Item7Appendix2HRA20190080DET

CAIRNGORMS NATION­AL PARK AUTHOR­ITY Plan­ning Com­mit­tee Agenda Item 7 Appendix 2 24/05/2019

AGENDA ITEM 7

APPENDIX 2

2019/0080/DET

HRA

HAB­IT­ATS REG­U­LA­TIONS APPRAIS­AL PROFORMA

Cairngorms Nation­al Park Author­ity have under­taken this HRA as the com­pet­ent authority.

APPRAIS­AL IN RELA­TION TO REG­U­LA­TION 48 OF THE CON­SER­VA­TION (NAT­UR­AL HAB­IT­ATS, &C.) REG­U­LA­TIONS 1994 AS AMENDED¹ (HAB­IT­ATS REG­U­LA­TIONS APPRAISAL)

NATURA SITE DETAILS Name of Natura site(s) poten­tially affected: River Dee SAC

Name of com­pon­ent SSSI if relevant:

Natura qual­i­fy­ing interest(s) & wheth­er pri­or­ity/non-pri­or­ity: Atlantic Sal­mon, Otter and Fresh­wa­ter Pearl Mussel

Con­ser­va­tion object­ives for qual­i­fy­ing interests: Pop­u­la­tion of the spe­cies, includ­ing range of genet­ic types for sal­mon, as a viable com­pon­ent of the site Dis­tri­bu­tion of the spe­cies with­in site Dis­tri­bu­tion and extent of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing the spe­cies Struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing the spe­cies No sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance of the spe­cies Dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel host spe­cies Struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel host species

STAGE 1: WHAT IS THE PLAN OR PRO­JECT? Pro­pos­al title: Erec­tion of Sub­sta­tion and Install­a­tion of bur­ied 11kV cable con­nect­ing power­house to substation.

Name of con­sul­tee: Name of com­pet­ent author­ity: Bal­mor­al Estates Cairngorms Nation­al Park Authority

Details of pro­pos­al (inc. loc­a­tion, tim­ing, meth­ods): Erec­tion of sub­sta­tion and install­a­tion of bur­ied 11kV cable con­nect­ing power­house to sub­sta­tion, approx­im­ately 5km. Major­ity of route is through agri­cul­tur­al fields except for approx­im­ately 300m through wooded areas, 150m lain in an exist­ing track and 200m beneath the gar­dens at Birkhall. Loc­a­tion: West­ern bank of the River Muick a trib­u­tary of the River Dee which it joins just upstream of Bal­later, N 791153 E 33445. Times­cale: Along­side the main Hydro scheme 2019 – 2020. Meth­ods: Cable will be laid in a trench approx­im­ately 1.1m deep and 300mm wide in accord­ance with the guid­ance of the UK Power Net­work engin­eer­ing stand­ard ESC 02 – 0019.

¹ Or, where rel­ev­ant, under reg­u­la­tion 61 of The Con­ser­va­tion of Hab­it­ats and Spe­cies Reg­u­la­tions 2010 as amended, or reg­u­la­tion 25 of The Off­shore Mar­ine Con­ser­va­tion (Nat­ur­al Hab­it­ats, &c.) Reg­u­la­tions 2007 as amended.

1 c:\users\dotharris\appdata\local\microsoft\windows\temporary inter­net files\content.outlook\qyrkb63k\20190080glenmuickcablehousinghra_sh (2).doc

STAGE 2: IS THE PLAN OR PRO­JECT DIR­ECTLY CON­NEC­TED WITH OR NECES­SARY TO SITE MAN­AGE­MENT FOR NATURE CON­SER­VA­TION? The fol­low­ing points should be con­sidered: i) Has the effect on all qual­i­fy­ing interests been con­sidered? ii) Is the pro­pos­al part of a fully assessed and agreed man­age­ment plan? iii) Is there a clear rationale to jus­ti­fy the con­nec­tion with the con­ser­va­tion object­ives? iv) If there is a clear con­nec­tion with the con­ser­va­tion object­ives will any bene­fits arising from the pro­pos­al out­weigh any neg­at­ive effects? v) Have any altern­at­ive meth­ods of imple­ment­ing the pro­pos­al been explored to demon­strate that this is the least dam­aging option? vi) Give a YES/NO con­clu­sion in terms of wheth­er the plan or pro­ject is con­sidered dir­ectly con­nec­ted with or neces­sary to site man­age­ment for nature conservation.

• If YES for all ele­ments of a plan or pro­ject, for all the Natura qual­i­fy­ing interests (prefer­ably as part of a fully assessed and agreed man­age­ment plan), then con­sent can be issued. The rationale should be detailed below and no fur­ther apprais­al is required (no need to pro­ceed to stage 3 or 4).
• If No for all Natura qual­i­fy­ing interests then pro­ceed to stage 3.
• If a plan has mul­tiple ele­ments (e.g. a range of policies or man­age­ment object­ives), ele­ments of the plan con­sidered dir­ectly con­nec­ted with or neces­sary to site man­age­ment for nature con­ser­va­tion should be dis­cussed below and a rationale giv­en for this con­clu­sion. No fur­ther apprais­al is then required for those ele­ments. All oth­er ele­ments of the plan must pro­ceed to stage 3.

i. Yes ii. No iii. No iv. No v. No vi. No

STAGE 3: IS THE PLAN OR PRO­JECT (EITHER ALONE OR IN COM­BIN­A­TION WITH OTH­ER PLANS OR PRO­JECTS) LIKELY TO HAVE A SIG­NI­FIC­ANT EFFECT ON THE SITE? Each qual­i­fy­ing interest should be con­sidered in rela­tion to their con­ser­va­tion object­ives. The fol­low­ing points should be con­sidered: i) Briefly indic­ate which qual­i­fy­ing interest could be affected by the pro­pos­al and how; if none, provide a brief jus­ti­fic­a­tion for this decision, and then pro­ceed to v), oth­er­wise con­tin­ue: ii) refer to oth­er plans/​projects with sim­il­ar effects/​other rel­ev­ant evid­ence; iii) con­sider the nature, scale, loc­a­tion, longev­ity, and revers­ib­il­ity of effects; iv) con­sider wheth­er the pro­pos­al con­trib­utes to cumu­lat­ive or incre­ment­al impacts in com­bin­a­tion with oth­er plans or pro­jects com­pleted, under­way or pro­posed; v) Where the impacts of a pro­pos­al are the same for dif­fer­ent qual­i­fy­ing interests these can be con­sidered togeth­er how­ever a clear con­clu­sion should be giv­en for each interest vi) give Yes/​No con­clu­sion for each interest.

• If yes, or in cases of doubt, con­tin­ue to stage 4.
• If poten­tial sig­ni­fic­ant effects can eas­ily be avoided, record modi­fic­a­tions required below. If no for all fea­tures, a con­sent or non-objec­tion response can be giv­en and recor­ded below (although if there are oth­er fea­tures of nation­al interest only, the effect on these should be con­sidered sep­ar­ately). There is no need to then pro­ceed to stage 4.

Con­ser­va­tion Objectives

2 c:\users\dotharris\appdata\local\microsoft\windows\temporary inter­net files\content.outlook\qyrkb63k\20190080glenmuickcablehousinghra_sh (2).doc

Pop­u­la­tion of the spe­cies, includ­ing range of genet­ic types for sal­mon, as a viable com­pon­ent of the site Dis­tri­bu­tion of the spe­cies with­in site Dis­tri­bu­tion and extent of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing the spe­cies Struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing the spe­cies No sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance of the spe­cies Dis­tri­bu­tion and viab­il­ity of fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel host spe­cies Struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sel host species

Fresh­wa­ter Pearl Mus­sel The pro­pos­al could cause dir­ect harm to fresh­wa­ter pearl mus­sels through the release of sed­i­ment laden sur­face water into the water­course which could smoth­er FWPM colon­ies in the vicin­ity of the scheme and down­stream. Pol­lu­tion run off (i.e fuel/​oil spill) can redu­cing water qual­ity caus­ing dir­ect harm.

• FWPM sur­vey under­taken 2017 along sur­vey route, and addi­tion­al 100m upstream and 500m down­stream. No dead or alive indi­vidu­als were found.

Con­clu­sion: Fresh water pearl mus­sel not con­sidered to be present with­in the affected part of the river or with­in 500m down­stream of the affected part of the river. There­fore, No Likely Sig­ni­fic­ant Effect

Atlantic Sal­mon The buri­al of the cable and con­struc­tion of the sub­sta­tion could poten­tially cause dir­ect harm to sal­mon spawn­ing sites from release of sed­i­ments dur­ing con­struc­tion works and poten­tial pol­lu­tion run off (i.e fuel/​oil spill) redu­cing water quality.

Con­clu­sion: Likely Sig­ni­fic­ant Effect Alone or in Combination

Otter The pro­pos­al could cause dir­ect harm to otters if there are holts along the cable route. The nature of the works has the pos­sib­il­ity to entrap otters with­in con­struc­tion trenches or des­troy holt sites. Pro­ject con­struc­tion activ­it­ies could cause dis­turb­ance to otter. Sed­i­ment release or pol­lu­tion run off into the water­course could impact on feeding.

• Otter sur­vey under­taken 2017, no holts or rest sites iden­ti­fied but signs of for­aging otter along the pro­posed scheme length which shows they are act­ive in the area and may be dis­turbed by works or become trapped with­in pipes or trench workings.

Con­clu­sion: Likely Sig­ni­fic­ant Effect from con­struc­tion and oper­a­tion of the scheme

Mit­ig­a­tion or modi­fic­a­tions required to avoid a likely sig­ni­fic­ant effect & reas­ons for these: Mit­ig­a­tion: Reason:

STAGE 4: UNDER­TAKE AN APPRO­PRI­ATE ASSESS­MENT OF THE IMPLIC­A­TIONS FOR THE SITE IN VIEW OF ITS CON­SER­VA­TION OBJECT­IVES (It is the respons­ib­il­ity of the com­pet­ent author­ity to carry out the appro­pri­ate assess­ment. The com­pet­ent author­ity must con­sult SNH for the pur­poses of car­ry­ing out the appro­pri­ate assess­ment. SNH can provide advice on what issues should be con­sidered in the appro­pri­ate assess­ment, what inform­a­tion is required to carry out the assess­ment, in some cir­cum­stances carry out an apprais­al to

3 c:\users\dotharris\appdata\local\microsoft\windows\temporary inter­net files\content.outlook\qyrkb63k\20190080glenmuickcablehousinghra_sh (2).doc

inform an appro­pri­ate assess­ment and/​or provide com­ments on an assess­ment car­ried out. Where we are provid­ing advice to a com­pet­ent author­ity our apprais­al of the pro­pos­al should be recor­ded here.) The fol­low­ing points should be con­sidered: i) Describe for each qual­i­fy­ing interest the poten­tial impacts of the pro­pos­al detail­ing which aspects or effects of the pro­pos­al could impact upon them and their con­ser­va­tion object­ives. ii) Eval­u­ate the poten­tial impacts, e.g. wheth­er short/​long term, revers­ible or irre­vers­ible, and in rela­tion to the proportion/​importance of the interest affected, and the over­all effect on the site’s con­ser­va­tion object­ives. This should be in suf­fi­cient detail to ensure all impacts have been con­sidered and suf­fi­ciently appraised. Record if addi­tion­al sur­vey inform­a­tion or spe­cial­ist advice has been obtained. iii) Each con­ser­va­tion object­ive should be con­sidered and a decision reached as to wheth­er the pro­pos­al will affect achieve­ment of this object­ive i.e. wheth­er the con­ser­va­tion object­ive will still be met if the pro­pos­al is con­sen­ted to.

Atlantic Sal­mon Con­ser­va­tion Objectives

1. Pop­u­la­tion of the spe­cies, includ­ing range of genet­ic types for sal­mon, as a viable com­pon­ent of the site
2. Dis­tri­bu­tion of the spe­cies with­in site
3. Dis­tri­bu­tion and extent of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing the species
4. Struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing the species
5. No sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance of the species

1&2: Pop­u­la­tion & Dis­tri­bu­tion of the spe­cies with­in site Poten­tial impacts: • Sed­i­ment laden run off enter­ing water­course which can smoth­er gravels used for spawn­ing. Pol­lu­tion (fuel/​oil) from vehicles can reduce water qual­ity. Pro­posed Mit­ig­a­tion • A Pol­lu­tion Pre­ven­tion Plan has been pro­duced and included with­in the Con­struc­tion Meth­od State­ment which details meth­ods includ­ing install­a­tion of silt traps, cut off drains, bun­ded fuel stor­age area, and inspec­tion of vehicles along with pro­vi­sion of spill kits. Con­clu­sion: No likely sig­ni­fic­ant effect on pop­u­la­tion and dis­tri­bu­tion of Atlantic Sal­mon with­in the site. 3: Dis­tri­bu­tion and extent of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing spe­cies Poten­tial impacts: Sed­i­ment laden run off enter­ing water­course which can smoth­er gravels used for spawn­ing. Pol­lu­tion (fuel/​oil) from vehicles can reduce water qual­ity. Pro­posed Mit­ig­a­tion • A Pol­lu­tion Pre­ven­tion Plan has been pro­duced and included with­in the Con­struc­tion Meth­od State­ment which details meth­ods includ­ing install­a­tion of silt traps, cut off drains, bun­ded fuel stor­age area, and inspec­tion of vehicles along with pro­vi­sion of spill kits. Con­clu­sion: No likely sig­ni­fic­ant effect on dis­tri­bu­tion and extent of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing spe­cies 4: Struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing the spe­cies Poten­tial release of silt and sed­i­ments and pol­lu­tion from vehicles which can smoth­er gravels used for spawn­ing and reduce water qual­ity. Poten­tial impacts: Sed­i­ment laden run off enter­ing water­course which can smoth­er gravels used for spawn­ing. Pol­lu­tion (fuel/​oil) from vehicles can reduce water qual­ity. Pro­posed Mit­ig­a­tion • A Pol­lu­tion Pre­ven­tion Plan has been pro­duced and included with­in the Con­struc­tion Meth­od State­ment which details meth­ods includ­ing install­a­tion of silt traps, cut off drains, bun­ded fuel stor­age area, and inspec­tion of vehicles and pro­vi­sion of spill kits.

4 c:\users\dotharris\appdata\local\microsoft\windows\temporary inter­net files\content.outlook\qyrkb63k\20190080glenmuickcablehousinghra_sh (2).doc

Con­clu­sion: No likely sig­ni­fic­ant effect on Struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing Atlantic Sal­mon with­in the site. 5: No sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance of the spe­cies Poten­tial impacts: The pro­pos­al has the poten­tial to cause dis­turb­ance from work­ing on the banks close to the river includ­ing release of silt and sed­i­ments and pol­lu­tion from vehicles which can smoth­er gravels used for spawn­ing. Pro­posed Mit­ig­a­tion • A Pol­lu­tion Pre­ven­tion Plan has been pro­duced and included with­in the Con­struc­tion Envir­on­ment­al Man­age­ment Plan which details meth­od includ­ing install­a­tion of silt traps, inspec­tion of vehicles and tim­ing of work­ing to avoid sens­it­ive peri­ods. Con­clu­sion: No likely sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance of Atlantic Salmon.

Otter Con­ser­va­tion Object­ives • Pop­u­la­tion & dis­tri­bu­tion of the spe­cies • Dis­tri­bu­tion and extent of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing the spe­cies • Struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing the spe­cies • No sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance of the spe­cies 1&2 Pop­u­la­tion and dis­tri­bu­tion of otter with­in the site Poten­tial impacts: Poten­tial for the pro­pos­al to cause entrap­ment and harm to otter dur­ing con­struc­tion. Sed­i­ment laden run off or pol­lut­ant run off (fuel /​oil) could impact on otter abil­ity to find food by cloud­ing up the water or redu­cing prey item avail­ab­il­ity if impacted on by a pol­lu­tion event. Pro­posed mit­ig­a­tion • A pre-con­struc­tion sur­vey to take place before works start • An ECOW will be on call if any rest­ing sites are detec­ted, all per­son­nel to be made aware otters are act­ive in the area • Con­struc­tion will avoid night works and will only be oper­a­tion­al between 7.00 and 19.00 or one hour before or after dusk whichever is soon­est • All open excav­a­tions will be ramped to allow otter and oth­er spe­cies to escape or closed over • All exposed pipes with a dia­met­er great­er than 3” will be capped before left unat­ten­ded to avoid otter entrap­ment • No con­struc­tion mater­i­als with sharp ends which could cause harm to otters will be left overnight • A Pol­lu­tion Pre­ven­tion Plan has been pro­duced and included with­in the Con­struc­tion Meth­od State­ment which details meth­ods includ­ing install­a­tion of silt traps, cut off drains, bun­ded fuel stor­age area, and inspec­tion of vehicles and pro­vi­sion of spill kits Con­clu­sion: No Likely Sig­ni­fic­ant Effect on otter pop­u­la­tion and dis­tri­bu­tion with­in the site 3: Dis­tri­bu­tion and extent of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing otter Poten­tial impacts: Poten­tial for the pro­pos­al to cause harm to otter rest­ing sites dur­ing con­struc­tion. Sed­i­ment laden run off or pol­lut­ant run off (fuel /​oil) could impact on otter abil­ity to find food by cloud­ing up the water or redu­cing prey item avail­ab­il­ity if impacted on by a pol­lu­tion event. Pro­posed mit­ig­a­tion • A pre-con­struc­tion sur­vey to take place before works start • An ECOW will be on call if any rest­ing sites are detec­ted, all per­son­nel to be made aware otters are act­ive in the area • Con­struc­tion will avoid night works and will only be oper­a­tion­al between 7.00 and 19.00 or one hour before or after dusk whichever is soon­est. A Pol­lu­tion Pre­ven­tion Plan has been pro­duced and included with­in the Con­struc­tion Meth­od Statement

5 c:\users\dotharris\appdata\local\microsoft\windows\temporary inter­net files\content.outlook\qyrkb63k\20190080glenmuickcablehousinghra_sh (2).doc

• which details meth­ods includ­ing install­a­tion of silt traps, cut off drains, bun­ded fuel stor­age area, and inspec­tion of vehicles and pro­vi­sion of spill kits All meas­ures with­in the Spe­cies Pro­tec­tion Plan incor­por­ated into the Con­struc­tion Meth­od State­ment Con­clu­sion: No Likely Sig­ni­fic­ant Effect on dis­tri­bu­tion and extent of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing otter

4: Struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing otter Poten­tial impacts: Poten­tial for the pro­pos­al to cause harm to otter rest­ing sites dur­ing con­struc­tion. Sed­i­ment laden run off or pol­lut­ant run off (fuel /​oil) could impact on otter abil­ity to find food by cloud­ing up the water or redu­cing prey item avail­ab­il­ity if impacted on by a pol­lu­tion event. Pro­posed mit­ig­a­tion • A pre-con­struc­tion sur­vey to take place before works start • An ECOW will be on call if any rest­ing sites are detec­ted, all per­son­nel to be made aware otters are act­ive in the area • Con­struc­tion will avoid night works and will only be oper­a­tion­al between 7.00 and 19.00 or one hour before or after dusk whichever is soon­est. A Pol­lu­tion Pre­ven­tion Plan has been pro­duced and included with­in the Con­struc­tion Meth­od State­ment which details meth­ods includ­ing install­a­tion of silt traps, cut off drains, bun­ded fuel stor­age area, and inspec­tion of vehicles and pro­vi­sion of spill kits All meas­ures with­in the Spe­cies Pro­tec­tion Plan incor­por­ated into the Con­struc­tion Meth­od State­ment Con­clu­sion: No Likely Sig­ni­fic­ant Effect on Struc­ture, func­tion and sup­port­ing pro­cesses of hab­it­ats sup­port­ing otter 5: No sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance of otter The mit­ig­a­tion described above will ensure there is no dis­turb­ance to otter dur­ing con­struc­tion Con­clu­sion: No Likely Sig­ni­fic­ant dis­turb­ance of otter

Over­all Con­clu­sion: There will be No Likely Sig­ni­fic­ant Effect on otter arising from this proposal

STAGE 5: CAN IT BE ASCER­TAINED THAT THE PRO­POS­AL WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE INTEG­RITY OF THE SITE? In the light of the apprais­al, ascer­tain wheth­er the pro­pos­al will not adversely affect the integ­rity of the site for the qual­i­fy­ing interests. Con­clu­sions should be reached bey­ond reas­on­able sci­entif­ic doubt. If more than one SAC and/​or SPA is involved, give sep­ar­ate con­clu­sions. If mit­ig­a­tion or modi­fic­a­tions are required, detail these below.

It can be con­cluded that there will be no adverse effect on site integ­rity res­ult­ing from this proposal.

Mit­ig­a­tion or modi­fic­a­tions required to ensure adverse effects are avoided, & reas­ons for these. Mit­ig­a­tion: See above Reason:

ADVICE SOUGHT

Bur­ied Cable Con­struc­tion Meth­od State­ment, (Grant Ltd, 2019) Otter Spe­cies Pro­tec­tion Plan, May 2018

6 c:\users\dotharris\appdata\local\microsoft\windows\temporary inter­net files\content.outlook\qyrkb63k\20190080glenmuickcablehousinghra_sh (2).doc

7 c:\users\dotharris\appdata\local\microsoft\windows\temporary inter­net files\content.outlook\qyrkb63k\20190080glenmuickcablehousinghra_sh (2).doc