<?xml version="1.0"?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:title xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">2021, Fugro, Sheringham Shoal Offshore Wind Farm, Seabed Monitoring Survey Comparison</dc:title>
  <dc:type xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">series</dc:type>
  <dc:identifier xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">https://portal.medin.org.uk/portal/start.php?tpc=015_800dcf2057cbfb471c713d0840d4371a</dc:identifier>
  <dc:description xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">Fugro was commissioned by Equinor (U.K), to undertake monitoring surveys of the Sheringham Shoal Offshore Wind Farm, export cable route, and transit route.This report provides a comparison of the results from six surveys carried out by Fugro: the 2008 pre-installation survey, winter 2013, winter 2014, winter 2015, winter 2018 and winter 2020 monitoring surveys. The 2008 survey was a full pre-construction geophysical and hydrographic survey and provided a baseline for an assessment of changes that may have resulted from the construction of the Wind Farm infrastructure. The 2013, 2014, 2015 surveys were carried out in order to meet the requirements for site monitoring as set out in MMO Licence L/2011/00153/16. The 2018 and 2020 surveys were undertaken as part of an ongoing program of preventative maintenance. Following an assessment of data collected in 2008, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2018 and 2020 the following summary conclusions have been made:
 - The most prominent natural seabed change since 2008 was associated with the movement of large dune bedforms in the south-east of the Wind Farm site. The largest seabed change was 
 associated with a reduction in depths of up to 3.91 m (accretion) and increase in depths of -3.37 m (erosion).
 - Since 2008 a total of 19 WTG locations exhibited a seabed deepening (erosion) of over 0.5 m within a radius of 25 m from the monopiles and the surrounding rock armour. These corresponded to WTG locations A3, D5, E5, F5, F6, F7, G5, G6, G8, H4, H5, H6, H8, I6, I7, I8, J7, J8 and K8.
 - Since 2018 seven WTG locations (E5, F6, G6, H6, I6, J8, K8) exhibited a seabed deepening (erosion) ranging from 0.4 m and 0.9 m. Additional 12 WTG locations exhibited not significant erosion ( less than 0.3 m); these corresponded to A3, D5, F5, F7, G5, G8, H4, H5, H8, I7, I8 and J7. A further WTG location (A7) is reported to have undergone net accretion.
 - Within the Cromer Shoal Marine Conservation Zone (MCZ) on the export cable route one minor change in depth was seen within the trenching area since the last survey was conducted in 2018, this represented an area of erosion between 0.2 to 0.7 m.
 -One exposure on the eastern export cable route (B) was identified in both the 2018 and 2020 surveys; this exposure decreased from 14.9 m to 9.6 m since 2018.
 - Fifteen exposures were identified in the main array area in the 2020 survey, of which nine were new exposures not seen in 2018. Four exposures exhibited evidence of freespan.
 - Eight cable exposures were found adjacent to 8 WTG locations, all located in an area of mobile seabed sediment waveforms. These corresponded to WTG locations K8, J8, J7, I7, H6, G6, F6 and 
 G5. Those adjacent to WTG locations J8 and G6 exhibited evidence of freespan.
 - Where no construction activity, trenching or sediment transport was observed, bathymetric differences were generally less than +/-0.5 m between all bathymetry surveys, as demonstrated by differences recorded at the datum square</dc:description>
  <dc:date xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/">20210520</dc:date>
</oai_dc:dc>