
9.3.4 Other drilling rig spills

Sources and likelihood of occurrence Table 9-1 summarises spill data from UK mobile offshore drilling units (MODUs) based on DECC records from the period 2001 - 2007. During this period, MODUs in operation in UK waters had a total of 172 years equivalent of operation. No spills 100 tonnes were recorded between 2001 and 2007 and the majority of spills recorded were less than 1 tonne. The number and frequency of spills per unit year from MODUs, in UK waters between 1990 and 2007, the most recent period for which complete spill data exists, are shown in Table 9-2 with the number and frequency of spills decreasing between the two periods compared during this time. Table 9-3 highlights the number and frequency of explosions, collisions and vessel contacts per unit year for MODUs. These data indicate a reduction in the frequency of such incidents between the two time periods compared: while not indicating whether or not a spill occurred from the explosion, collision or vessel contact, the data indicates that the likelihood of incidents which could lead to a spill is decreasing. Structural damage to the drillship may lead to total loss of hydrocarbon inventory, although this is unlikely as hydrocarbon stock is stored in multiple locations. Table 9-4 details the maximum hydrocarbon inventory of the Stena Carron.
Page 74
August 2011
Accidental Events
Spill cause Maintenance/ Operational activities Bunkering Subsea releases Drilling ROV associated Other production All spills*** <100 10 tonnes ** <10 1 tonnes 1 <1 0.1 tonnes 5 <100 10 kg 4 <10 1 kg 14
<1 kg 10
All spills* 35
** 1 1 ** ** 2
** 2 2 ** ** 8
9 1 15 ** 1 42
2 3 15 1 ** 40
9 3 6 3 ** 42
2 1 12 1 ** 35
22 12 54 5 1 179
* Includes spills of unknown size ** Did not occur within the report period *** All spills include spills of unknown cause and spills that could not be categorised
Table 9-1: Number of spills from a MODU based on UK historical data by spill size and source during the period 2001 - 2007 (TINA Consultants Ltd personal communication, 2010).
Period Facility No MODU 160 1990 1999 Freq 0.246 No 78 2000 2007 Freq 0.172 Overall (1990-2007) No 238 Freq 0.215
Table 9-2: Number and frequency of spills per unit year from MODUs in the UK, 1990 2007 (Oil and Gas UK, 2009).
Period Facility No Vessel ContactMODU Collision - MODU Explosion - MODU 108 1990 1999 Freq 0.166 No 25 2000 2007 Freq 0.055 Overall (1990-2007) No 133 Freq 0.120
14 10
0.021 0.015
1 -
0.0022 -
10 10
0.014 0.009
Table 9-3 Number and frequency of explosions, collisions and vessel contacts per unit year for MODUs in the UK, 1990 - 2007 (Oil and Gas UK, 2009).
August 2011
Page 75
Accidental Events
Hydrocarbon Crude storage Maximum storage volume (m3) This provision is for well test situations and will not be used for this project 3,250 11,500 500 420 420
operations carried out by the drillship once it is in place. Approach procedures and poor weather operational restrictions for visiting vessels and transfer operations at the drillship will be defined prior to operations. Fuel handling, transfer and monitoring procedures will be put in place. Pre-mobilisation audits of the drillship and vessels including a detailed list of contract requirements in terms of spill (both oil and chemical) prevention procedures will be undertaken. Lube and hydraulic oils will be stored onboard the drillship in tanks or sealed drums, which pose a minimum risk of spillage. In addition, drums and storage tanks for hydrocarbons will be well secured and stored in contained areas. Procedures will be in place for bunker transfer, other bulk storage transfers and mud-handling in order to minimise the risk of spillage. Oil spill kits, including absorbent material, will be available on board the drillship and vessels to allow clean up of any deck spills or leaks. BP also follows the Exercise Schedule outlined in Table 9-5 to maintain competency of their personnel.
Surface mud pits Diesel Base oil Mud chemicals Cement
Table 9-4: Storage capacities for Stena Carron. Spill prevention and contingency planning BP will implement the following management and mitigation measures to prevent and/or minimise the likelihood of any oil spill from the drillship and to mitigate the impact of any such spill: The drillship will be suitable for the operating environment encountered in the project area. The drillship will comply with International Maritime Organisation (IMO)/Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) codes for prevention of oil pollution, and will maintain an onboard Shipboard Oil Pollution Emergency Plan (SOPEP). An OPEP will be in place for the drilling
Exercise Schedule Subject Offshore OPEP TIER 1 Dispersant spraying Onshore ER Team OCU Members EPC SOSREP requirements Industry deployment of T3 Equipment Frequency 1/Shift / Year Monthly 2 / yr 1 / yr 1 / 5yr Description Review plan and perform simple notification check. Function and Deployment check. To include communications to site and simulate interaction with regulators. (DPO: includes quarterly refresher training). An exercise to include the involvement of OCU members. An exercise to include the setting up of an OCU in the operators facility. BP to ensure that its in receipt of the exercise report from such an event and to review this OPEP against its recommendations and findings.
1 / 5yr
Table 9-5 Exercise frequency carried out by BP to maintain competency of personnel
Page 76
August 2011
Accidental Events
9.4
Behaviour and movement of oil at sea
The environmental impact of an oil spill depends on a wide variety of factors, which in the offshore environment include: Spill volume Release point (seabed, sea surface) Release geometry and timescale Direction of travel of the slick Weathering properties of the crude Any environmental sensitivities present in the path of the slick (these may also have temporal variations in sensitivity) Sensitivity of the beaching locations Weather Wave regime Salinity Temperature.
mass and concentrations) of contaminants on the water surface, on shorelines, in the water column and in sediments. The model allows multiple release sites, each with a specified beginning and end to the release. For subsurface releases (e.g. blowouts or pipeline leaks), the near field part of the simulation is conducted with a multi-component integral plume model that is embedded in the OSCAR model. The near field model accounts for buoyancy effects of oil and gas, as well as effects of ambient stratification and cross flow on the dilution and rise time of the plume. The model output is recorded in three physical dimensions plus time. The model databases supply values for water depth, sediment type, ecological habitat, and shoreline type. The system has an oil properties database that supplies physical, chemical and biological parameters required by the model. The version of OSCAR used is that contained within the Marine Environmental Modelling Workbench 6.0. DECC issued new advice on their requirements relating to oil pollution emergency preparedness and this section takes these requirements into account. Deterministic and stochastic modelling are two types of oil spill modelling. These tools are used in oil spill contingency planning to assess what response resources should be located where to respond most effectively in the event of oil reaching the shoreline. Deterministic modelling predicts spill behaviour in a given wind direction to identify minimum, worst case beaching times under extreme weather conditions, albeit these conditions may never occur in reality e.g. constant 30 knot onshore wind for several days. The information obtained from deterministic modelling contributes to the development of shoreline response providing a worst case or minimum time interval for initiation of response. Stochastic modelling uses historic wind data collected over a period of time to establish a statistical picture of probability of coastline pollution in different locations, rather than artificial fixed winds taken from a wind rose. This contributes to the locating of shoreline response resources, focusing resources on areas most probably affected in the event of oil beaching, rather than on areas where modelling indicates oil will not beach. OSIS modelling Similar to the OSCAR model, OSIS tracks and calculates the movement and volume of oil on the Page 77
9.4.1 Overview of modelling undertaken

Spill scenarios have been modelled using both the SINTEF Oil Spill Contingency And Response (OSCAR) model and BMTs Oil Spill lnformation System (OSIS). OSCAR modelling The OSCAR model has significant scientific research and validation, e.g. Reed et al. (1995a and b) and Johansen et al. (2001). The model incorporates years of research into the behaviour of underwater blowouts including a major DEEPSPILL Joint Industry project in 2000 funded by several major operators and the US Minerals Management Service whereby experiments were undertaken simulating underwater blowouts in the Norwegian Sea. Several deliberate releases of oil and gas were undertaken in around 900m water depth to observe the formation of the underwater plume and to understand its movement, together with sophisticated detection techniques for droplet sizes, rise times and oil properties. This research showed for example that in deepwater blowouts, a significant proportion of the oil remains in the water column in fine droplets with neutral or low buoyancy. The model is regularly upgraded with new information and analysis, and recently the model was used in the Deepwater Horizon incident. OSCAR calculates and records the distribution (as August 2011
Accidental Events
sea surface. However the OSIS model does not take into account water depth, water currents at depth, the associated dispersion and biodegradation of oil in the water column or the northeasterly residual circulation currents west of Shetland. As a result of these limitations this chapter focuses on the output from the OSCAR model which can take these aspects into consideration. However output from the OSIS model is also discussed.
A representative conductivity (salinity), temperature and depth profile (CTD profile) has been applied in the model based on available measurements from the Faroe-Shetland Channel. The model takes account of varying density and temperature effects as the oil travels through the water column. Oil properties and release geometry The most likely oil type to be encountered in the North Uist prospect will be similar to the light crudes found in the Rosebank and Lochnagar discoveries. These are the nearest wells to North Uist with equivalent reservoir depth, geology and fluid samples. There is a very low probability that any oil encountered would be as heavy as that found in the Clair Field, which would have a greater impact on the environment. However it has been assumed, for the purposes of a potential worst case scenario, that the oil type will be similar to Clair. This gives much more pessimistic results in terms of the movement of the oil and the amount potentially reaching the coast in the event of an extended blowout. Oil properties used in the model run are shown in Table 9-6.
Aspect Density Reference Viscosity Pour Point Asphaltene content Wax content Boiling Point Curve Temperature Celsius Value used 0.9086 t/m3 171 cP at 13 Celsius -18 Celsius 1.5% 5.2% Fraction lost 3.5% 8% 10% 16% 36% 43% 65% 72%
9.4.2 Input data

Metocean and bathymetry The OSCAR model uses 3-dimensional current data, using 16 depth bands through the water column, along with 2-dimensional wind data and bathymetry to model the movement of oil, from the Norwegian Meteorological Institute as supplied by SINTEF for use with OSCAR. This data is summarised visually in Figure 9-5. If oil particles are predicted to transit outside the region of 3D current data, a corresponding 2D surface current field is applied. This data is provided at intervals of 2 hours and reflects local and regional variations along with diurnal, monthly and annual variations. A database of sea and air temperatures is also applied for stochastic modelling purposes.
Bathymetry data
2D wind data
90 149 175 232 342 369 509 550
3D currents data
2D currents data Table 9-6 Key oil properties adopted.
Figure 9-5 Metocean and bathymetry data. Page 78
August 2011
Accidental Events
Modelling has also been carried out on a lighter oil type in order to inform BPs oil spill planning and response. The impacts of a lighter oil are generally much lower than the results described here for Clair oil type due to greater evaporation, less oil reaching or remaining on the sea surface and higher rates of biodegradation. Modelling of a blowout has also been carried out using the OSIS model. The maximum possible blowout rate can be stated as 75,000 barrels per day and this is used in the modelling. Should a release occur, the most likely condition of the well at the time is for the 9 5/8 casing to have been set and drilling of the 8.1/2 section to be ongoing or completed with the maximum flow rate occurring when the 81/2 section has been completed. The flow path would therefore be through the 9 5/8 casing. The flow could occur open hole i.e. with nothing in the casing, or there may be drill pipe present. In the case that drill pipe is present, flow could be either through the drill pipe, in the annulus between the drill pipe and the casing, or through both. The maximum flow occurs when the hole is unobstructed and the full diameter has been used for modelling purposes. A release temperature of 70 Celsius has been assumed, which is between the reservoir temperature and the ambient seabed temperature. The expansion of gas on release also cools the outgoing fluid. Scenarios relating to the behaviour of oil from a blowout at maximum flow rate from the North Uist well and the release of all diesel from the drillship were modelled. For each scenario, a stochastic analysis was carried out to determine the probability of a surface sheen >0.04m, the probability of a water concentration of > 50 ppb and the probability of oil reaching any coastline. The blowout model is run for 170 days, based on a maximum of 140 days to drill a relief well to arrest the blowout plus 30 days to consider further dispersion of the oil that has been released. This is assessed to be the extreme worst case scenario. A subsea blowout is the most likely scenario for an extended oil spill. In the event of a blowout beginning where there is an uncontrolled release of oil at the drillship, if short-term action to control the blowout is not successful, the drillship will use the emergency disconnect system to disconnect the riser from the well. If this failed, or the drillship were to be disabled in some way, it would either be moved or would drift off station, breaking the riser connection near the wellhead. Consequently an oil release at the sea surface August 2011
would only be expected to last for a number hours. The > 0.04 m surface thickness threshold was chosen as this is the minimum surface thickness identified by the Bonn Agreement Oil Appearance Code (BAOAC) capable of producing a visible sheen (Table 9-7). Code Description Appearance Layer thickness Interval (m) 0.04-0.30 0.3-5.0 5.0-50 50-200 200 Litres per km2
1 2 3 4 5
Sheen (silver/grey) Rainbow Metallic Discontinuous true oil colour Continuous true oil colour
40 - 300 300 5,000 5,000 50,000 50,000 200,000 200,000
Table 9-7 Bonn Agreement Oil Appearance Code. The BAOAC states that oil films below 0.04m thickness are considered invisible. The water column distribution has been curtailed at a concentration of 50 ppb. Below this threshold there is no expectation of significant acute toxic effects as this is the lowest acute concentration for any oil component that is deemed to present a 5 % risk to marine life using standard no-effect risk assessment methodologies. This is a very conservative approach since it assumes that the most toxic component is representative of all the oil components. In addition to the varied wind and current data used in the above modelling the movement of the hydrocarbons in the presence of unvarying offshore and onshore 30 knot winds is presented.
9.4.3 Well blowout results

OSCAR results The uncontrolled flow rate from the well, based on full penetration of the reservoir and combination of reservoir drilling activities, has been modelled. A stochastic analysis was undertaken by modelling numerous scenarios utilising a broad range of weather and current data. Figure 9-7 and Figure 9-8 show the probability of oil being present on the sea surface and shoreline Page 79
Accidental Events
respectively, at some point in the 170 day period modelled, in the event of an uncontrolled blowout for 140 days. It should be emphasised that the contours appearing in the figure do not represent the size of a slick. At any one time, the visible surface oil will cover a small area relative to these contours. The area of slick or sheen is predicted 2 to be an average of 2,800 km over the period modelled, approximately 0.5% of the area north and east of the release point shown in Figure 9-7. In this worst case scenario, there is over 90% probability of oil entering Norwegian waters and greater than 70% probability of oil entering Faroese waters. A visible surface sheen is not predicted in the waters of any other country, nor is beaching predicted in any country other than parts of the UK (Shetland Islands) and Norway (as discussed below). A mass balance representation of the behaviour of the hydrocarbons is shown in Figure 9-6. The modelling predicts that the majority of oil is dispersed into the water column, where it biodegrades over time. Approximately 10-20% reaches the surface and the majority of this evaporates, leaving around 5% at most as oil on the water surface, dependent heavily on prevailing weather conditions. When the weather is calm, oil droplets near the surface are able to rise and form a sheen, whereas in modest or high wind speeds the action of wind and waves acts to disperse the surface sheen into the water column. Less than 0.3% of the oil is ultimately predicted to end up 100% 90% 80% 70% Massbalance 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0 7 13 20 27 33 40 47 53 60 67 73 80 87 93 100 107 113 120 127 133 140 147 153 160 167 Time(days) Figure 9-6 Behaviour of the oil following a blowout. Page 80
either on the shoreline or in sediments. The oil in the water column steadily biodegrades, and at the end of the release at day 140, approximately 30% of the oil is predicted to have biodegraded, with 50% dispersed in the water column and 20% having evaporated. Sixteen days after a release has ended, water column concentrations are predicted to have reduced to below 50 ppb and therefore are not expected to constitute a significant environmental risk.Slight contamination of the seabed sediments around the coast of the Shetland Islands and Norway is predicted at around the locations where shoreline oiling is predicted. The concentrations 2 predicted are a maximum of 2g/m with typical 2 values of 200 mg/m . Assuming a sediment density of 2,000 kg/m3 and assuming the hydrocarbons are contained within the top 10 cm of the sediment (a depth within which sediment movement processes and bioturbation can be expected to occur and mix the sediment), this equates to 2-20 mg/kg. The UKOOA Drill Cuttings JIP of 2001 concluded that levels of oil of 50 mg/kg could produce discernible effects, a value that was adopted in OSPAR Recommendation 2006/5 on cuttings pile management. The predicted levels are below this level and no significant impact is predicted. Nevertheless in the event of a major spill, environmental monitoring may be undertaken in these areas to confirm the absence of effects. It is recognised that the oil will biodegrade over time.
Evaporated Surface Dispersed Cleaned Sediment Stranded Decayed
August 2011
Accidental Events
500'W 000'E 500'E
1000'E
5800'N
6000'N
6200'N
6400'N
500'W
2011 Google Imagery 2011 TerraMetrics, Map data Europa Technologies, Google, Tele Atlas, Geocentre Consulting, GIS Innovatsia
000'E
500'E
1000'E
Figure 9-7 Probability of a surface sheen with a 0.04m thickness occurring at any time following a blowout with maximum unrestricted flow rate for 140 days.
500'W 000'E 500'E 1000'E
6400'N
6400'N
6200'N
6200'N
6000'N
6000'N
500'W
000'E
500'E
1000'E
Figure 9-8 Probability of shoreline oiling following a blowout with maximum unrestricted flow rate for 140 days.
August 2011
Page 81
Accidental Events
Subsea oil plume formation The dynamics of the formation of the plume of oil being released are crucial in understanding the effects of the spill. The OSCAR model builds on years of research and experience in this area, notably the DEEPSPILL joint industry project in 2000 whereby oil and gas were deliberately released in deep water in the Norwegian Sea to simulate a blowout and measure and understand the movements and behaviour of the oil, the results of which were that a good correlation with the model predictions was obtained. For a blowout scenario, oil is predicted to take one hour to surface. Figure 9-9 shows the predicted underwater oil concentrations through the plume 48 hours after the beginning of a blowout. This clearly shows the dispersion of oil in the water column that takes place in the few hundred metres above the well, and also the separate water column concentrations relating to the surface slick. These two areas of oil will move differently, the former being driven by deeper water currents and the latter being driven by surface currents and wind, which are overwhelmingly towards the northeast and into the northern North Sea and Norwegian Sea. Figure 9-10 shows the development of the plume after 30 days, with a cross section taken across the plume. There are two areas of the water column where oil concentrations occur at levels of less than one part per million, although these levels may be locally variable. These are near the surface oil and also in a layer around 200m above the release point where degassed and neutrally buoyant oil droplets are predicted to occur, where they are moved by prevailing subsurface currents and ultimately biodegraded. Surface slick description The viscosity of oil initially surfacing is less than ten centipoises, and although this viscosity increases gradually with water emulsification, the predicted degree of emulsification is relatively small and the viscosity is predicted to be at approximately 200 centipoise. This means that the oil is readily amenable to dispersant application when it surfaces. This window for dispersants continuing to be effective remains open for up to 4 days depending on weather conditions. The area of the surface slick is plotted in Figure 911. This shows a highly fluctuating area that relates to the weather conditions that prevail in the northeast Atlantic. The maximum instantaneous 2 slick area is approximately 50,000 km , approximately 8% of the area illustrated in Page 82
Figure 9-7, while the average is an order of magnitude lower. The persistence of a slick after 140 days is largely attributable to shoreline oil that washes back into the sea and maintains a sheen, whereas in reality, response actions would have a strong focus on preventing oil reaching the shoreline and treating such oil. Surface oil is naturally dispersed into the water column to a large extent due to the combined action of waves and wind. A continuous persistent sheen is only predicted to be observed in the immediate vicinity of the well site and is highly dependent on wind conditions. A slick or sheen further afield is predicted to result during calmer weather. Hence in the event of a spill, the weather forecast is vital in determining the resources that might be at risk and therefore the optimum response. For example, dispersant spraying would provide little benefit to seabirds if rough weather is forecast for days or weeks, but in calm weather, seabirds may be at risk from oil that has not been chemically dispersed reappearing at the surface. Shoreline oiling The stochastic scenarios modelled were ranked in ascending order of the mass of oil predicted to beach and also in terms of the time taken to first reach the shoreline. The results are shown in Figure 9-12 and Figure 9-13 and these illustrate the wide range of possible outcomes dependent on metocean conditions. In a worst case scenario a minimum of 14 tonnes of oil and a maximum of approximately 3,200 tonnes of oil is predicted to beach. These masses will be emulsified and, including the entrained water, total maximum worst case scenario mass of emulsion is likely to be around 10,000 tonnes. Oiling on the northwest of the Shetland Islands is not predicted in all scenarios, although shoreline oiling in Norway is much more likely, where the oil will be in much more dispersed form. The time taken to reach shore is between 14 days and 120 days based on the range of metocean conditions used in the simulations. This suggests that there is time to plan and mount shoreline protection measures in the event of a serious spill occurring.
August 2011
Accidental Events
A A B B
Figure 9-9 Cross section of predicted oil concentrations through subsea plume, 2 days after start of blowout.
A A
B A
Figure 9-10 Cross section of predicted oil concentrations, day 30 after start of blowout (larger scale). 60000 50000 TotalArea(km2) 40000 30000 20000 10000 0 0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180
Time(days) Figure 9-11 Predicted surface slick area over time.
August 2011
Page 83
Accidental Events
100% %ofscenarioslessthan 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 0 50 100 150
assumes all oil starts on the sea surface. Using OSCAR, only around 20% is predicted to reach the surface. The OSIS model demonstrates that beaching of oil may occur on the Faroe Isles and relatively little, if any, in Norway. OSCAR predicts no oil beaching in Faroes in any scenario but predicts more oil beaching in Norway. Considering the limitations of the OSIS model, i.e. its failure to take into account water depth, water currents at depth, the associated dispersion and biodegradation of oil in the water column or the northeasterly residual circulation currents west of Shetland it is believed the output from the OSCAR model is more probable. Therefore, it is considered very unlikely the oil would beach on the Faroe Isles in the event of a well blow-out.
Timeashore(days) Figure 9-12 Distribution of predicted mass of shoreline oil. 100% %ofscenarioslessthan 80% 60% 40% 20% 0% 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
9.4.4 Loss Of Diesel

The Stena Carron has a fuel capacity of 11,500 m3 of diesel. Modelling of this volume of diesel discharged onto the sea surface over 1 hour and dispersing for 30 days has been undertaken to simulate a total loss of inventory. A stochastic analysis was undertaken by modelling this release utilising a broad range of weather and current data. The model output indicates the calculated probability of a surface sheen > 0.04 m thickness being present at a specific location at any point in time over the duration of the model run. The precise behaviour and movement of the diesel varies according to the prevailing weather. Figure 9-14 shows that in the unlikely event of total loss of diesel from the Stena Carron, the predicted surface oiling at a thickness of > 0.04 um could be visible within around 200km, although the average extent is a maximum of 60 km. In 90% of scenarios, the diesel is predicted to disperse at sea without reaching the coast, but a visible surface sheen is predicted to reach the coastline of the Shetland Islands in approximately 10% of scenarios as shown in Figure 9-15.
Massofoilbeaching(tonnes)
Figure 9-13 Distribution of predicted time for oil to first reach shoreline. OSIS modelling results OSIS modelling tracks and calculates the movement and volume of oil on the sea surface. The results generally confirm the OSCAR predictions of time to beach, being in the order of 12 days or more. The results confirm the OSCAR predictions in showing oil beaching in Shetland. However, the volumes of oil are higher as OSIS
Page 84
August 2011
Accidental Events
500'W
000'E
500'E
5800'N
6000'N
6200'N
6400'N
Figure 9-14 Probability of a surface sheen with a 0.04m thickness occurring at any time following a maximum loss of diesel from the drillship.
5800'N
6000'N
6200'N
6400'N
Figure 9-15 Probability of shoreline oiling following a maximum loss of diesel from the drillship.
August 2011
Page 85
Accidental Events
To understand the oil movement for a specific scenario, a scenario where a thin sheen of diesel reaches the shore has been examined in more detail and a mass balance diagram is presented in Figure 9-16. Since there is a large amount of diesel released in a confined area, evaporation could take several days, and this would be exacerbated by calm weather. By day ten, the amount of diesel on the sea surface is 10-20%, the remainder having either evaporated, decayed or mixed as fine droplets in the water column. Slight contamination of the seabed sediments at isolated points of the Shetland Islands coastline is predicted in this worst case scenario at around 100mg per square metre. Assuming a sediment
3 density of 2 kg/m and assuming the hydrocarbons are contained within the top 10 cm of the sediment (a depth within which sediment movement processes and bioturbation can be expected to occur and mix the sediment), this would equate to 0.5 mg/kg. The UKOOA Drill Cuttings JIP of 2001 concluded that levels of oil of 50mg/kg could produce discernible effects, which was adopted in OSPAR Recommendation 2006/5. The predicted levels are 100 times smaller than this level and no significant impact is predicted. Nevertheless, the results indicate that in the event of such a spill, environmental monitoring should be undertaken around the northwest the Shetland Islands coast to assess any acute or chronic impacts.
100% 90% 80% 70%

Massbalance
60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 22 24 26 28 30
Evaporated Surface Dispersed Cleaned Sediment Stranded Decayed
Time(days)
Figure 9-16 Behaviour of diesel following release from Stena Carron.
Page 86
August 2011
Accidental Events
9.4.5 Onshore and offshore winds

In addition to the varied wind data used above, DECC Guidance requires that predictions are made for unvarying 30 knot onshore and offshore winds (referred to as a deterministic analysis). The movement and behaviour of the blowout fluids and the diesel as determined by OSCAR in such an instance are presented in Table 9-8. It should be noted that at these wind speeds, wave heights are predicted to be 5-6 m in height using the in-built fetch/wind speed predictions in OSCAR and oil on the surface rapidly evaporates or disperses into the water column. Once at a certain depth in the water column, the oil will move with prevailing currents rather than being wind-driven. Under these conditions, diesel on the sea surface is predicted to reduce to <1% in approximately 1.5 days over an average extent of 60 km from the drillship.
Hydrocarbon source Wind direction Time to beach or cross median 18 hours Evidence of beaching
OSIS modelling does not take into account natural degradation of oil and underwater currents and hence the outcome presented is not considered realistic. OSIS modelling shows the diesel to disperse naturally after 17 and 19 hours for 30 knot onshore and offshore winds respectively with no beaching taking place. This is in accordance with the OSCAR output.
9.5
Environmental vulnerability to oil spill
Subsea blowout
Offshore 30 knot wind Onshore 30 knot wind
No No. Zero oil on surface beyond 75km towards shore No
Environmental vulnerability to oil spill is a factor of both the likelihood of impact of an oil spill (as considered in previous sections) and the sensitivity of the environment. In a recent memorandum to the UK government regarding the Gulf of Mexico oil spill, the JNCC has highlighted that the key implications are with respect to both the Governments and the industrys ability to understand and predict the environmental impacts of any oil spill. This is needed for both planning (to ensure the most appropriate response is available) and in responding should a spill occur (JNCC, UKD 06e). Offshore and coastal vulnerabilities need to be considered separately as different parameters will apply. The impacts of oil in the marine environment are well documented from previous incidents and monitoring around the world and a summary of these impacts and their effects is given below. The behaviour and movement of oil and subsequent impacts are often largely dependent on the circumstances of the event and local environment.
N/A
Surface blowout
2 days to median line 4 days 22 hours to shore 27 hours
Yes
9.5.1 Offshore
Effects from a hydrocarbon release will largely be associated with the oil plumes. The impacts of an oil spill will be highly dependent on environmental sensitivities, prevailing sea state and weather conditions at the time. The sea and weather conditions in the project area (see Chapter 3) means any spillage of oil will break up and disperse. Seabirds The effects of oil on birds has been widely studied and includes both immediate chronic impacts which can kill birds or longer-term, sub-lethal impacts that could affect individual birds and populations over many years (e.g. Camphuysen et al. 2005, Perez et al. 2009). The oil can become incorporated into the feathers which can cause loss of insulation and waterproofing. If birds Page 87
Drilling rig diesel
No No. Zero oil on surface beyond 75km towards shore
N/A
Table 9-8 Deterministic 30 knot onshore and offshore wind modelling results summary. Modelling of similar surface release scenarios using OSIS showed that in the presence of 30 knot offshore winds the blowout fluids would cross the UK-Faroe median after 21 hours and beaching on the Faroe Islands would occur after 81.5 hours. The model suggests onshore 30 knot winds would result in beaching on the Shetland Islands after 48.5 hours. August 2011
Accidental Events
become heavily oiled their survival rates are lowered. To assist in determining the likely impact on birds from a release of oil Camphuysen (2006) collated data from a number of sources to derive an oil vulnerability index (OVI) from which it is possible to indicate the sensitivities of bird families that could be impacted. The results from the study indicate that Auks and Divers are the most sensitive species to an oil spill, whilst Gulls and Skuas are least sensitive. This is based on a wide range of ecological and behavioural traits for each species, in particular the proportion of time each species is present on the sea surface. Divers tend to be a coastal species and are unlikely to be found in the vicinity of the project site. The JNCC has stated in a memorandum to the UK Government that the greatest risks to nature conservation of oil on the offshore (deepwater) sea surface are to seabirds (JNCC UKD 06). Seasonal vulnerability of birds to oil pollution within the vicinity of the project is presented in Table 9-9 and is derived from the JNCC offshore vulnerability index. Seabird species at the project area are considered to be vulnerable to surface pollution during the months of February and September. For the rest of the year, vulnerability is considered medium to low (JNCC, 1999). In the pre-breeding period Fulmars, the main species in the project area, undergo a pre-laying exodus to offshore waters from the breeding colonies (Dunnet et al., 1963), this may account for the high vulnerability in February. The other high vulnerability category in September is associated with the moulting period for a number of species in the area during which time they are more susceptible to surface pollutants. The magnitude of any impact will depend on the number of birds present, the percentage of the population present, their vulnerability to oil spill and their recovery rates from oil pollution. As can be seen from Table 9-9, overall seabird vulnerability is low.
Block Number February January
213/19 213/20 213/24 213/25 213/29 213/30 214/16 214/21 214/26
3 3 2 2 2 2 3 2 2
4 3 4 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
3 3 3 3 3 3 4 3 3
2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 4
3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3
4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
4 4 4 4 4 -
No data available for January 1 - Very High, 2 - High, 3 - Medium, 4 - Low
Table 9-9 Monthly seabird vulnerability in block 213/25 and surrounding blocks. Plankton Oil can be toxic to a wide range of planktonic organisms. Those living near the sea surface are at risk from oil dissolving into the water column from a surface slick and from oil being entrained in the upper water layers through wind and wave action. Although oil spills may kill plankton, the effects on whole plankton communities generally appear to be short-term, through a combination of high reproductive rates and immigration from outside the affected area. Any effects will be greater during a period of plankton blooms and during fish spawning periods. Contamination of marine prey including plankton and small fish species may then lead to aromatic hydrocarbons accumulating in the food chain. Benthic Communities In the unlikely event of a spill, much of the oil released is predicted to remain trapped below the thermocline and move in the direction of the dominant deepwater currents thereby reaching the surrounding benthic communities. In addition coastal benthic organisms may be at risk from oil carried as fine droplets or in dissolved form in the water column, which is carried from deep water into shallow water where the plume then comes into contact with the seabed. The areas where deposition is predicted to occur are described above. The concentrations predicted are below a generally accepted level of discernible toxic effects. Given the assumptions
Page 88
August 2011
Overall annual vulnerability 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4
September
November
December
October
August
March
June
April
July
May
Accidental Events
and the scales of the input data used for modelling, some local degradation of benthic quality cannot be ruled out, but the results indicate a minor impact. The spill model predicts little if any oil deposition in the immediate area of the project site following a blowout. Rather, oil is deposited in sediments further afield at slightly shallower depths (Figure 99 and 9-10). Characteristic benthic species present in the deeper areas of the Faroe-Shetland Channel tend to be deposit feeders that feed on the fine organic matter trapped amongst the sediments and therefore these animals would be affected by oil depositing on the seabed and becoming bound to the sediments. Colonies of coldwater coral Lophelia pertusa are not recorded in this area in waters deeper than 1000m, and they are generally associated with water temperatures between 4 and 12 Celsius (e.g. Maddock, 2008). The seabed water temperature at the North Uist location is typically below zero Celsius. Any oil that could reach the nearest colonies would be highly dispersed and is not considered to pose a significant risk to these communities. There are no seabed protected areas in the vicinity of the well. The DEEPSPILL JIP project showed that there is an initial degassing of oil as it leaves the well. This results in the formation of a plume of oil droplets and dissolved oil which remains within the water column. Any oil reaching shallower waters will have undergone weathering, degradation and dispersion processes accelerated by the fine droplet size created by the initial release conditions and the degassing of the crude. It is therefore not predicted that any released oil would significantly affect the shallow water benthic communities that it may encounter. Oil may also smother benthic communities. However given the distance from the project site to the shallower coastal areas, the oil reaching the sediments in these areas is expected to be very finely dispersed and this is not considered a significant impact mechanism. Fish In general, offshore fish populations are considered to remain relatively unaffected by oil pollution, as oil concentrations below the surface slick are generally low (Clark, 2001). There is also evidence that fish are able to detect and avoid oilcontaminated waters. This avoidance may, August 2011
however, cause disruption to migration or spawning patterns. Mackerel migrate through the Faroe-Shetland Channel from spawning areas in the southwest to summer feeding areas in the Norwegian Sea. Deepwater species in the FaroeShetland Channel generally have slow growth rates, late onset of sexual maturity and low fecundity, leaving them vulnerable to the effects of disturbance. Rather than impacting the fish directly, heavily contaminated sediments may have an adverse effect on local populations of demersal fish species, due to the impact it has lower down the food chain. The predictions from this study are, however, that sediment contamination will be relatively slight. Fish eggs and larvae are more vulnerable to oil pollution than adult fish and in several species the larval stages float to the surface where contact with oil as a continuous layer is more likely. As most of these fish species have extensive spawning grounds and produce large numbers of pelagic young, it is considered unlikely that there would be any long lasting effect on numbers in the adult populations. Shellfish Shellfish that cannot or do not move away from oiled sediments may be adversely affected by oil. This can range from insignificant individual effects such as reduced feeding to the removal of a species from an area for a period of time. Low levels of certain oil components can cause tainting in shellfish, which may be commercially damaging to shellfish fisheries. This is more common in filter feeding shellfish, particularly bivalves, as they take up fine oil droplets from the water column. In the deepwater of the Faroe-Shetland Channel, commercially important shellfish are only found in very small quantities. The inshore waters around the Shetland and Orkney Islands do, however, support commercially important shellfish fisheries. For example, in 2009 the Shetland Islands produced 3,700 tonnes of mussels and 25,000 tonnes of pacific oysters; Source; Marine Scotland, 2009. These may be at risk if a spill reaches these areas. Marine mammals Low densities of marine mammals may be present in the area including seals, dolphins and porpoises as discussed in Section 3. Marine mammals that come into contact with oil may be impacted in a number of ways. The insulation properties of otter fur are greatly reduced when covered in oil leaving the animals at risk of hypothermia if the thermal properties are reduced. Insulation is considered Page 89
Accidental Events
less of an issue for marine mammals such as seals and cetaceans as their skin forms a nearly impenetrable barrier to hydrocarbons. However, where oil is in contact with the skin there is the potential for it to cause irritation to the eyes or burns to mucous membranes. Ingestion of oil by marine mammals can damage the digestive system or affect the functioning of livers and kidneys. If inhaled, hydrocarbons can impact the respiration. Grey seals, common seals and otters are known to inhabit and breed in the Shetland Islands, and may be at risk from surface oil reaching inshore waters. No significant risk to marine mammal populations is anticipated such that any adverse impacts to individual cetaceans would not affect the species at a population level.
fishing; mariculture and tourism. The main coastal sensitivities to oil spills on the Shetland Islands are illustrated in Figure 9-17 (note that in some cases the same feature is designated under multiple systems). The Shetland Islands have considerable lengths of cliff coastline, which support internationally and nationally important populations of breeding seabirds. In addition, shingle/rock and boulder shores on the western and northern coasts are important breeding sites for Arctic tern (Sterna paradisaea) and ringed plover (Charadrius hiaticula). The coastline also has numerous boggy areas, which support approximately half of the British breeding population of red-throated diver and other moorland bird species. Approximately 22% of the UKs harbour seal population occurs on the Shetland Islands and nationally important otter concentrations are present in Yell Sound. There are a number of seabird breeding colonies along the west coast of the Shetland Islands, as well as overwintering seaduck and resident seabird populations. Likely impacts arising from an oil spill will principally be from the physical smothering effects of oil and contamination and potential degradation of habitats and feeding grounds. The main breeding seabird colonies of the Shetland Islands are listed in Table 9-11.
9.5.2 Coastlines
The level of impact is directly related to the volume of the oil released and the volume of emulsified oil beaching. The most likely impact of any oil spill will be one of physical smothering and coating by oil. As previously noted, the overall probability of shoreline oiling is low. However, should it occur then the impact of such an event will be lowmoderate given the amount of oil predicted to beach depending on the time of year and the extent of oiling along the coast. The Shetland Islands are the closest landmass to the proposed project and, in the unlikely event of an oil spill occurring, may be affected. Orkney and mainland Scotland are both well away from the area predicted to be affected by the stochastic simulation, which incorporates a wide variety of real weather and current conditions. Oil is predicted to cross over into the Faroese waters, but the overall conclusion from a variety of modelling outputs is that oil is not expected to beach on the Faroes. The Shetland Islands incorporate many coastal habitats that are designated as sites of international, European and national importance. Table 9-10 lists those sites in the west and northwest of the Shetland Islands that are important in terms of conservation and that are at most at risk from any major oil spill from the project area. A brief summary of the important features of each site is also provided. The following coastal sensitivities have been identified as being particularly vulnerable to oil spills: seabird populations; waders, divers and waterfowl; otters; seals; coastal habitat types; Page 90
August 2011
Accidental Events
Site Code
Name
Category
Special Protection Areas
Qualifying Feature
8512
Hermaness, Saxa Vord and Valla Field
Birds - aggregations of breeding birds
Breeding birds include: Fulmar, Gannet, Great skua, Guillemot, Puffin, Red-throated diver and Shag
8563
Otterswick & Graveland
Birds - aggregations of breeding birds
Breeding birds include the Red-throated diver
8568
Ramna Stacks and Gruney
Birds - aggregations of breeding
Leach's petrel
8564 8345 8393
Papa Stour Papa Stour The Vadills
Assemblages of breeding birds Inshore sublittoral rock (Marine) Littoral rock (Marine) Inshore sublittoral sediment (Marine)
Breeding birds include: Arctic tern and Ringed plover Reefs Sea caves Lagoons
Special Areas of Conservation
8345
8370
Papa Stour Ronas Hill -North Roe
Inshore sublittoral rock (Marine) Littoral rock (Marine) Standing open water and canals Inland rock Montane habitats Bogs (Upland) Standing open water and canals Dwarf shrub heath (Upland) Dwarf shrub heath
Reefs Sea caves Acid peat-stained lakes and ponds Acidic scree Alpine and subalpine heaths Blanket bog Clear-water lakes or lochs with aquatic vegetation Dry heaths Wet heathland with cross-leaved heath
Sites of Special Scientific Interest 8108 Valla Field Birds - aggregations of breeding birds Breeding birds include: Red-throated diver, Great skua 1545 776 TongaGreff Hermaness Mineralogy Birds - aggregations of breeding birds Supralittoral rock (Coast) Mineralogy Mineralogy Mammals Birds - aggregations of breeding Vascular plants Standing open water and canals Supralittoral sediment (Coast) Supralittoral sediment (Coast) MineralogyofScotland Breeding birds include: Gannet, Great skua, Guillemot and Puffin Maritime cliff Mineralogy of Scotland Mineralogy of Scotland Otters present Breeding birds include Red -throat divers Bog orchid Eutrophic loch Maritime cliff Sand dunes
1111 1686 8110 265
Lunda Wick Yell Sound Coast Graveland Breckon
1217
Ness of Cullivoe
Structural and metamorphic geology
Metamorphic rocks
1415 615 1589 1539
Sel Ayre Eshaness Coast Villians of Hamnavoe Tingon
Quaternary geology and geomorphology Igneous petrology Geomorphology Bogs (upland) Assemblages of breeding birds Other invertebrates Bogs (Upland) Assemblages of breeding birds
Quaternary of Scotland Old Red Sandstone Coastal Geomorphology of Scotland Blanket blog Breeding birds include: Red-throat diver and Whimbrel Arctic water flea Blanket bog Breeding birds include: Red-throat diver
1370
Ronas Hill - North Roe
August 2011
Page 91
Accidental Events
Geomorphology Quaternary geology and geomorphology Broad-leaved, mixed and yew woodland
Coastal Geomorphology of Scotland Quaternary of Scotland Scrub
1586
Uyea, North Roe Coast
Structural and metamorphic geology
Metamorphic rocks
1328
Ramna Stacks and Gruney
Birds - aggregations of breeding
Leach's petrel and guillemot
1239 1458 1434 481 1594 1146 1679
North Roe Meadow South Whiteness Skelda Ness Culswick Marsh Ward of Culswick Melby The Vadills
Vascular plants Littoral sediment (Coast) Vascular plants Mineralogy Fen, marsh and swamp (Wetland) Birds - aggregations of breeding birds Palaeontology Alga Inshore sublittoral sediment (Marine) Inshore sublittoral rock (Marine) Igneous petrology Inland rock Vascular plants Neutral grassland Vascular plants RAMSAR SITES
Vascular plant assemblage Saltmarsh Shetland mouse-ear-hawkweed Mineralogy of Scotland Valley fen Breeding birds include: Artic skua and Whimbrel Silurian - Devonian Chordata Egg wrack Saline lagoon Tidal rapids Old Red Sandstone Tall herb ledge Vascular plant assemblage Lowland neutral grassland Vascular plant assemblage
1216 1028 276 1208
Ness of Clousta Loch of Clousta Burn of Lunklet Muckle Roe Meadows
8453
Ronas Hill-North Roe and Tingon
Bogs (Upland)
Blanket Bog
Table 9-10: Conservation areas in west and northwest of the Shetland Islands (SNH, 2011).
Page 92
August 2011
Accidental Events
Figure 9-17 Coastal sensitivities to oil spill in the Shetland Islands.
August 2011
Page 93
Accidental Events
Primary species at colonies Leachs Storpetrel Storm Petrel Great skua Arctic tern Guillemot Kittiwake Razorbill
Gannet
Fulmar
Site no.
Colony name
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Hermaness/Saxa Vord Ramna Stacks/Gruney Fetlar Ronas Hill and North Roe Papa Stour Foula Noss Mousa Sumburgh Head Fair Isle
Others
Puffin
Shag Arctic skua -
Shag, Arctic skua -
Shag, Arctic skua
Table 9-11 Important seabird colonies on the Shetland Islands (adapted from Pollock et al., 2000).
9.5.3 Coastal Norway

Figure 9-18 shows UK SPAs and SACs and Norwegian protected areas (source: Framstad et al. 2010). Additionally it shows sites designated by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), which reflects a greater international significance. The site labels shown in the figure are the IUCN site names; Shetland refers to the Shetland National Scenic Area. The coast of Norway has many protected sites that are, in the main, designated for seabirds. Additional protected features include coastal mammals and geomorphological features of importance. Coldwater corals are also of importance, and these are most abundant in the northern waters of Norway. Sponges similarly are most common in northern waters although are also found off the southern Norwegian coast. Regarding fish sensitivities, the southern Norwegian coastline is important as a spawning ground for Norwegian spring-spawning herring, whereas the northern coast is more important for North-East Arctic cod and Barents Sea capelin (Forsgren et al. 2009). In general, Forsgren et al. (2009) conclude that the northern Norwegian Sea area (Lofoten-Barents Sea region) is more vulnerable to spills as a result of lower biodiversity and lower resilience than further south in the Norwegian Sea and in the North Sea. The OSCAR modelling predicts potential impacts Page 94 August 2011 on the Norwegian coast in the event of a spill from a worst case blowout. There is a 0-30% probability of oil persisting as far as the northern Norwegian coast, and by this time the slick predictions are that it will be a very patchy and of a thickness of under 1 micron, in constant exchange with droplets in the water column, and consequently very dispersed.
Accidental Events
North Uist
Figure 9-18 Protected areas around the NE Atlantic. Note: Labelled sites refer to IUCN designated marine sites
August 2011
Page 95
Accidental Events
9.5.4 Socio Economic impacts

Oil spills can have a negative impact on commercial fisheries through the closure of fishing grounds, fouling of fishing gear and tainting of fish. For small spills these impacts are generally shortterm and very localised but the effects are potentially longer lasting for larger spills. Fishing and mariculture are very important industries on the Shetland Islands. Commercial fish landings in Shetland in 2009 totalled 373 million (Marine Scotland). These landings would have included landings outwith Shetland waters (Shetlands Islands Council, 2010). Mariculture operations are important along the west coast of the islands with salmon, mussels and oysters being cultivated. In 2009, 43,785 tonnes of salmon were produced and 6,300 tonnes of shellfish (Shetlands Island Council, 2010). These may be at risk if a spill reaches these areas. A major oil spill can have a localised effect on the fishing industry through the closure of areas affected by either surface oil, water column oil, or oil in sediments. Some commercially important species spawn in the vicinity of the project or use the wider area as a nursery ground, although the immediate project area is not a spawning or nursery ground for many commercially fished species. Using ICES data for the value of fish landings from UK waters into UK ports, the value of fisheries that might be affected can be estimated, illustrated in Table 9-12 and Figure 9-19.
Oil spills may also have a direct impact on the amenity value of the coastline due to the physical and visual impact of oiling. This effect is generally short lived as a large proportion of the beached oil is broken down by natural means or mechanical removal. Perception of damage may be of longer duration, particularly by potential tourists rather than the local population. The tourist industry represents a significant proportion of the Shetland Islands local economy value with walking, ornithology, sailing, fishing, archaeology and diving being the most important. There are a number of tourist attractions on the west coast of the islands, including houses, monuments and places of interest. There are also various water-based activities in this region with various leisure craft moorings and sea angling areas.
Annual commercial fisheries value in ICES rectangles () ICES rectangle 51E6 51E7 51E8 52E7 52E8 52E9 Demersal 6,800 95, 800 2, 285,000 Pelagic 0 0 398,000
No data available 115,000 708,000 0 92,000
Data Source : Scottish Government Fisheries Division (2011)
Table 9-12 Fisheries data for ICES squares potentially affected by surface oil from a blowout. Page 96 August 2011
Accidental Events
Figure 9-19 Fisheries potentially most at risk from surface oil from a blowout.
August 2011
Page 97
Accidental Events
9.6
Residual risks
In the event of a spill from the project area, it can be seen from the assessment undertaken, that the most probable spill is a spill of < 1 tonne which typically breaks down and disperses rapidly in the environment. Larger spills and total loss of inventory from the drillship that could reach the coastline are considered to be remote i.e. have a low probability of occurrence. The consequences of a larger spill of hydrocarbons from the project will vary depending on factors such as wind speed and direction and sea state, as well as the time of year and the length of coastline affected. Several factors act to limit the extent of impacts in this particular project, including the predicted light nature of the oil and the predominance of currents and winds acting to take the spill northeast into open waters where it will disperse, evaporate and biodegrade. Consequently the risk to shorelines is limited, with a maximum of 1,500 tonnes of oil predicted to beach on the Shetland Islands and in Norway. Surface oil beaching in Norway in particular will have travelled a long distance in a constant exchange with the upper water column and will be in a more dispersed state. Though oil is predicted to cross over into the Faroese waters, the overall conclusion is that oil is not expected to beach on the Faroes. Offshore concentrations of seabirds have variable vulnerability in the area and adjacent blocks throughout the course of the year, with many months identified as being of high vulnerability. The magnitude of any impacts to seabirds following on from a spill will depend upon the size of the spill and the weather conditions at the time and the number of birds present. There are also areas of very high vulnerability to the north and east (the most likely direction of travel) in April and June-August, and any large oil spill at the project site could pass through these areas. In addition to affecting waterproofing of feathers, diesel is relatively toxic and in some situations it can pose a significant risk to offshore seabirds, particularly in calmer weather when the slick is not broken up or evaporated by high seas. Crude oil spills with a longer weathering window pose a risk of causing physical impacts and reducing the survivability of birds that come into contact with the spill. However the probability of large spills, such as an uncontrolled blowout, is considered remote, meaning that the overall risk of an oil spill from the project adversely impacting the coast of Scotland Page 98
is assessed to be extremely low. BP has in place a range of preventative response/mitigation measures to address such risks, as detailed in Section 9.7.
9.7
Oil spill response strategy
In addition to the prevention and source control measures described earlier, which limit the likelihood and scale of any release, there are comprehensive measures in place to respond to any release of oil or chemicals.
9.7.1 Oil pollution emergency plans

Spill response will be detailed in the Oil Pollution Emergency Plan (OPEP) that will be developed for the project. BP has considerable resources globally that can be applied in response to a major incident. In addition BP, as an offshore operator active in exploration and production in UK waters is party to a voluntary oil pollution compensation scheme, the Offshore Pollution Liability Association (OPOL). These response plans are regularly revised in line with regulatory requirements. The OPEP will be submitted for approval by the regulator in sufficient time to allow full consideration of the proposals.
9.7.2 Contingency planning

Structure BP has in place the resources necessary to provide a commensurate level of response to the size of spills which may potentially be encountered in the project. These resources are compliant with the requirements as detailed within the DECC OPRC guidance notes. The system is based upon the standard 3 Tiered system and is defined as follows:Tier 1: Monitoring and surveillance using infield vessels Tier 2: Additional aerial surveillance and dispersant spraying capability is available through OSR Tier 3: A full Tier 3 capability is available through OSR BP are full members of Oil Spill Response, based in Southampton, who provide the full range of equipment and personnel necessary to fulfil the response expectations of BP in the UKCS and to align with the regulatory requirements. Surface spill response will comply with UK Regulatory requirements including aerial August 2011
Accidental Events
surveillance capability within four hours; dispersant spraying within 6 hours; and the high-rate dispersant application from the C130 Hercules within 9 hours. Natural dispersion by wave action is the preferred method of dispersion, but should any sensitive resources be threatened by surface oil, dispersant application may be engaged onto fresh oil. In practice such a decision would be made after consultation with DECC, the MCA and the Scottish Environment Group which includes Marine Scotland, JNCC and SNH. Given that oil spills could occur from a number of scenarios, BP will have in place a variety of scenario plans to enhance response effectiveness and reduce response time. These plans will be exercised prior to commencement of drilling. In the event of a Tier 3 incident, the National Contingency Plan would be activated and further national resources brought to bear in controlling pollution and restoring affected areas. The Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) possesses response equipment, dispersants, vessels and aircraft along with trained personnel who would address the issue as necessary. BPs resources and those of the industry are regularly maintained and tested via local and national exercises, including the most recent testing of the National Contingency Plan in May 2011, where a blowout west of the Shetland Islands and response was simulated. Should oil enter Norwegian waters, it is expected that the MCA would activate the NORBRIT agreement and the Norwegian authorities would then assess the risks to their own seas and coastline and deploy their considerable resources in tackling those risks. Surface oil Surface spill response will comply with UK regulatory requirements including aerial surveillance capability and dispersant spraying capability. Natural dispersion by wave action is the preferred method of dispersion. Surface dispersants will also be used where necessary to mitigate risks to personnel, and should any sensitive resources be threatened by surface oil. The application of dispersant onto fresh oil will be considered based on the circumstances at the time, and in consultation with the relevant authorities. The standby vessel will also be equipped with dispersant capability. The BP Onshore Oil Spill Plan is in place, encompassing resources and personnel to combat oil spills approaching coastal areas of the Shetland Islands. Containment and recovery
The use of containment and recovery is a specialist operation and it is not necessarily appropriate if the oil is dispersing under natural processes, if other mitigation methods are effective or if there are no receptors at risk. Logistical support will be required by the response team in the form of specialist vessels, storage capability and eventual waste disposal. Hired storage vessels will comply with MCA offshore oil recovery requirements M1663. Detailed requirements will be provided by MCA upon request, with OSR ensuring equipment and operations align. A key parameter is the prevailing weather, as the specific equipment will have its own weather tolerance limits based on recovery effectiveness and also the safety of the vessels towing the boom. At sea containment and recovery is statistically inefficient, but is an option for Tier 3 large spills or ongoing spills. Surveillance is required also to monitor the clean up and to help guide any vessels to the densest parts of the oil spill. Should containment and recovery be undertaken, the waste arising will be managed in line with the relevant legal requirements and good practices. Subsea dispersant BP will have access to vessels with ROV capability for operation in 1,300m of water. Recent experience from the Gulf of Mexico has demonstrated that dispersant can be deployed from coil tubing or umbilical reels run through open water and directed into a flow stream using ROVs. This is an active area of research and development within OSPRAG. A decision on subsea dispersant would only be made after consultation with the relevant authorities and an assessment of the ongoing situation, with regard to operational considerations and the net environmental benefit of the subsea dispersant deployment. The effectiveness of dispersants is dependent on many factors and accepted practice for aerial dispersants is to undertake a test application before full and ongoing application, and this logic may apply to subsea dispersant if this is deemed necessary. Availability of oil spill response resources Table 9-13 lists the availability of oil spill response resources in the event of a Tier 3 oil spill via BPs support arrangements with OSR and through resources jointly developed via the industry group OSPRAG. Page 99
August 2011
Accidental Events
Tier
Resource
Response Time
Supplier
Contract
Authority to Mobilise
Notes
Surveillance Capability
1-3 Stena Carron OIM / BP WSL Sea surveillance Air surveillance Cessna 310 On site BP Yes OIM Use BAOAC from OPEP to quantify spill volume. Undertaken from RSV/ERRV or other available vessels. Mobilise via OSR. Fitted with remote sensing equipment and downloading equipment. Based in Coventry. Will have to supply trained observer.
1-3
On site
BP
Yes
OIM
Response time max 4 hrs to site.
Via OSR
Yes
BP IMT Manager
Air surveillance crew change helicopters Air surveillance Cessna Jigsaw helicopters
1 hr plus time to site
Various
Yes
BP Logistics
2/3
If available
MCA (CPS)
No
MCA
With remote sensing equipment. Can request service from MCA (CPS). Ability to map slick and estimate size. Fitted with video and digital camera equipment.
2/3
TBC on the day
BP
Yes
BP IMT Manager
Dispersant Capability - (not applicable to diesel) 1 Sea deployable dispersant Air deployable dispersant (Cessna 406) Air deployable dispersant (Hercules L-382) Air deployable dispersant Jigsaw Vessels (RSV + 2 ARRCs) On site ERRV Yes OIM Undertaken from ERRV or other available vessels. Mobilise via OSR. Treats 25 tonnes of oil per sortie. Based in Inverness / Coventry. Mobilise via OSR. Treats 340 tonnes of oil per sortie. Based in Southampton. Can request service from MCA (CPS) via DECC. Each RSV carries 2000 litres of Super Dispersant 25. Also fitted with dispersant pumps, educator and hoses for over the side dispersant application. Boom towing via ARRCs capability but booms not normally carried.
6 Hours to site 9 hours to site
Via OSR
Yes
BP IMT Manager BP IMT Manager
2/3
OSR
Yes
2/3
As available
MCA (CPS) BP
No
MCA
2/3
TBC on the day
Yes
BP IMT Manager
Page 100
August 2011
Accidental Events
Tier
2/3
Resource
Jigsaw vessels (RSV)
Response Time
TBC on the day
Supplier
BP
Contract
Yes
Authority to Mobilise
BP IMT
Notes
Each Jigsaw RSV can store up to 300m3 of oily waste.
At sea containment and recovery
Variable
OSR
Yes
BP IMT Manager
Recovery and storage equipment available at Southampton Base. Uses vessels of opportunity that will need to be hired by BP. Discuss availability and mobilisation options with Marine Technical Authority.
Shoreline Protection and Clean Up Capability 3 Shoreline response Will be confirmed by OSR on the day TBC on the day TBC on the day OSR Yes BP IMT Manager Significant capability available via OSR. Transport of equipment to relevant site will be arranged on the day. Equipment spread held and managed by SVT primarily for Sullom Voe response. BP Shipping will vet coastal tankers for suitability and arrange the charter on BPs behalf. Shoreline response (excluding Sullom Voe) mobile response packages at two sites, loaded with containment booms and support equipment. Vessels of opportunity, primarily from the fish farming community, are ideal for nearshore support.
SVT
BP SVT
Yes
BP IMT
Chartered vessels
BP Shipping
No
BP IMT Manager
1/2
BP/OSR/ SIC Shetland Response
First trailer mobilised <60 mins
BP / OSR
Yes
BP IMT / OSR
2/3
Near-shore support vessels
TBC on the day
BP
No
BP IMT Manager
Management and Expertise 3 Technical support Telephone Support 60 mins Rep on Site: Confirmed with OSR on the day OSR Yes BP IMT Manager Trained personnel to assist in managing spill. Based in Southampton or Aberdeen but will travel promptly to response centre.
Table 9-13 Availability of oil spill response resources.
August 2011
Page 101
Accidental Events
Shetland Islands coastline protection It is expected that, in the unlikely event of a Tier 3 spill affecting significant areas of the Shetland shoreline, control of all resources will fall to the Local Authority operating under the auspices of the Shoreline Response Centre. A number of documents developed in agreement/co-operation with relevant stakeholders detail how the response will be co-ordinated and managed (e.g. BP Atlantic Frontier Programme Shoreline Protection Strategy; BP/OSR Shetland Coastal Response Callout Strategy; Shetland Islands Council Marine Pollution Contingency Plan; Sullom Voe Harbour Oil Spill Plan). The BP Onshore Oil Spill Plan currently in place for the Schiehallion, Foinaven and Clair assets will also be activated for this project if necessary. As part of this plan, BP have contracted with OSR to have strategically located mobile response packages, and trained response personnel, that can be engaged to combat oil spills approaching inshore areas. The packages comprising a number of containment booms and ancillary booming equipment are located on the Shetland Islands mainland at Sullom Mine, Brae and on Yell at Cullivoe. The arrangements with OSR extend to the provision of a pool of trained local responders who, will take the equipment to a pre-determined location and undertake response operations. BP has further resources and trained oil spill responders located at Sullom Voe Terminal who would respond in the event of any oil threat to the Shetland Islands. Waste Management In general, natural dispersion is usually considered a more effective treatment technique than attempting to recover oil physically at sea. Consequently oily water arising from boom collection of oil offshore are not expected to be significant. If this recovery method was used, there is a reliable supply chain that routinely deals with the storage, treatment and disposal of oily water from the oil industry that could accommodate modest volumes of oily water. BP has a contract in place with a national waste contractor. This contractor routinely processes oily water and otherwise contaminated water safely on behalf of BP. There are other contractors in the marketplace who could also offer this service. Oily water would originate in the recovery vessels and could be transported to a relevant port
for treatment. Were oil to reach the shoreline and it is deemed that physical removal of oil and contaminated sediments is required, this will generate a hazardous waste stream. The model predicts, on a worst case scenario, that up to 3,200 tonnes of oil might beach, equivalent to 10,000 tonnes of oily emulsion. This might be bound to sediments and therefore the total waste arising might be several times higher than this. Further disposal of oily packaging, absorbents etc. would be required. There exists infrastructure of storage and processing at several sites in the UK and there are significant logistical bases through which such material could be moved at many places around the coastline including the Shetland Islands. This is in addition to the capacity within the non-oil industry oily waste streams. Therefore the additional oily waste generated by a spill is considered manageable. The short term measures required to manage such oily wastes are considered in BPs onshore emergency response plans. In addition, a Waste Management Plan has been prepared for North Uist.
9.8
Cumulative and transboundary risk
9.8.1 Cumulative risk

Other developments in the west of the Shetland Islands area from which a spill may occur include The Foinaven and Schiehallion FPSOs. The oil from the Foinaven and Schiehallion fields is produced into the Foinaven and Schiehallion FPSO facilities which are permanently stationed in the field. The crude oil is exported by shuttle tankers. BPs Clair Phase 1 and proposed Clair Ridge Development. The Clair Ridge Development is the second stage of the Clair oil field development, expanding on the Clair Phase 1 platform which started production in 2005. The Clair Ridge Development is at pre-development stage, but there may be drilling ongoing via a semi-submersible rig at the time of drilling North Uist. Various exploration programmes are either underway or planned for the west of Shetland Islands area by other Operators.
Page 102
August 2011
Accidental Events
As indicated by historical data, the likelihood of one major spill occurring is remote, limiting the potential for cumulative oil spill impacts from the project and other existing installations. Detailed contingency plans are in place, outlining the response measures to be implemented in the event of any spill.
9.9
Chemical spills
9.9.1 Chemical spill source identification

A range of chemicals will be used on the project for drilling, process and utilities (see Chapter 7) and there is some risk of chemical spills, for example, during chemical transfer onto or within the drillship.
9.8.2 Transboundary risk

Oil spill modelling undertaken for the project, which assumed no response measures were implemented, indicates some probability that in the event of a worse case oil spill, a transboundary impact could result, with regard to Norwegian waters and coastline and to a lesser extent in Faroese waters. No significant impact is predicted in any other waters or coastlines. The assessment of spill likelihood in this chapter, based on historical UK and international incident data, demonstrates that the likelihood of a spill large enough to lead to such a transboundary impact is remote. Therefore BP believes that consultation under the Espoo Convention is not required as a result of the project. The Espoo Convention requires notification and consultation only on projects likely to have a significant adverse environmental impact across boundaries. The risk of oil spill having a transboundary impact, particularly from the North Sea operations, is recognised by the UK Government and other governments around the North Sea. Agreements are in existence for dealing with international oil spill incidents with states bordering the UK. In the event of a major spill which is predicted to spread into Norwegian waters, the NORBRIT plan will be activated. The NORBRIT plan is a joint UK/Norway oil spill contingency plan operating within the framework of the 2006 National Contingency Plans. The plan is oriented towards major spills. It becomes operational when agreement to the request for its implementation is reached. Responsibility for implementing joint action rests with the Action Co-ordinating Authority (ACA) of the country on whose side of the median line a spill originated. The UKs Counter Pollution Branch of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) is the ACA for the UK. In the unlikely event of a major spill which is predicted to drift into Faroese waters, the MCA will liaise with the Marine Rescue and Co-ordination Centre (MRCC) in Torshavn, Faroe.
9.9.2 Chemical spill prevention

A Management System, which aligns with the BP North Sea Region requirements, will be used to monitor and manage chemical storage, usage and disposal. This will be supported by an auditable chemical assessment and selection process. Chemical spill equipment will be provided at strategic locations around the drillship to enable operational personnel to treat any chemical spills. Drillship and supply vessel personnel will be given full training in chemical spill prevention and actions to be taken in the event of a spill. A system will be in place for the reporting of all spills.
9.9.3 Residual risk

As for oil spills, BPs target is for zero chemical spills. However, despite design, operational and training measures to reduce the probability of chemical spill, the risk cannot be totally eliminated. To reduce the potential chemical spill risk from chemicals used offshore, BP continually works with its chemical suppliers to ensure that chemical use is minimised, wherever possible, without compromising technical performance. Furthermore BP recognises that substitution is an important part of the OSPAR Harmonised Mandatory Control Scheme (HCMS) and is committed to the investigation of alternative components and products. Information on specific chemical use and associated environmental impact assessment will be provided in the relevant PONs prior to the commencement of activity. Given the high energy marine environment of the project site, any chemical spill is expected to rapidly disperse in the offshore marine environment with a possible negligible to minor localised impact on plankton. In addition, given the low probability of a chemical spill occurring with any significant associated environmental impact, means that the residual risk of chemical spill during the project will be remote.
August 2011
Page 103
Accidental Events
Page 104
August 2011
Conclusions
10 Conclusions
This chapter outlines the key findings of the EIA process, including any residual impacts.
significant. Accidental events - the water column, coastal areas and associated fauna could be affected by the accidental release of oil and/or chemicals to sea. In almost all scenarios observed in historic statistics, the effect will be localised and nonsignificant. In the event of a major incident, such as a well blowout leading to spill or a total loss of fuel inventory, effects are likely to be significant, although the likelihood of such effects is extremely remote. Seabirds in the wider project area in particular would be at risk from such events, along with coastal environmental resources where oil might beach. In the event of a prolonged blowout, it is predicted that there would be a 10% likelihood of beaching in northwest of the Shetland Islands and also at several points along the Norwegian coastline. Though oil is predicted to cross over into the Faroese waters, the overall conclusion is that oil is not expected to beach on the Faroes. Fishing activity would be curtailed in areas affected by oil, either on the coast, in the water column or on the surface. Numerous and substantial preventative and response measures are in place to manage this risk.
10.1
Potential environmental issues
The following environmental issues were identified during the EIA process as the key issues associated with the project that might present a threat to the receiving environment: Physical presence - the seabed and fauna within the vicinity of the project might be affected by installing the well. The drillship will, however, not use anchors with associated seabed disturbance, and the area affected is a very small proportion of the similar habitat in this area. This impact is assessed as non-significant. Permitted discharges to sea - the seabed, fauna and water column in the immediate vicinity of the project might be affected by discharges associated with discharges during drilling, notably water-based mud and drill cuttings. Given the expected deposition thicknesses, the controls on chemical toxicity, the limited quantities associated with a single well and the ability of the seabed to recover, this impact is assessed as non-significant. Underwater noise - sources of underwater noise generation from activities associated with the project include the presence of the drillship and standby vessel, potential for undertaking vertical seismic profile of the well and the potential use of an explosive charge to sever the wellhead. These activities have the potential to impact upon marine animals in close vicinity of the project at the relevant time. BP will implement a number of measures to mitigate noise impacts based on the principles of the JNCC guidelines for seismic surveys activities and the JNCC guidelines for explosive use, and therefore the overall impact is considered nonsignificant. Atmospheric emissions the use of fuel in the course of the project will create emissions, but these are located well away from sensitive receptors in a highly dispersive environment and are of a scale consistent with many other marine activities. This impact is assessed as non-
Overall, it is considered that following application by BP of preventative and mitigation measures, the project will not cause any significant environmental impacts.
10.2
Key residual issues
The residual issues that remain after preventative and mitigation measures are taken, relate to unlikely events, namely the failure of preventative measures to protect against the effects of the use of explosives and seismic airguns, and the failure of preventative and mitigation measures to protect against the effects of a prolonged well blowout or loss of diesel inventory on the project vessels. In these cases, the requirement of the EIA under the EIA Regulations is, when considering significant impacts, to consider accidental and unplanned events. These events have been considered in the preceding chapters. The potential use of explosives and, to a lesser extent seismic airguns, has the potential to disturb or injure marine mammals, and a set of mitigation measures involving observation and acoustic monitoring will be applied to minimise this risk to a non-significant level. Any vertical seismic profiling
August 2011
Page 105
Conclusions
operation will be subject to a specific environmental assessment through the PON14 application process, and the use of explosives will be notified to DECC. The effects of worst case oil spill scenarios have been modelled and documented, along with the numerous and substantial preventative and response measures in place. The residual risks associated with this activity have been quantified. The spill prevention strategy will be detailed in the OPEP which will involve further consultation with the statutory authorities and appraisal of existing response arrangements.
10.4
Protected areas and species
No significant impacts are expected upon the marine species and habitats protected by Annexes I and II of the Habitats Directive (as transposed to UK waters) and Annex I of the Birds Directive. The presence of protected species under Annex I of the Birds Directive is limited to European Stormpetrel, Leachs storm petrel and the arctic tern. The European Storm-petrel is present in the area in high densities during September and occurs in internationally important numbers. The presence of protected species under Annex II of the Habitats Directive within the project area is limited to marine mammal species. Marine mammal species that may be found in the project area occur in very low densities; furthermore mitigation measures are in place to minimise the risk of significant noise impacts from the project to a tolerable level. It is considered unlikely that this project will have a significant effect on any European protected sites.
10.3
Cumulative and transboundary impacts
The cumulative impact assessment has drawn on the SEA undertaken by DECC for the area north and west of the Orkney and Shetland Islands (SEA 4) (DTI, 2003). This SEA considered existing and long-term potential development in the area and therefore provides a basis for considering the projects input to long-term cumulative impacts in the area. Effects are considered cumulative if: The physical contamination or footprint overlaps with that of adjacent activities; or The effects of multiple sources clearly act on a single receptor or resource (for example a fish stock or seabird population)
10.5
Commitments
A review of the potential impacts associated with the project, and the mitigation measures proposed, indicates that no significant cumulative impacts are anticipated. Transboundary impacts originate in one country but have an effect on the environment in another country. A review of each of the potential impacts associated with the project and the mitigation measures proposed indicates that no significant transboundary impacts are anticipated. The results of oil spill modelling, which assumed no response measures were implemented, indicate that in the very unlikely event of a worst case spill, oil is likely to move into Norwegian waters and is ultimately likely to affect the Norwegian coastline. Oil is also predicted to cross over into the Faroese waters, but the overall conclusion from a variety of modelling outputs is that oil is not expected to beach on the Faroes. The assessment of spill frequency demonstrates the extremely low probability of such an event, without a relevant precedent.
The environmental impact of most offshore activities is strictly controlled through direct and indirect legal requirements. BP complies with these legal requirements, and in so doing, the associated impacts are assessed as nonsignificant and further mitigation is not required. There remain a small number of residual impacts that need additional management measures. The aspects identified in this Environmental Statement as requiring specific management measures are as follows. Underwater noise For any vertical seismic profiling operation, BP will employ trained Marine Mammal Observers and Passive Acoustic Monitoring systems to detect cetaceans. The JNCC guidelines for minimising acoustic disturbance to marine mammals from seismic surveys (JNCC, 2010) will be followed. Explosive severance of the wellhead Should explosives be required to undertake the severance of the wellhead, BP will employ trained Marine Mammal Observers and Passive Acoustic Monitoring systems to detect cetaceans. Consideration will be given to the use of an acoustic deterrent device to be activated prior to detonation of the charge. The JNCC guidelines for minimising acoustic disturbance to marine mammals whilst using explosives (JNCC, 2010)
Page 106
August 2011
Conclusions
will be followed. Oil spill prevention and response BP commits to undertaking the measures identified in Section 9.3.3 regarding well design, well control, well control procedures, BOP management, well capping and containment, relief well planning and well control response. BP commits to providing or obtaining access to the spill response resources detailed in Section 9.7.
10.6
Final remarks
Based on the findings of the project EIA process and the identification and subsequent application of the mitigation measures identified for each potentially significant environmental impact, it is concluded that the project is highly unlikely to result in any significant environmental impacts.
August 2011
Page 107
Conclusions
Page 108
August 2011
References
11 References
Au, W.W.L., Pack, A.A., Lammers, M.O., Herman, L.M., Deakos M.H & Andrews K. (2006). Acoustic properties of humpback whale songs. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 120, 1103 1110. AFEN (2001). The UK Atlantic Margin Environment Towards a better understanding. Aurora Environmental and Hartley Anderson. AFEN, Aberdeen. Battelle. Neff JM, Hillman RE and Waugh JJ (1989). Bioaccumulation of trace metals from drilling mud barite by benthic animals. In Engelhardt F.R., Ray J.P. & Gillam A.H. (eds.) Drilling Wastes. Proceedings of the 1988 International Conference on Drilling Wastes, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 461 to 479. Bett B. J. (1997). RRS Charles Darwin Cruise 101C Leg 2, 14 Jul-20 Aug 1996. Atlantic Margin Environmental Survey; seabed survey of the shelf edge and slope west of Shetland. Southampton Oceanography Centre Cruise Report No. 7, 127pp + app. Bett, B.J. (1999). RRS Charles Darwin cruise 112C Leg 2, 19 May-24 Jun 1998. Atlantic Margin Environmental Survey: seabed survey of deepwater areas (17th round Tranches) to the north and west of Scotland. Southampton Oceanography Centre, Cruise Report No. 25, 171pp. Bett, B.J. (2003). An introduction to the benthic ecology of the Faroe-Shetland Channel (SEA4). http://www.offshoresea.org.uk/consultations/SEA_4/SEA4_TR_Bentho s_SOC.pdf [Accessed 25/07/11]. Bett, B.J. (2007). Atlantic Margin Environmental Surveys and North Sea Environmental Surveys. RRS Charles Darwin Cruise 123C3-4. 19 July 15 September 2000. Southampton Oceanography Centre Cruise Report No. 20. 221pp. BIOFAR (2006). A description of a large scale internordic benthic macrofauna/flora project. Available online at http://www.biofar.fo [Accessed 25/07/11]. BODC (1998). United Kingdom digital Marine Atlas. Third Edition, British Oceanographic Data Centre. BP (2004). Schiehallion Wider Field PerspectiveEnvironmental Statement. BP document Reference Z-8000-ZS-4034. Breitzke, M., Boebel, O., Naggar, S., Jokat, W., & Werner, B. (2008). Broad band calibration of marine seismic sources used by R/V Polarstern for
academic research in polar regions. Geophysical Journal International. 174 (505-524). Brueggeman, J.J., Malme C.I., Grotefendt R.A., Volsen, D.P., Burns, J.J., Chapman, D.G., . Ljungblad, D.K & Green G. A. (1990). Shell Western E & P Inc. 1989 Walrus Monitoring Program: The Klondike,Burger, and Popcorn Prospects in the Chukchi Sea. Report prepared by EBASCO Environmental for Shell Western E & P Inc. 157 p. Bloor P.D, Reid J.B, Webb A., Begg G & Tasker M.L. (1996). The distribution of seabirds and cetaceans between the Shetland and Faroe Islands. JNCC Report, No. 226. Campbell, N., Neat, F., Burns, F. And P. Kunzlik (2010). Species richness, taxonimic diversity and taxonomic distinctness ofthe deep-water demersal fish community on the Northeast Atlantic contonental slope (ICES Subdivision Via). ICES Journal of Marine Science 68(2) 365-376. Coull, K. A., Johnstone, R., & Rogers, S. I. (1998). Fisheries Sensitivity Maps in British Waters. UKOOA Ltd. Chevron (2008). Aberlour Environmental Seabed Survey UK, 2007. Report C016/08. Chevron (2010). Lagavulin Environmental Statement. W/4062/2009. Submission Date: March 2010 . Clark, R. (1996). Oil Pollution. In Marine Pollution Third Edition (pp. 28-51). Clark, C.W, & Charif, R.A (1998). Acoustic monitoring of large whales to the west of Britain and Ireland using bottom-mounted hydrophone arrays, October 1996-September 1997. JNCC Report, No. 281. Debes, H. H., Gallego, A. & Magen, C. (2007). Seasonal Abundance and development of krill in the Faroe-Shetland Channel. ICES CM 2007/F:01. DECC (2009a). Offshore Energy SEA - A3a.6 Birds. Available online at http://www.offshoresea.org.uk/consultations/Offshore_Energy_SEA/O ES_A3a6_Birds.pdf [Accessed 07/01/10]. DECC (2009b). UK Offshore Energy Strategic Environmental Assessment. Future Leasing for Offshore Wind Farms and Licensing for Offshore Oil & Gas and Gas. Environmental Report. January 2009. DECC (2010 & 2011) Letters to industry dated 23rd December 2010 and 17th May 2011 regarding the issue of oil spills in environmental submissions. DECC (2011) Guidance Notes: Decommissioning
August 2011
Page 109
References
of Offshore Oil and Gas Installations and Pipelines under the Petroleum Act 1998. DTI (2000) Strategic Environmental Assessment of Former White Zone Volume 2 - Synthesis of Environmental Information. DTI (2003). Strategic Environmental Assessment area North and West of Orkney and Shetland. http://www.offshoresea.org.uk/consultations/SEA_4/SEA4_assessmen t.pdf [Accessed 25/07/11]. Dunnet, GM, Ollason, JC, & Cormack, RM 1963 A study of survival of adult fulmars with observations on the pre-laying exodus. British Birds, 56: 2-18. Ferguson, M.A., Onder, A., Whitehead, A., Hartley, J., Applebee, J., Walls, A.H., Buchanan, I., Duff, A., Fletcher, I., Moore, D., Picton, C., Spink, J., Taylor, D., Urbanus, J., Harvey, G., Webber, J., Johnsone, R. and M. Tasker (1997). Baseline environmental surveys in deep-water exploration territory A new approach. SPE/UKOOA European Environmental Conference Paper No. 37845. Folkow L.P, Martensson P.E and Blix A.S (1996). Annual distribution of hooded seals (Cystophora cristata) in the Greenland and Norwegian Seas. Polar Biology, 16, 179 189. Forsgren, E., Dalsgaard, S.C., Fauchald, P., Jrnegren & J.,Nsje, T.F Norwegian marine ecosystems are northern ones more vulnerable to pollution from oil than southern ones? http://www.nina.no/archive/nina/PppBasePdf/rappo rt/2009/514.pdf [Accessed 25/07/11]. Framstad, E., Blindheim, T., Erikstad, L., Thingstad, P.G. & Sloreid, S.-E. 2010. Assessment of natural variation and qualities of Norwegian conservation sites. NINA Rapport 535. 214 pp. http://www.dirnat.no/multimedia/46143/NINArapp5 35-verneevaluering.pdf [Accessed 25/07/11]. Fowler,S., Mogensen, C.B. & Blasedale, T (2004). Plan of action for the conservation and management of sharks in UK waters. JNCC report no 360. Fulton, T. W. (1891). The comparative fecundity of sea-fishes. Ninth Annual Report of the Fishery Board for Scotland (1890) Part III: 243-268. Fulton, T. W. (1898). The ovaries and ovarian eggs of the angler or frog-fish (Lophius piscatorius) and of the John Dory (Zeus faber). Sixteenth Annual Report of the Fishery Board for Scotland (1897) Part III: 125-134. Gardline Survey (1998). Baseline Environmental Survey of the Sediments Around UKCS 213/25
July 1998. Final Report. Prepared for Conoco (UK) Limited. Gardline Report Number 5195. GEBCO (2009). General bathymetric chart of the oceans. Available online at http://www.gebco.net/ [Accessed 25/07/11]. Gordon, J. D. M. and Swan, S. C. (1997). The distribution and abundance of deep-water sharks on the continental slope to the west of the British Isles. ICES CM 1997/BB:11, 23pp. Gore, M.A. et al. 2008. Transatlantic migration and deep ocean diving by basking shark. Biology Letters, 4, 4, 395-398. Graham, C., Holmes, R., Wild, J.B. & Tulloch, G. (1996). Charles Darwin cruise 101C - Geological Observations. Technical Report WB/96/37C, British Geological Survey, Edinburgh, 13pp. Grant, C., Dwyer, R. & Leggart, I (1995). Development of a new Metocean design basis for the NW Shelf of Europe. Offshore Technology Conference Paper No. 7685. Greene, C. (1986). Underwater sounds from the semi-submersible drill rig SEDCO 708 drilling in the Aleutian Islands, Section 1. American Petroleum Institute 4438 , 69pp. Gubbay S (2003). Marine aggregate extraction and biodiversity. Information, issues and gaps in understanding. Report to the Joint Marine Programme of the Wildlife Trusts and WWF-UK. Hamer K.C. , Phillips, R.A. , Wanless S, Harris M.P., Wood, A.G (2000). Foraging ranges, diets and feeding locations of gannets Morus bassanus in the North Sea: evidence from satellite telemetry. Marine Ecology Progress Series. Vol. 200: 257264. Hartley JP (1996). Environmental monitoring of offshore oil and gas drilling discharges a caution on the use of barium as a tracer. Marine Pollution Bulletin, 32 (10): 727 to 733. Heath, M.R. & Jnasdtir, S.H. (1999). The ascent migration of Calanus finmarchicus from overwintering depths in the Faroe-Shetland Channel. Fisheries Oceanography; 8 (supplement 1) 84-99. Hildebrand, J. (2009). Anthropogenic and natural sources of ambient noise in the ocean. Marine Ecology Progress Series , 5-20. Hislop, J. R. G., Gallego, A., Heath, M. R., Kennedy, F. M., Reeves, S. A. & Wright P. J. (2001). A synthesis of the early life history of anglerfish, Lophius piscatorius (Linnaeus, 1758) in northern British waters. ICES Journal of Marine Science 58: 70-86.
Page 110
August 2011
References
Hitchcock, D. R., & Drucker, B. R. (1996). Investigation of benthic and surface plumes associated with marine aggregates mining in the United Kingdom. In The global ocean towards operational oceanography. Oceanology International Vol. 2 (pp. 220234), ISBN 0-90025412-2. Hughes, J.A. Narayanaswamy, B. E., and B. J. Bett (2003). SEA 4; An overview of the benthic ecology of the Faroe-Shetland Channel. Huthnance, J.M., (1986): The Rockall Slope Current and shelf edge processes. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Edinburgh, 88 B, 83-101. ITAP. (2008). Measurement of Noise at Horns Rev II. ITAP Institut fr technische und angewandte Physik GmbH. Jenkins, K.D., Howe, S., Sanders, B.M. & Norwood, C (1989). Sediment Deposition, Biological Accumulation and Sub-cellular Distribution of Barium Following the Drilling of an Exploratory Well. In Engelhardt FR, Ray JP & Gillam AH (eds.) Drilling Wastes. Proceedings of the 1988 International Conference on Drilling Wastes, Calgary, Alberta, Canada, 587 to 608. Johansen, . (1991). Numerical modeling of physical properties of weathered North Sea crude oils. SINTEF Report No. 02.0786.00/15/91. 18 p. Jones, D.O.B. & Gates. A (2010). Deep-sea life of Scotland and Norway. Published by Ophiura. 77pps. Jones, D. O. B. & Gates, A. R. (2010). Assessing The Effects Of Hydrocarbon Drilling Activity on Deep-Water Megafauna In The Northern North Atlantic. A Rapid Universal Assessment Method? Proceedings of the SPE International Conference on Health, Safety and Environment, 1214 April 2010, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. SPE 126841 Jones, D.O B., Wigham, B. D., Hudson, I. R. and B. J. Bett (2007). Anthropogenic disturbance of deep-sea megabenthic assemblages; a study with remotely operated vehicles in the Faroe-Shetland Channel, NE Atlantic. Marine Biology 151; 17311741. JNCC (2010) Guidelines for minimising the risk of injury and disturbance to marine mammals from seismic surveys / explosives. Joint Nature Conservation Committee. JNCC (2010b). Protection of marine European Protected Species from the offences of injury and disturbance. Joint Nature Conservation Committee.
Ketten D.R, Arruda J., Cramer S., Yamato M., Zosuls M., Mountain D., Chadwick R.S., Dimitriadis E.K., Shoshani J & O'Connell-Rodwell C. (2007). How low can they go: Functional analysis of the th largest land and marine mammal ears. 17 Biennial Conference on the Biology of Marine Mammals, Cape Town, South Africa. Macleod K, Simmonds M.P & Murray E (2003). Summer distribution and relative abundance of cetacean populations off north-west Scotland. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the UK, 83, 1187 1192. Marsh, H., & Schulkin, M. (1962). Shallow water transmission loss. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America , 34: 863. McCauley, R. (1998). Radiated Underwater noise measured from the drilling rig Ocean General, rig tenders Pacific Ariki and Pacific Frontier, Fishing vessel Reef Venture and natural sources in the Timor Sea, Northern Australia. Shell Australia. McConnell BJ, Curry MG, Vaughan, RW, and McConnell LC (1992). Satellite tracking of grey seals (Halichoerus grypus). Journal of Zoology. 226, 271-282. Nedwell, J., & Edwards, B. (2004). A review of the measurement of underwater man made noise carried out by Subacoustech Ltd. Subacoustech Ltd. Nedwell, J., & Edwards, B. (2002). Measurements of underwater man made noise carried out by Subacoustech Ltd. 1993-2003. Subacoustech. Nedwell, J., Edwards, B., Turnpenny, A., & Gordon, J. (2004). Fish and marine mammal audiograms: A summary of available information. Subacoustech Report Ref: 534R0214. Nedwell, J., Needham, K., Gordon, J., Rogers, C., & Gordon, T. (2001). The effects of underwater blast during wellhead severance in the North Sea. Subacoustech Ltd. Nedwell, J., Parvin, S., Edwards, B., Workman, r., Brooker, A., & J.E., K. (2007). Measurement and interpretation of underwater noise during construction and operation of offshore windfarms in UK waters. Subacoustech. North Sea Task Force (1993). North Sea Quality Status Report, Oslo and Paris Commissions, Olsen and Olsen, Denmark, 132pp. Neff J.M. (2005). Composition, Environmental Fates, and Biological Effect of Water Based Drilling Muds and Cuttings Discharged to the Marine Environment. Petroleum Environmental Research Forum.
August 2011
Page 111
References
NRC. (2005). Marine Mammal Populations and Ocean Noise. Determining when noise causes biologically significant effects. Washington DC: The National Academies Press. pp126. Oil and Gas UK (2009). Accident statistics for offshore units on the UKCS 1990-2007. Issue 1, April 2009. Co-sponsored by the Health and Safety Executive. Available online at http://www.oilandgasuk.co.uk/issues/health/docs/U KCS_accident_statistics_offshore_units.pdf. [Accessed 25/07/11]. OGP, (2010). E&P Sound and Marine Life Programme. Available online at http://www.soundandmarinelife.org/Site/index.html [Accessed 25/07/11]. OSPAR (2000). Quality Status report 2000, region II Greater North Sea. OSPAR Commission, London, 136 pp. OSPAR. (2009b). Overview of Impact of anthropogenic underwater sound in the marine environment. OSPAR Commission. OSPAR (2009a). Assessment of impacts of offshore oil and gas activities in the North-East Atlantic. Offshore Industry Series Publication Number: 453/2009. ISBN 978-1-906840-93-8. Pollock C.M., Mavor R., Weir C.R., Reid A., White R.W., Tasker M.L., Webb A & Reid J.B (2000). The distribution of seabirds and marine mammals in the Atlantic Frontier, north and west of Scotland. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. Reed, M., O. M., Aamo O. M. & P. S. Daling (1995a). Quantitative analysis of alternate oil spill response strategies using OSCAR. Spill Science and Technology, Pergamon Press 2(1): 67-74. Reed, M., French, D., Rines, H., & Rye, H. (1995b): A three-dimensional oil and chemical spill model for environmental impact assessment. Proceedings of the 1995 International Oil Spill Conference, pp.61-66. Richardson, J., Greene, C., Malme, C., & Thomson, D. (1995). Marine Mammals and Noise. San Diego California: Academic Press. Robinson, G.A. (1970). Continuous plankton records; variation in the seasonal cycle of phytoplankton in the North Atlantic. Bulletin of Marine Ecology 6, 333-345. Roth, E., & Schmidt, V. (2010). U.S. Geological survey coastal and marine geology report on cooperative agreement G09AC00352: Analysis of acoustic sound pressure levels generated by research icebreakers and marine seismic sources
in the deep water, Artic Ocean. University of California San Diego, La Holla: Marine Physical Laboratory of the Scripps Institute of Oceanography. Saunders, P. M.(1990). Cold outflow from the Faroe Bank Channel. Journal of Physical Oceanography 20, 29-43. Scandpower (2011). Blowout and well release frequencies based on SINTEF offshore blowout database 2010 (revised). Report No. 19.101.0013009/2011/R3. Shelton, R. G. J., Turrell, W.R., Macdonald, A. McLaren, I.S. and N.T. Nicoll (1997). Records of post-smolt Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L., in the Faroe-Shetland Channel in June 1996. Fisheries Research 31(1-2) 159-162. Shetland Islands Council (2010). Shetland in statistics. http://www.shetland.gov.uk/documents/SinStatsBin der1.pdf SNH (2011). Special Areas of Conservation. Available at http://www.snh.gov.uk/protectingscotlands-nature/protected-areas/internationaldesignations/sac/ [Accessed 25/07/11]. SINTEF (2006) ERMS Report no. 9B: KjeilenEilertsen, G., Trannum, H., Jak, R., M.Smit, M., Neff, J., G.Durell, 2004. Literature report on burial: derivation of PNEC as component in the MEMW model tool. Akvamilj Report no. AM-2004/024. Southall B.L., Bowles, E.A., Ellison, W.T., Finneran, J.J., Gentry, R.L., Greene, C.R., Kastak, D., Ketten, D., Miller, J.H., Nachtigall, P.E., Richardson, W.J., Thomas, J.A. and P. L. Tyack (2007). Marine Mammal Noise Exposure Criteria: Initial Scientific Recommendations. Aquatic Mammals, 33(4), 411 - 521. Stone, C. J., Webb, A., Barton, C., Ratcliffe, N., Reed, T. C., Tasker, M. L., Camphuysen, C. J., & Pienkowski, M. W. 1995. An Atlas of Seabird Distribution in North-West European Waters. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. 326 pp. Taylor SJ & Reid JB 2001. The distribution of seabirds and cetaceans around the Faroe Islands. Joint Nature Conservation Committee, Peterborough. Thorpe, J. E. (1989). Downstream migration of young salmon:recent findings, with special reference to Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar. In: Brannon, E.L. & Jonsson, B., eds. Salmonid migration and distribution symposium. Seattle: University of Washington, pp. 8186.
Page 112
August 2011
References
TINA Consultants, (2010). Updated report on the analysis of DTI UKCS oil spill data from the period 1975-2005 including 2006-2009. Turrell, W. R., Hansen, B., Osterhus, S., Hughes, S., Ewart, K. And J. Hamilton (1999). Direct observations of inflow to the Nordic Seas through the Faroe-Shetland Channel 91994-1997), ICES CM 1999/L:o1. International Council for the Exploration of the Sea, Copenhagen. Tyack P.L (2008). Implications for marine mammals of large-scale changes in the marine acoustic environment. Journal of Mammalogy, 89(3), 549 558. Ulrick, R. J. (1983). Principles of underwater sound, 3rd Edition. New York: McGraw-Hill, 423pp. UKMMAS (2010). Charting Progress 2. United Kingdom Marine Monitoring and Assessment Strategy, DEFRA. Available online at http://chartingprogress.defra.gov.uk/ [Accessed 25/07/11]. UKOOA (2006). Report on the analysis of DTI UKCS oil spill data from the period 1975 - 2005. October 2006. A report prepared by TINA Consultants Ltd. Wyatt, R. (2008). Review of existing data on underwater sounds produced by the oil and gas industry. Oil and Gas Producers (OGP) Joint Industry Programme report on Sound and Marine Life.
August 2011
Page 113
Summary of Environmental Legislation
Appendix A Summary of Environmental Legislation

General
Issue
General
Legislation
MARPOL 73/78
Regulator and Requirements

UK Regulations apply to ALL vessels regardless of flag whilst in UK Territorial Waters (12nm from coastline), and implement the requirements of MARPOL 73/78. Similarly, MARPOL 73/78 requirements apply to ALL vessels whilst on the High Seas (outside territorial waters).
Annexes I Prevention of pollution by oil, II Control of pollution by noxious liquid substances, IV Prevention of Pollution by Sewage from Ships, V Prevention of pollution by garbage from ships and VI Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships of MARPOL Public Participation Public Participation Directive 2003/35/EC
The international Maritime Organisation may designate area of sea as Special Areas for oceanographic reasons, ecological condition and in relation to character of shipping and other sea users. The North West European Waters (including the North Sea area) have been given Special Area status from August 1999. In these area special mandatory methods for the prevention of sea pollution is required and these special areas are provided with a higher level of protection than other areas of the sea.
The Public Participation Directive (PPD) was issued by the European Commission in order to provide members of the public with opportunities to participate on the permitting and ongoing regulation of certain categories of activities within Member States, including Environmental Impact Statements.
Environmental Liability
Environmental Damage Regulations 2009
Brings into force rules to force polluters to prevent and repair damage to water systems, land quality, species and their habitats and protected sites. The polluter does not have to be prosecuted first, so remedying the damage should be faster.
Marine management
Marine (Scotland) Act
Regulators: Marine Scotland (on behalf of the Scottish Government The Marine (Scotland) Act 2010 saw the formation of Marine Scotland, who operate as the competent marine management authority on behalf of the Scottish Government. The main measures of the act include: Marine planning: a new statutory marine planning system to sustainably manage the increasing, and often conflicting, demands on our seas Marine Licensing: a simpler licensing system, minimising the number of licences required for development in the marine environment to cut bureaucracy and encourage economic investment Marine Conservation: improved marine nature and historic conservation with new powers to protect and manage areas of importance for marine wildlife, habitats and historic monuments Seal Conservation: much improved protection for seals and a new comprehensive licence system to ensure appropriate management when necessary Enforcement: a range of enhanced powers of marine conservation and licensing.
August 2011
Page A.1
Consenting
Issue EIA Legislation
The Offshore Petroleum Production and Pipe-lines (Assessment of Environmental Effects) Regulations 1999 and the Offshore Petroleum Production and Pipe-lines (Assessment of Environmental Effects) (Amendment) Regulations 2007

Regulator: Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) The Secretary of State for Energy and Climate Change will take into consideration environmental information in making decisions regarding consents for offshore developments and projects. A statutory Environmental Statement (ES) and public consultation is mandatory for: New field developments or increase in production where production is predicted to exceed 500 tonnes of oil per day or 500,000 cubic meters or more per day of gas; New pipelines or extensions to pipelines of 800mm diameter and 40km or more in length.
A formal process has been established for the submission of an ES and public consultation which involves: Submission of the ES to DECC and their advisors (Environmental Authorities); The ES must be advertised in the national and local press; The ES must be available for public consultation for at least 28 days following the advertisements (longer if this includes a public holiday); The public may request a copy of the ES and the maximum allowable charge which may be made for this is 2; The public, Environmental Authorities, consultees and other organisations make their comments to DECC; DECC may require more information/clarifications from the operator or may require resubmission of the ES should they feel that they have insufficient information on which to evaluate the environmental implications of the proposed project. Following consideration, DECC may issue a project consent which is then advertised in the Gazette, following which there is a six week period during which those who feel aggrieved by this decision may challenge it.
The requirement for a Statutory Environmental Statement is at the discretion of the Secretary of State for: Smaller developments and pipelines; Exploration, appraisal and development wells and any sidetracks; Production consent variations and renewals.
If a Direction as to the requirement for an Environmental Statement is desired then the Petroleum Operations Notice 15 online application forms on the UKOilPortal should be used: PON 15b when seeking a direction for drilling a proposed well including new sidetrack wells and/or seeking a chemical permit; PON 15c when seeking a direction for a proposed pipeline and/or seeking a chemical permit; PON 15d when seeking a direction for proposed development (or for variation, renewal or extension of a production consent) and/or seeking a chemical permit; PON15e seeking a chemical permit during decommissioning operations (not on portal paper version of application form can be found at https://www.og.decc.gov.uk/regulation/pons/index.htm and should be emailed to the Environmental Management Team at DECC); PON 15f seeking a chemical permit during workover/well intervention operations.
Page A.2
August 2011
Field Development Plan Seabed lease
Petroleum Act 1998
Regulator: Department of Energy and Climate Change Operator is required to submit plans for development of field to DECC for approval.
Crown Estate Act 1961
Regulator: Crown Estate Commissioners Minute of agreement required for occupation of seabed.
Location of structures
Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009 (formerly Coast Protection Act 1949)
Regulator: DECC The issuing of 'consent to locate' under the Coast Protection Act Regulations 1949 Section 34, Part II by the Secretary of State to an individual or organisation has recently been transferred to the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009. This provides an indication that impacts have been considered with respect to (i) navigation and (ii) the local habitat within the proposed area; that no significant impacts would occur as a consequence of the proposed offshore installation. The consent issued is part of the PON 4 for drilling.
Continental Shelf Act 1964
Regulator: DECC Extends the UK governments right to grant licences to explore (and exploit) hydrocarbon resources to the UK Continental Shelf.
Well consent
Petroleum Act 1998 Petroleum Operations Notice No 4
Regulator: DECC Application for consent to drill exploration, appraisal and development wells must be submitted to DECC through the WONS.
Licensing
Petroleum Licensing (Production) (Seaward Areas) Regulations 2008 and Petroleum Licensing (Amendment) Regulations 2009
Petroleum Licensing (Production) (Seaward Areas) Regulations 2008 were issued under the Petroleum Act 1998. In order to search, bore for or get petroleum within Great Britain, or beneath the UK territorial sea and Continental Shelf a licence should be obtained from the Secretary of State. Petroleum Licensing (Amendment) Regulations 2009 updates the previous regulations including the standard application fees for petroleum licences.
Regulators: Marine Scotland on behalf of the Scottish Government The main measures of the act include: Marine Licensing: a simpler licensing system, minimising the number of licences required for development in the marine environment to cut bureaucracy and encourage economic investment Enforcement: a range of enhanced powers of marine conservation and licensing Regulators: Marine Scotland (on behalf of the Scottish Government The main measures of the act include: Marine planning: a new statutory marine planning system to sustainably manage the increasing, and often conflicting, demands on our seas Enforcement: a range of enhanced powers of marine conservation and licensing
Planning
August 2011
Page A.3
Drilling
Issue Muds, cuttings and chemical use and discharge Legislation
Food Environmental Protection Act 1985 (as amended) (FEPA) and the Deposits in the Sea (Exemption) Order 1985

Regulators: DECC supported by MARINE SCOTLAND and CEFAS Deposits in the sea are regulated through FEPA. Discharge of drill cuttings and muds during drilling are specifically excluded from the licensing requirements of this Act by the paragraphs 14 and 15 of Schedule 3 or the Deposits in the Sea (Exemption) Order 1985: 14. Deposit on the site of drilling for, or production of oil or gas, of any drill cuttings or drilling muds in the course of such drilling or production. 15. Deposit under the seabed on the site of drilling for, or production of, oil or gas of any substance or article in the course of such drilling or production. Deposits in the Sea (Exemptions) (Amendment) (England and Wales) Order 2010 came into force in April 2010 in England and Wales only, making minor amendments to the Deposits in the Sea (Exemption) Order 1985, however, the above still applies.
Deposits in the Sea (Exemptions) (Amendment) (England and Wales) Order 2010
The Offshore Petroleum Activities (Oil Pollution Prevention and Control) Regulations 2005 (as amended in 2010) OPPC
Regulator: DECC Under OPPC it is illegal to discharge reservoir hydrocarbons and cuttings to the marine environment without an exemption from the Secretary of State. The Paris Commission decision 92/2 established a maximum oil on cuttings concentration of 1% by weight for discharge of cuttings to sea. The contamination of cuttings by muds comes under the Offshore Chemical Regulations, but discharges/cuttings contaminated with reservoir oil fall under the OPPC regulations. A permit is required for discharge of oil to sea and is obtained from DECC.
Offshore Chemicals Regulations 2002 (as amended in 2010) PON 15b Implementing the requirements of OSPAR Decision 2000/2 on a Harmonised Mandatory Control System for the Use and Reduction of the Discharge of Offshore Chemicals and associated Recommendations.
Regulator: DECC Under these Regulations, offshore drilling operators need to apply for permits to cover both the use and discharge of chemicals. The permits are applied for through the PON15b online application form (UKoilPortal). The application requires a description of the work carried out, a site specific environmental impact assessment and a list of all the chemicals intended for use and or discharge, along with a risk assessment for the environmental effect of the discharge of chemicals into the sea. The permit obtained may include conditions. These Regulations amend the Deposits to Sea (Exemptions) Order 1985 to make the discharges of chemicals to sea exempt from requiring a licence under FEPA when the discharge has a permit under the Offshore Chemicals Regulations. Regulator: Maritime and Coastguard Agency The regulations require that dangerous goods and marine pollutants are labelled and packed according to the International
Dangerous Goods
The Merchant Shipping (Dangerous Goods and Marine Pollutants) Regulations 1997
Page A.4
August 2011
and 2000 amended in 2006
Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) code and that dangerous goods declarations are provided to vessel masters prior to loading.
Chemical data sheets and labelling
The Chemicals (Hazard Information and Packaging for Supply) Regulations 2002
Regulator: Health and Safety Executive The transport of chemicals to and from offshore fields is principally by road to shore base and then by sea. These regulations (commonly known as CHIP 3) specify safety data sheet format and contents and required packaging and labelling of chemicals for supply.
EC Regulation 1907/2006 (REACH) REACH Enforcement Regulations 2008 SI 2852
Regulator: DECC Reach deals with the registration, evaluation, authorisation and restriction of chemical substances.
Vessels
Issue Fisheries liaison Legislation
Model Clauses of Licence HSE Offshore Safety Division Operations Notice 3
th th

Regulator: DECC From the 7 and 8 Licensing rounds onwards, operators have been required to appoint a Fisheries Liaison Officer to liaise with the fishing industry and government Fisheries Departments on exploration and production activities. HSE Offshore Safety Division Operations Notice 3, Liaison with Other Bodies, June 2008 outlines liaison routes to improve communication between Operators and other users of the sea and includes a requirement for a Fisheries Liaison.
Machinery space drainage from shipping
The Merchant Shipping (Prevention of Oil Pollution) Regulations 1996 and the 2000 and 2005 amendments
Regulator: Maritime and Coastguards Agency Within a Special Area ships which are 400GT or above can discharge water from machinery space drainage providing the oil content of the water does not exceed 15ppm. Vessels must be equipped with oil filtering systems; automatic cut offs and oil retention systems. All vessels must hold an approved Shipboard Oil Pollution Emergency Plan (SOPEP) and must maintain a current Oil Record Book and the ship must be proceeding on its voyage. All vessels must hold a UKOOP certificate or an IOPC certificate for foreign ships. Installations can obtain a temporary exception from MCA under an informal agreement between the UKO&G and the MCA, however new installations need to demonstrate their equivalence to other offshore installations where temporary installations are being issued and they are unlikely to obtain a certificate unless then fully comply with the requirements. Note, if all machinery drainage is routed via the hazardous or non-hazardous drainage systems this will fall under OPPC and not require a UKOOP certificate. MARPOL 73/78 also defines a ship to include "floating craft and fixed or floating platforms" and these are required where
August 2011
Page A.5
appropriate to comply with the requirements similar to those set out for vessels.
Waste from vessels and construction
MARPOL 73/78 Annex V
Regulator: Maritime and Coastguards Agency Annex V totally prohibits of the disposal of plastics anywhere into the sea, and severely restricts discharges of other garbage from ships into coastal waters and "Special Areas". The Annex also obliges Governments to ensure the provision of facilities at ports and terminals for the reception of garbage. The special areas established under the Annex are:

The Merchant Shipping (Prevention of Pollution by Garbage) Regulations 1998 which has been superseded by The Merchant Shipping (Prevention of Pollution by Sewage and Garbage) Regulations 2008
the Mediterranean Sea the Baltic Sea Area the Black Sea area the Red Sea Area the Gulfs area the North Sea the Wider Caribbean Region and Antarctic Area Regulator: Maritime and Coastguard Agency
Implements Annexes IV and V of MARPOL All wastes to be segregated and stored and returned to shore for disposal. No garbage to be dumped overboard in a Special Area Food waste can be discharged only if: Greater than 12 miles from coastline; and Ground to less than 25mm particle size.
Vessels must have a garbage management plan with suitable labelling and notices displayed.
Sewage from vessels
MARPOL 73/78 Annex IV Regulations for the Prevention of Pollution by Sewage from Ships
Regulator: Maritime and Coastguard Agency Requirement for ships to discharge sewage only under certain conditions:
Comminuted and disinfected sewage may only be discharged more than 4nm from the coast; Non-comminuted or disinfected sewage may only be discharged 12nm from the coast; Original international regulations entered into for in September 2003 and the revised annex entered into force in 2005. This does not apply to offshore installations as defined in the Petroleum Act 1998.
The Merchant Shipping (Prevention of Pollution by Garbage) Regulations 1998
Regulator: Maritime and Coastguard Agency
Page A.6
August 2011
which has been superseded by The Merchant Shipping (Prevention of Pollution by Sewage and Garbage) Regulations 2008
Implements Annexes IV and V of MARPOL No consent is required unless the vessel is >400 GRT or <4000 GRT and engaged in international voyage, here an International Sewage Pollution Prevention Certificate is needed.
Atmospheric emissions from vessels
MARPOL 73/78 Annex VI Regulations for the Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships
Regulator: Maritime and Coastguard Agency The Annex sets limits on sulphur oxide and nitrogen oxide emissions from ship exhausts and prohibits deliberate emissions of ozone depleting substances. It caps 4.5%m/m on the sulphur content of fuel oil. Special SOx emission control areas (SECAS) where sulphur emissions are limited further and sulphur content in fuel oil must not exceed 1.5%m/m or have an exhaust gas cleaning system fitted. The North Sea is one such SECAS. No new installations containing ozone-depleting substances are permitted with the exception of HCFCs which are permitted till 1 January 2020. NOx emissions from diesel engines are to be limited by the implementation of NOx technical code. No incineration of contaminated packing materials or PCBs onboard ships.
The Merchant Shipping (Prevention of Pollution from Ships) Regulations 2008
Regulator: Maritime and Coastguard Agency The purpose of this Merchant Shipping Notice (MSN) is to detail the technical aspects of the United Kingdoms implementation of Annex VI of MARPOL in conjunction with the Regulations. The Regulations aim to reduce air pollution from shipping. This will be achieved through controls on emissions of Nitrogen Oxides, Sulphur Oxides, Volatile Organic Compounds and Ozone Depleting Substances, which are not Greenhouse Gases. Additionally elements of the Regulations limit the sulphur content of marine fuels and require a register of local marine fuel suppliers.
Antifouling coating on vessels
International Convention on the Control of Harmful Antifouling Systems on Ships Surface Waters (Dangerous Substances) (Classification) Regulations, 1998 Control of Pesticides Regulations (as amended) Regulations 1997 OSPAR and Helsinki Conventions
Regulator: Maritime and Coastguard Agency It was proposed by the International Convention on the Control of Harmful Antifouling Systems on Ships that the use of TBT will be banned on new vessels from 2003 with a total ban on all hulls from 2008. However, currently, in the UK, the use is only restricted under the Surface Waters (Dangerous Substances) (Classification) Regulations, 1997. Additionally, it is listed as a priority hazard substance under the Water Framework Directive, for priority action under the OSPAR and Helsinki Conventions and its sale and use are restricted under the Control of Pesticides Regulations (as amended).
Discharges
The Offshore Petroleum Activities (Oil Pollution Prevention and Control) Regulations 2005 (and amendments 2010)
Regulator: DECC As with drilling, discharges contaminated with reservoir oil during installation require an OPPC permit. These can be either term permits or life permits depending on the duration of the discharge. An OPPC permit is not required if the discharge
August 2011
Page A.7
(replaced the Prevention of Oil Pollution Act 1971)
originated from a vessel covered by the Merchant Shipping (Prevention of Oil Pollution) Regulations. A permit is required for discharge of oil to sea and is obtained from DECC. Specific monitoring and reporting requirements will be included on each permit. Reporting is via the EEMS.
Offshore Chemicals Regulations 2002 (and amendments 2010) PON 15c
Regulator: DECC Under these Regulations, offshore pipeline installations need to apply for permits to cover both the use and discharge of chemicals. The permits are applied for through the PON15c online application form (UKoilPortal). The application requires a description of the work carried out, a site specific environmental impact assessment and a list of all the chemicals intended for use and or discharge, along with a risk assessment for the environmental effect of the discharge of chemicals into the sea. The permit obtained may include conditions.
Vessel movements
International Regulation for Preventing Collisions at Sea 1972 (COLREGS) and 1981, 1987, 1989, 1993, 2001 and 2007 amendments
Regulator: IMO The COLREGs are designed to minimise the risk of vessel collision at sea and apply to all vessels on the high seas. They include 38 rules divided into five sections: Part A General Part B - Steering and Sailing Part C - Lights and Shapes Part D - Sound and Light signals Part E - Exemptions.
There are also four Annexes containing technical requirements concerning lights and shapes and their positioning; sound signalling appliances; additional signals for fishing vessels when operating in close proximity, and international distress signals. The Merchant Shipping (Distress Signals and Prevention of Collisions) Regulations 1996 Regulator: Maritime and Coastguard Agency Implement the COLREGS into UK law. Vessels to which these regulation apply must comply with Rules 1-36 of Annexes I to III of the COLREGS
Page A.8
August 2011
Decommissioning
Issue Chemical use and discharge Legislation
Offshore Chemicals Regulations 2002 PON 15E, or covered within the drilling consent PON15B

Regulator: DECC Under these Regulations, permits to use and discharge chemicals need to be obtained. Types of permit required for the operations would be a PON15 for use and discharges of chemicals during decommissioning. The permits are applied for using the application form found at https://www.og.decc.gov.uk/regulation/pons/index.htm and emailed to Environmental Management Team at DECC. The application requires a description of the work carried out, a site specific environmental impact assessment and a list of all the chemicals intended for use and or discharge, along with a risk assessment for the environmental effect of the discharge of chemicals into the sea. The permit obtained may include conditions.
Abandonment of wells
Part III of the Energy Act 2008 amends Part 5 of the Petroleum Act 1998 Part 1 of the Petroleum Act Consent to abandon the well is given via a PON5 application
Regulator: DECC Part III of the Energy Act 2008 amends Part 5 of the Petroleum Act 1998 to enable proper provisions to be made for the abandonment of wells including financial security provisions. Amendments are also made to Part 1 of the Petroleum Act giving the Secretary of State powers to require a licensee to plug and abandon a well which has been suspended for at least one month. Before consent is given the abandon the well, details of the proposed methods must be submitted. In general, these must follow the DECC guidance on Decommissioning of Offshore Installations and Pipelines under the Petroleum Act 1998 and the Oil and Gas UK Guidelines for the Suspension and Abandonment of Wells (2009).
August 2011
Page A.9
Accidental Events
Issue Oil pollution emergency planning Legislation
The Merchant Shipping (Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Cooperation) Regulations 1998 which has been superseded by The Merchant Shipping (Oil Pollution Preparedness, Response and Co-operation Convention) (Amendment) Regulations 2001

Regulator: DECC Requires the Operator to produce a site specific Oil Pollution Emergency Plan (OPEP) to be submitted to DECC and statutory consultees at least 2 months prior to start of activities. An OPEP needs to cover the procedures and reporting requirements on how to deal with an incident where hydrocarbons are being released into the sea. All approved OPEPs must be reviewed and resubmitted to DECC and consultees no later than five years after initial submission. In order to ensure adequate cover the operator must submit the plan at least 2 months prior to the end of this deadline. Regular reviews are further required to ensure response capabilities, operation details and contact details remain current. Vessels that are in transit will be covered under the SOPEP however when once on site and carrying out work for the operator the vessels should be covered by the operators OPEP.
Offshore Installations (Emergency Pollution Control) Regulations 2002
Regulator: DECC In the event of an incident or accident involving an offshore installation where there may be a risk of significant pollution of the marine environment or where the operator fails to implement effective control and preventative operation the Government is given powers to intervene. DECC under agreement with MCA will notify Secretary of State Representative (SOSREP) in the event of an incident if there is a threat of significant pollution into the environment. The SOSREPs role is to monitor and if necessary intervene to protect the environment in the event of a threatened or actual pollution incident in connection with an offshore installation.
Spill reporting
Model Clauses of Licence PON 1
Regulator: DECC All oil spills must be reported to DECC, the nearest HM coastguard and JNCC using a PON 1.
Page A.10
August 2011
Wildlife Protection
Issue Birds and other wildlife Protected sites and species SACs and SPAs Legislation
European Council Directive 79/409/EEC (The Birds Directive) Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 (as amended) Countryside and Rights of Way Act (CRoW) Act 2000 Nature Conservation (Scotland) Act 2004 European Council Directive 92/43/EEC (EC Habitats Directive) Conservation (Natural Habitats &c.) Regulations 1994 and amendments which has been superseded by the Conservation (Natural Habitats, c.) (Amendment) (England and Wales) Regulations 2009 Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c) Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2007 which has been superseded by Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c) Amendment (Scotland) Regulations 2008 The Offshore Maine Conservation (Natural Habitats, 7c) Regulations 2007 Offshore Petroleum (Conservation of Habitats) Regulations 2001 and 2007 & 2009 amendments The Conservation of Habitats and Species Regulations 2010 Regulator: Competent Authorities following advice from UK statutory nature conservation agencies These regulations implement aspects of the Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009. They also consolidate the Conservation (Natural Habitats, &c) regulations 1994 (as amended) and transpose Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora(206) (the Habitats Directive). Regulator: DECC These regulations apply the Habitats Directive and the Birds Directive in relation of oil and gas plans or projects wholly or partly on the United Kingdoms Continental Self and superjacent waters outside territorial waters.

Regulator: Natural England, SNH and co-ordinated by JNCC Anyone who kills, injures, takes from the wild or disturbs certain birds, animals/mammals commits an offence. The Birds Directive aims to protect ranges of species, as well as population and breeding of certain populations of birds. Extends out to territorial waters Provides for the establishment of Sites of Special Scientific Interest (SSSIs) Under the Birds Directive, member states to take measures to conserve certain areas, including the establishment of Special Protection Areas (SPAs) both on land and within the territorial waters.
Regulator: Natural England and SNH Regulations provide for the designation and protection of European Sites, the protection of European Protected Species and the adaption of planning and other controls for the protection of European Sites only as far as the limit of territorial waters (12nm from the coastline).
August 2011
Page A.11
Birds
Convention on Wetland of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitats 1971 (The Ramsar Convention)
Regulator: Natural England and SNH Aims to prevent encroachment or loss of wetlands on a worldwide scale. Recognises the importance of a network of wetlands on waterfowl. It is applicable to marine areas to a depth of 6m at low tide and other areas greater then 6m depth that are recognised as important to waterfowl habitat.
Cetaceans
Agreement on the Conservation of Small Cetaceans of the Baltic and North Seas 1991 (ASCOBANS)
Regulator: Natural England and SNH Requires governments to undertake habitat management, conduct surveys and research and to enforce legislation to protect small cetaceans. The Merchant Shipping (Pollution) Act 2006 enables the UK Government to produce Regulations to implement Annex VI of MARPOL 73/78. Draft new Regulations are currently under preparation by the MCA. Annex VI of MARPOL 73/78 is concerned with the control of emissions of ozone depleting substances, NOx, SOx and VOCs and require an International Air Pollution Prevention Certificate following survey to ensure compliance. UK installations will be given the option of obtaining a UK Air Pollution Certificate through independent surveyors or to have the survey carried out during routine DECC inspections by DECC inspector. The procedure for this survey will be contained in an Marine Safety Notice from the MCA. Annex VI only applies to diesel engines over 130 KW and does not apply to turbines. Emissions arising directly from the exploration, exploitation and associated offshore processing of seabed mineral resources are exempt from Annex VI, including the following:
Emissions
Annex VI of MARPOL 73/78 replaced with Merchant Shipping (Prevention of Air Pollution from Ships) Regulations 2008
emissions resulting from flaring, burning of cuttings, muds, well clean-up emissions and well testing; release of gases entrained in drilling fluids and cuttings; emissions from treatment, handling and storage of reservoir hydrocarbons; and emissions from diesel engines solely dedicated to the exploitation of seabed mineral resources. equipment intended to be used solely in case of emergency.
In addition, Regulation 13 concerning NOx does not apply to emergency diesel engines, engines installed in lifeboats or
Page A.12
August 2011
EIA Matrices
Appendix B EIA Matrices

Potential impacts of the North Uist project and the associated environmental effect before and after mitigation measures. Key - Risk Key High Moderate Low
Environmental Aspect Emissions to Air
Source Exhaust emissions from drilling operations (i.e. burning of fuel gas or diesel).
Activity Description Generation of power during the proposed drilling operations will result in emissions of various combustible gases.
Potential effects and significance of potential impacts May contribute to climate change (CH4, CO2), acidification effects (SOx, NOx) and potentially localised smog formation (VOC, NOx & particulates). N.B. BP always considers GHG emissions to be of importance, therefore a moderate risk has been concluded. Likelihood 5 Consequence 1 Risk Moderate
Management of impacts and actions to address concerns Audit to ensure drillship complies with BP and UK standards, engines are maintained and operated correctly.
Residual impact and/or concern None envisaged
Use of low sulphur diesel in vessels.
Exhaust emissions from support vessels and helicopter transfers
Vessels involved will include; support, supply and helicopters
May contribute to climate change (CH4, CO2), acidification effects (SOx, NOx) and potentially localised smog formation (VOC, NOx & particulates).
Vessel numbers will be minimised through logistics management.
None envisaged
Likelihood 5
Consequence 1
Risk Low
August 2011
Page B.1
EIA Matrices
Discharges to Sea
Permitted discharges from drilling operations
WBM, cuttings, brine and cementing chemicals required in the drilling process
Short term impact on water quality and localised smothering of seabed and associated biota Likelihood 5 Consequence 2 Risk Moderate
Maximum efficient use of WBM.
Minor temporary localised impact on water column and seabed.
Use of PLONOR chemicals (i.e. low toxicity chemicals). BPs procedure for the handling of OBM contaminated cuttings will be followed. None envisaged.
Contained and treated drilling fluids (accidental release)
OBM contaminated brine spacer, cuttings & cleaning chemicals. Other oily slops.
Release of untreated OBMs can result in toxic or sub-lethal effects on sensitive organisms and ecosystems. Bioaccumulation of heavy metals in marine organisms. Burial of benthic organisms/ modification to the benthic environment. Likelihood 1 Consequence 3 Risk Low
BP Rig Audit procedures consider containment of fluids MARPOL compliant filtration and monitoring equipment with discharges of oil in water at less than 15ppm. None envisaged.
Contained and treated drainage water
Open drains collect drainage water from all non-hazardous areas on the drillship.
Uncontrolled discharge of oil and chemicals in water can result in narcotic, toxic, teratogenic impacts, localised water column enrichment etc.
Drainage water that meets MARPOL standards may be discharged.
Likelihood 5
Consequence 1
Risk Low
Drillship inspection to ensure it is compliant with UK and BP requirements. Drillship inspection to ensure it is compliant with UK and BP requirements. None envisaged.
Contained hazardous drainage water (accidental discharge)
Drains from hazardous areas on the drillship (e.g. shaker room) are routed to a contained tank.
Uncontrolled discharge of oil and chemicals in water can result in narcotic, toxic, teratogenic impacts, localised water column enrichment etc.
Likelihood Page B.2
Consequence
Risk August 2011
EIA Matrices
1 Liquid waste (domestic sewage & food waste) associated with drilling operations, support vessels etc. Discharge of sewage (grey & black water macerated to < 6mm prior to discharge via a sewage caisson).
Low Sewage treatment unit on board rig (MARPOL) and vessels to reduce BOD prior to discharge, this will aid biological breakdown on release. None envisaged
Sewage and food waste has a high BOD resulting from organic & other nutrient matter in the detergents & human wastes that can impair water quality in the immediate vicinity of the discharge.
Likelihood 5 Waste General waste from drilling operations and support vessels. Drilling rigs and support vessels generate a number of wastes during routine operations including waste chemicals and oil, packaging, scrap metal etc.
Consequence 1
Risk Low
Drillship audit will examine treatment system and ensure it meets UK and BP requirements. Wastes will be minimised by use of appropriate procurement controls. All wastes to be properly segregated for recycling/disposal /treatment onshore. None envisaged
Impacts associated with onshore disposal are dependent on the nature of the site or process. Landfills land take, nuisance, emissions (methane), possible leachate, limitations on future land use. Treatment plants- nuisance, atmospheric emissions, potential for contamination of sites.
Likelihood 5 Physical Presence Drillship and support vessels. Drillship, standby and supply vessels
Consequence 1
Risk Low
Waste will be dealt with in accordance with regulatory requirements. Logistics management to reduce the number of vessels required. None envisaged.
Presence of a drillship and the increase in associated vessel movements has the potential to impact other users of the sea e.g. commercial traffic across the Atlantic. Likelihood Consequence Risk
Other users of the area
August 2011
Page B.3
EIA Matrices
will be notified.
5 Noise and Vibration. Sources include drilling operations and propellers and thrusters associated with the drillship and support vessels.
Low
Generates elevated sound levels which can affect the behaviour of animals in the area.
The drillship will be present over a relatively short period of time (three months).
None envisaged
Likelihood 5 Disturbance to seabed by drilling well Wellhead will be in place for 3-4 months.
Consequence 2
Risk Moderate
Marine Mammal Observers will be onboard throughout the operations. Only one well to be drilled. None envisaged
Disturbance of benthic communities living in the immediate area of the project site and possible wider smothering caused by the resultant sediment plume. Likelihood 5 Consequence 1 Risk Low
Internal cutter will be used when abandoning the well. PON 14a permit application will be submitted, therefore a full impact assessment will be carried out. None envisaged
Operational Noise
Vertical Seismic Profiling (VSP) Operations
Firing of airguns at various time intervals which will produce a distinct, shortduration source of relatively high intensity impulse noise.
Generates elevated sound levels which can affect the behaviour of animals in the area.
Will occur over a relatively short period of time, typically less than 24 hours.
Likelihood 5
Consequence 1
Risk Low
Marine Mammal Observers will be onboard.
Page B.4
August 2011
EIA Matrices
Explosive use in decommissioning
Only as a contingency should mechanical removal of the wellhead not be successful
Generates elevated sound levels which can affect the behaviour of animals in close proximity (< 1km).
Use of explosives is a contingency to the mechanical removal of the wellhead.
None envisaged
If required the absolute minimum of explosives will be used.
Likelihood 1
Consequence 2
Risk Low
Marine Mammal Observers will be onsite.
August 2011
Page B.5
EIA Matrices
Minor Accidental Events
Chemical Spills
Chemical storageaccidental spills, leaks, containment damage.
May result in a variety of impacts including increased chemical or biochemical oxygen demand, toxicity, persistence, bioaccumulation in animals
Optimised quantities procured & stored. COSHH, Task Hazard Assessments are completed and MSDS sheets are available.
None envisaged.
All transfer operations suspended in rough weather. All bulk hoses and connections must be inspected before and after use by competent personnel.
Spill kits will be onboard.
Likelihood 2
Consequence 2
Risk Low
Chemicals stored in tote tank area. OPEP is implemented as appropriate in the result of a spill as per Emergency Response Process. Statutory reporting of all spills.
Page B.6
August 2011
EIA Matrices
Lube and Hydraulic Oil Spills
Accidental spillage of oils may result from rupture/corrosion of drums in storage; loss of containment during decanting; rupture of hydraulic hose in use. Spill may enter drainage system and be discharged to sea
Minor spillage that would impair water quality and marine life in immediate vicinity of discharge.
Trained personnel undertake decanting operations. Storage tanks and hoses are subject to an inspection and engineering maintenance strategy.
None envisaged
Likelihood 2 Diesel Spills Accidental spillage during bunkering operations or rupture of diesel tanks.
Consequence 2
Risk Low
OPEP is implemented in the event of a spill as per Emergency Response Process. Trained personnel involved in fuel transfer. Diesel storage tanks and transfer hoses are subject to inspection & engineering maintenance strategy. Bunded storage tanks. None envisaged.
Impacts depend on spill size, prevailing wind, sea state & temperature & sensitivity of environmental features affected. Birds are most sensitive offshore receptor. Also affected are plankton, fish/fisheries, seabed animals & marine mammals.
Diesel should rapidly evaporate and disperse.
Spill kits on board.
Likelihood 2
Consequence 1
Risk Low
OPEP is implemented in the event of a spill as per Emergency Response Process.
August 2011
Page B.7
EIA Matrices
Oil Spills
Loss of hydrocarbon containment includes accidental discharges of untreated OBMs, OBM contaminated cleaning fluids, drillings etc.
Impact dependent on spill volume and weather conditions. Birds are most sensitive offshore receptor. Also affected are plankton, fish/fisheries, seabed animals & marine mammals.
Likelihood 2
Consequence 2
Risk Low
Procedures in OPEP are implemented should a spill occur. Training is provided on oil spill response to all appropriate personnel. BP are members of OSR (OSR are on standby to provide oil spill clean-up when required). Tanks have a spill over area. Spill kits on board.
Spills may cause local elevation of hydrocarbon levels and contamination and toxic effects.
Page B.8
August 2011
EIA Matrices
Major accidental events
Loss of well control following a blow out /fire explosion
Loss of control of well resulting in release of oil and gas which may ignite.
Impact dependent on spill volume and weather conditions. Birds are most sensitive offshore receptor. Also affected are plankton, fish/fisheries, seabed animals & marine mammals.
In the event of a blow out BP have in place ; A Well Control Response Plan A Containment Response Plan A Relief Well Plan An OMS interface document with Stena Drilling
Modelling suggests that following an uncontrolled blowout during maximum flow rates, there is a risk of coastline impacts.
BP is a member of OSR Dispersant on board standby vessel available for local response.
Emergency Response Plan implemented in the result of a loss of well control/fire and explosion and activation of fire-fighting systems. Regular drills held. Inspection & engineering maintenance strategy based on preventative maintenance.
Likelihood 1
Consequence 4
Risk Moderate
August 2011
Page B.9
EIA Matrices
Loss of drillship diesel
Complete loss of drillship fuel e.g. through loss of vessel. (Stena Carron has a fuel capacity of 11,500m3)
Potential impacts on marine life particularly sea birds.
OPEP is implemented in the event of a spill as per Emergency Response Process.
Likelihood 1
Consequence 3
Risk Low
Oil spill modelling has assessed the risk and consequence of loss of diesel inventory.
Short term impact. Twenty days after spill occurs <1% remains on the sea surface while >80% will have evaporated or decayed after 30 days.
Page B.10
August 2011

Scotland North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Scotland North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

bp

Sullom Voe Foinaven Schiehallion

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

This page is intentionally left blank

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

Development concept and schedule

Project background and purpose

Environmental statement remit

Figure 1: Location of the proposed project.

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

Wells and drilling

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

Key environmental sensitivities

Assessment of potential impacts

Non-Technical Summary Physical presence

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

Cumulative and transboundary impacts

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

Abbreviations and Glossary

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

Abbreviations and Glossary

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

Abbreviations and Glossary

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

Pa2-s Micro Pascal per Second

Abbreviations and Glossary

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

Abbreviations and Glossary

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

Abbreviations and Glossary

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

Abbreviations and Glossary

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

Abbreviations and Glossary

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

Abbreviations and Glossary

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

This page is intentionally left blank

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

Physical Presence ........................... 41

Discharges to Sea ........................... 45

Underwater Noise ............................ 49

The Development .............................. 5

The Environment ............................... 9

Atmospheric Emissions ................... 63

Accidental Events ............................ 67

The Environmental Impact Assessment Process ....................... 39

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

10.5 Commitments .......................................... 106 10.6 Final remarks .......................................... 107

10 Conclusions ................................... 105

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

1.2.1 Requirement for an EIA

Project background and purpose

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

Key environmental legislation

BP environmental policy and requirements

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement

Aim of the EIA process and scope of the environmental statement

North Uist Exploration Well Environmental Statement