‘offshore wind’ standards, certification & litigation
TRANSCRIPT
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Professor Feargal Brennan Offshore Wind Foundations
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Presentation Overview
bull The Context
bull The Stakeholders
bull The Science Engineering amp Technology
bull The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
bull Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
bull The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
bull The Choice
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Context
Global Atmospheric CO2 Concentrations
Source Scripps Institution of Oceanography October 2015
IPCC Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report
IPCC Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report
UK Electricity Generation
Source DECC Energy Trends October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
COP21 CMP11 UN CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE
The Stakeholders
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Stakeholders
The Science Engineering amp Technology
The rapidly increasing size of wind installations as they move offshore
Design Considerations for Offshore Support Structures
bull Primary Purpose ie Ultimate Capacity
bull Maintainability
bull Transportation
bull Installation
bull CAPEX amp OPEX
bull Environmental Impact
bull Environmental Life-Cycle
European Water Depths
USA Water Depths
Image Courtesy of Google Earth
Offshore Wind Support Structures
Support
structure
Monopile gravity-based Tri-pod Jacket Floating
Water depth
(m)
0-40 10-40 30-80 gt50-100 ()
Industrial
development
Large commercial wind farms already exist
(Denmark UK the Netherlands Germany
Sweden etc)
Demonstration wind
farms (Beatrice
Alpha Ventus)
Prototype (full-scale Hywind WindFloat small-
scale BlueH Sway etc)
International
Standards
IEC 61400-3 GL DNV BV and ABS an
extension of design code for onshore wind
turbines
Refer to offshore
codes for support
structures
Under development
Fixed
Foundation
Fixed
Foundation Fixed
Foundation
Floating wind turbine foundations
Floater spar semi-submersible and barge Mooring system catenary mooring and tension leg
Floating wind turbine foundations
HYWIND (Courtesy Statoil)
Floating wind turbine foundations
(Courtesy WindFloat)
Offshore Wind ndash Floating Demonstrators
(Courtesy Fukushima Forward)
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Professor Feargal Brennan Offshore Wind Foundations
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Presentation Overview
bull The Context
bull The Stakeholders
bull The Science Engineering amp Technology
bull The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
bull Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
bull The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
bull The Choice
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Context
Global Atmospheric CO2 Concentrations
Source Scripps Institution of Oceanography October 2015
IPCC Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report
IPCC Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report
UK Electricity Generation
Source DECC Energy Trends October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
COP21 CMP11 UN CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE
The Stakeholders
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Stakeholders
The Science Engineering amp Technology
The rapidly increasing size of wind installations as they move offshore
Design Considerations for Offshore Support Structures
bull Primary Purpose ie Ultimate Capacity
bull Maintainability
bull Transportation
bull Installation
bull CAPEX amp OPEX
bull Environmental Impact
bull Environmental Life-Cycle
European Water Depths
USA Water Depths
Image Courtesy of Google Earth
Offshore Wind Support Structures
Support
structure
Monopile gravity-based Tri-pod Jacket Floating
Water depth
(m)
0-40 10-40 30-80 gt50-100 ()
Industrial
development
Large commercial wind farms already exist
(Denmark UK the Netherlands Germany
Sweden etc)
Demonstration wind
farms (Beatrice
Alpha Ventus)
Prototype (full-scale Hywind WindFloat small-
scale BlueH Sway etc)
International
Standards
IEC 61400-3 GL DNV BV and ABS an
extension of design code for onshore wind
turbines
Refer to offshore
codes for support
structures
Under development
Fixed
Foundation
Fixed
Foundation Fixed
Foundation
Floating wind turbine foundations
Floater spar semi-submersible and barge Mooring system catenary mooring and tension leg
Floating wind turbine foundations
HYWIND (Courtesy Statoil)
Floating wind turbine foundations
(Courtesy WindFloat)
Offshore Wind ndash Floating Demonstrators
(Courtesy Fukushima Forward)
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Presentation Overview
bull The Context
bull The Stakeholders
bull The Science Engineering amp Technology
bull The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
bull Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
bull The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
bull The Choice
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Context
Global Atmospheric CO2 Concentrations
Source Scripps Institution of Oceanography October 2015
IPCC Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report
IPCC Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report
UK Electricity Generation
Source DECC Energy Trends October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
COP21 CMP11 UN CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE
The Stakeholders
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Stakeholders
The Science Engineering amp Technology
The rapidly increasing size of wind installations as they move offshore
Design Considerations for Offshore Support Structures
bull Primary Purpose ie Ultimate Capacity
bull Maintainability
bull Transportation
bull Installation
bull CAPEX amp OPEX
bull Environmental Impact
bull Environmental Life-Cycle
European Water Depths
USA Water Depths
Image Courtesy of Google Earth
Offshore Wind Support Structures
Support
structure
Monopile gravity-based Tri-pod Jacket Floating
Water depth
(m)
0-40 10-40 30-80 gt50-100 ()
Industrial
development
Large commercial wind farms already exist
(Denmark UK the Netherlands Germany
Sweden etc)
Demonstration wind
farms (Beatrice
Alpha Ventus)
Prototype (full-scale Hywind WindFloat small-
scale BlueH Sway etc)
International
Standards
IEC 61400-3 GL DNV BV and ABS an
extension of design code for onshore wind
turbines
Refer to offshore
codes for support
structures
Under development
Fixed
Foundation
Fixed
Foundation Fixed
Foundation
Floating wind turbine foundations
Floater spar semi-submersible and barge Mooring system catenary mooring and tension leg
Floating wind turbine foundations
HYWIND (Courtesy Statoil)
Floating wind turbine foundations
(Courtesy WindFloat)
Offshore Wind ndash Floating Demonstrators
(Courtesy Fukushima Forward)
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Context
Global Atmospheric CO2 Concentrations
Source Scripps Institution of Oceanography October 2015
IPCC Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report
IPCC Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report
UK Electricity Generation
Source DECC Energy Trends October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
COP21 CMP11 UN CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE
The Stakeholders
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Stakeholders
The Science Engineering amp Technology
The rapidly increasing size of wind installations as they move offshore
Design Considerations for Offshore Support Structures
bull Primary Purpose ie Ultimate Capacity
bull Maintainability
bull Transportation
bull Installation
bull CAPEX amp OPEX
bull Environmental Impact
bull Environmental Life-Cycle
European Water Depths
USA Water Depths
Image Courtesy of Google Earth
Offshore Wind Support Structures
Support
structure
Monopile gravity-based Tri-pod Jacket Floating
Water depth
(m)
0-40 10-40 30-80 gt50-100 ()
Industrial
development
Large commercial wind farms already exist
(Denmark UK the Netherlands Germany
Sweden etc)
Demonstration wind
farms (Beatrice
Alpha Ventus)
Prototype (full-scale Hywind WindFloat small-
scale BlueH Sway etc)
International
Standards
IEC 61400-3 GL DNV BV and ABS an
extension of design code for onshore wind
turbines
Refer to offshore
codes for support
structures
Under development
Fixed
Foundation
Fixed
Foundation Fixed
Foundation
Floating wind turbine foundations
Floater spar semi-submersible and barge Mooring system catenary mooring and tension leg
Floating wind turbine foundations
HYWIND (Courtesy Statoil)
Floating wind turbine foundations
(Courtesy WindFloat)
Offshore Wind ndash Floating Demonstrators
(Courtesy Fukushima Forward)
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Global Atmospheric CO2 Concentrations
Source Scripps Institution of Oceanography October 2015
IPCC Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report
IPCC Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report
UK Electricity Generation
Source DECC Energy Trends October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
COP21 CMP11 UN CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE
The Stakeholders
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Stakeholders
The Science Engineering amp Technology
The rapidly increasing size of wind installations as they move offshore
Design Considerations for Offshore Support Structures
bull Primary Purpose ie Ultimate Capacity
bull Maintainability
bull Transportation
bull Installation
bull CAPEX amp OPEX
bull Environmental Impact
bull Environmental Life-Cycle
European Water Depths
USA Water Depths
Image Courtesy of Google Earth
Offshore Wind Support Structures
Support
structure
Monopile gravity-based Tri-pod Jacket Floating
Water depth
(m)
0-40 10-40 30-80 gt50-100 ()
Industrial
development
Large commercial wind farms already exist
(Denmark UK the Netherlands Germany
Sweden etc)
Demonstration wind
farms (Beatrice
Alpha Ventus)
Prototype (full-scale Hywind WindFloat small-
scale BlueH Sway etc)
International
Standards
IEC 61400-3 GL DNV BV and ABS an
extension of design code for onshore wind
turbines
Refer to offshore
codes for support
structures
Under development
Fixed
Foundation
Fixed
Foundation Fixed
Foundation
Floating wind turbine foundations
Floater spar semi-submersible and barge Mooring system catenary mooring and tension leg
Floating wind turbine foundations
HYWIND (Courtesy Statoil)
Floating wind turbine foundations
(Courtesy WindFloat)
Offshore Wind ndash Floating Demonstrators
(Courtesy Fukushima Forward)
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
IPCC Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report
IPCC Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report
UK Electricity Generation
Source DECC Energy Trends October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
COP21 CMP11 UN CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE
The Stakeholders
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Stakeholders
The Science Engineering amp Technology
The rapidly increasing size of wind installations as they move offshore
Design Considerations for Offshore Support Structures
bull Primary Purpose ie Ultimate Capacity
bull Maintainability
bull Transportation
bull Installation
bull CAPEX amp OPEX
bull Environmental Impact
bull Environmental Life-Cycle
European Water Depths
USA Water Depths
Image Courtesy of Google Earth
Offshore Wind Support Structures
Support
structure
Monopile gravity-based Tri-pod Jacket Floating
Water depth
(m)
0-40 10-40 30-80 gt50-100 ()
Industrial
development
Large commercial wind farms already exist
(Denmark UK the Netherlands Germany
Sweden etc)
Demonstration wind
farms (Beatrice
Alpha Ventus)
Prototype (full-scale Hywind WindFloat small-
scale BlueH Sway etc)
International
Standards
IEC 61400-3 GL DNV BV and ABS an
extension of design code for onshore wind
turbines
Refer to offshore
codes for support
structures
Under development
Fixed
Foundation
Fixed
Foundation Fixed
Foundation
Floating wind turbine foundations
Floater spar semi-submersible and barge Mooring system catenary mooring and tension leg
Floating wind turbine foundations
HYWIND (Courtesy Statoil)
Floating wind turbine foundations
(Courtesy WindFloat)
Offshore Wind ndash Floating Demonstrators
(Courtesy Fukushima Forward)
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
IPCC Climate Change 2014 Synthesis Report
UK Electricity Generation
Source DECC Energy Trends October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
COP21 CMP11 UN CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE
The Stakeholders
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Stakeholders
The Science Engineering amp Technology
The rapidly increasing size of wind installations as they move offshore
Design Considerations for Offshore Support Structures
bull Primary Purpose ie Ultimate Capacity
bull Maintainability
bull Transportation
bull Installation
bull CAPEX amp OPEX
bull Environmental Impact
bull Environmental Life-Cycle
European Water Depths
USA Water Depths
Image Courtesy of Google Earth
Offshore Wind Support Structures
Support
structure
Monopile gravity-based Tri-pod Jacket Floating
Water depth
(m)
0-40 10-40 30-80 gt50-100 ()
Industrial
development
Large commercial wind farms already exist
(Denmark UK the Netherlands Germany
Sweden etc)
Demonstration wind
farms (Beatrice
Alpha Ventus)
Prototype (full-scale Hywind WindFloat small-
scale BlueH Sway etc)
International
Standards
IEC 61400-3 GL DNV BV and ABS an
extension of design code for onshore wind
turbines
Refer to offshore
codes for support
structures
Under development
Fixed
Foundation
Fixed
Foundation Fixed
Foundation
Floating wind turbine foundations
Floater spar semi-submersible and barge Mooring system catenary mooring and tension leg
Floating wind turbine foundations
HYWIND (Courtesy Statoil)
Floating wind turbine foundations
(Courtesy WindFloat)
Offshore Wind ndash Floating Demonstrators
(Courtesy Fukushima Forward)
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Electricity Generation
Source DECC Energy Trends October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
COP21 CMP11 UN CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE
The Stakeholders
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Stakeholders
The Science Engineering amp Technology
The rapidly increasing size of wind installations as they move offshore
Design Considerations for Offshore Support Structures
bull Primary Purpose ie Ultimate Capacity
bull Maintainability
bull Transportation
bull Installation
bull CAPEX amp OPEX
bull Environmental Impact
bull Environmental Life-Cycle
European Water Depths
USA Water Depths
Image Courtesy of Google Earth
Offshore Wind Support Structures
Support
structure
Monopile gravity-based Tri-pod Jacket Floating
Water depth
(m)
0-40 10-40 30-80 gt50-100 ()
Industrial
development
Large commercial wind farms already exist
(Denmark UK the Netherlands Germany
Sweden etc)
Demonstration wind
farms (Beatrice
Alpha Ventus)
Prototype (full-scale Hywind WindFloat small-
scale BlueH Sway etc)
International
Standards
IEC 61400-3 GL DNV BV and ABS an
extension of design code for onshore wind
turbines
Refer to offshore
codes for support
structures
Under development
Fixed
Foundation
Fixed
Foundation Fixed
Foundation
Floating wind turbine foundations
Floater spar semi-submersible and barge Mooring system catenary mooring and tension leg
Floating wind turbine foundations
HYWIND (Courtesy Statoil)
Floating wind turbine foundations
(Courtesy WindFloat)
Offshore Wind ndash Floating Demonstrators
(Courtesy Fukushima Forward)
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
COP21 CMP11 UN CLIMATE CHANGE CONFERENCE
The Stakeholders
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Stakeholders
The Science Engineering amp Technology
The rapidly increasing size of wind installations as they move offshore
Design Considerations for Offshore Support Structures
bull Primary Purpose ie Ultimate Capacity
bull Maintainability
bull Transportation
bull Installation
bull CAPEX amp OPEX
bull Environmental Impact
bull Environmental Life-Cycle
European Water Depths
USA Water Depths
Image Courtesy of Google Earth
Offshore Wind Support Structures
Support
structure
Monopile gravity-based Tri-pod Jacket Floating
Water depth
(m)
0-40 10-40 30-80 gt50-100 ()
Industrial
development
Large commercial wind farms already exist
(Denmark UK the Netherlands Germany
Sweden etc)
Demonstration wind
farms (Beatrice
Alpha Ventus)
Prototype (full-scale Hywind WindFloat small-
scale BlueH Sway etc)
International
Standards
IEC 61400-3 GL DNV BV and ABS an
extension of design code for onshore wind
turbines
Refer to offshore
codes for support
structures
Under development
Fixed
Foundation
Fixed
Foundation Fixed
Foundation
Floating wind turbine foundations
Floater spar semi-submersible and barge Mooring system catenary mooring and tension leg
Floating wind turbine foundations
HYWIND (Courtesy Statoil)
Floating wind turbine foundations
(Courtesy WindFloat)
Offshore Wind ndash Floating Demonstrators
(Courtesy Fukushima Forward)
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stakeholders
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Stakeholders
The Science Engineering amp Technology
The rapidly increasing size of wind installations as they move offshore
Design Considerations for Offshore Support Structures
bull Primary Purpose ie Ultimate Capacity
bull Maintainability
bull Transportation
bull Installation
bull CAPEX amp OPEX
bull Environmental Impact
bull Environmental Life-Cycle
European Water Depths
USA Water Depths
Image Courtesy of Google Earth
Offshore Wind Support Structures
Support
structure
Monopile gravity-based Tri-pod Jacket Floating
Water depth
(m)
0-40 10-40 30-80 gt50-100 ()
Industrial
development
Large commercial wind farms already exist
(Denmark UK the Netherlands Germany
Sweden etc)
Demonstration wind
farms (Beatrice
Alpha Ventus)
Prototype (full-scale Hywind WindFloat small-
scale BlueH Sway etc)
International
Standards
IEC 61400-3 GL DNV BV and ABS an
extension of design code for onshore wind
turbines
Refer to offshore
codes for support
structures
Under development
Fixed
Foundation
Fixed
Foundation Fixed
Foundation
Floating wind turbine foundations
Floater spar semi-submersible and barge Mooring system catenary mooring and tension leg
Floating wind turbine foundations
HYWIND (Courtesy Statoil)
Floating wind turbine foundations
(Courtesy WindFloat)
Offshore Wind ndash Floating Demonstrators
(Courtesy Fukushima Forward)
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Stakeholders
The Science Engineering amp Technology
The rapidly increasing size of wind installations as they move offshore
Design Considerations for Offshore Support Structures
bull Primary Purpose ie Ultimate Capacity
bull Maintainability
bull Transportation
bull Installation
bull CAPEX amp OPEX
bull Environmental Impact
bull Environmental Life-Cycle
European Water Depths
USA Water Depths
Image Courtesy of Google Earth
Offshore Wind Support Structures
Support
structure
Monopile gravity-based Tri-pod Jacket Floating
Water depth
(m)
0-40 10-40 30-80 gt50-100 ()
Industrial
development
Large commercial wind farms already exist
(Denmark UK the Netherlands Germany
Sweden etc)
Demonstration wind
farms (Beatrice
Alpha Ventus)
Prototype (full-scale Hywind WindFloat small-
scale BlueH Sway etc)
International
Standards
IEC 61400-3 GL DNV BV and ABS an
extension of design code for onshore wind
turbines
Refer to offshore
codes for support
structures
Under development
Fixed
Foundation
Fixed
Foundation Fixed
Foundation
Floating wind turbine foundations
Floater spar semi-submersible and barge Mooring system catenary mooring and tension leg
Floating wind turbine foundations
HYWIND (Courtesy Statoil)
Floating wind turbine foundations
(Courtesy WindFloat)
Offshore Wind ndash Floating Demonstrators
(Courtesy Fukushima Forward)
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Science Engineering amp Technology
The rapidly increasing size of wind installations as they move offshore
Design Considerations for Offshore Support Structures
bull Primary Purpose ie Ultimate Capacity
bull Maintainability
bull Transportation
bull Installation
bull CAPEX amp OPEX
bull Environmental Impact
bull Environmental Life-Cycle
European Water Depths
USA Water Depths
Image Courtesy of Google Earth
Offshore Wind Support Structures
Support
structure
Monopile gravity-based Tri-pod Jacket Floating
Water depth
(m)
0-40 10-40 30-80 gt50-100 ()
Industrial
development
Large commercial wind farms already exist
(Denmark UK the Netherlands Germany
Sweden etc)
Demonstration wind
farms (Beatrice
Alpha Ventus)
Prototype (full-scale Hywind WindFloat small-
scale BlueH Sway etc)
International
Standards
IEC 61400-3 GL DNV BV and ABS an
extension of design code for onshore wind
turbines
Refer to offshore
codes for support
structures
Under development
Fixed
Foundation
Fixed
Foundation Fixed
Foundation
Floating wind turbine foundations
Floater spar semi-submersible and barge Mooring system catenary mooring and tension leg
Floating wind turbine foundations
HYWIND (Courtesy Statoil)
Floating wind turbine foundations
(Courtesy WindFloat)
Offshore Wind ndash Floating Demonstrators
(Courtesy Fukushima Forward)
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The rapidly increasing size of wind installations as they move offshore
Design Considerations for Offshore Support Structures
bull Primary Purpose ie Ultimate Capacity
bull Maintainability
bull Transportation
bull Installation
bull CAPEX amp OPEX
bull Environmental Impact
bull Environmental Life-Cycle
European Water Depths
USA Water Depths
Image Courtesy of Google Earth
Offshore Wind Support Structures
Support
structure
Monopile gravity-based Tri-pod Jacket Floating
Water depth
(m)
0-40 10-40 30-80 gt50-100 ()
Industrial
development
Large commercial wind farms already exist
(Denmark UK the Netherlands Germany
Sweden etc)
Demonstration wind
farms (Beatrice
Alpha Ventus)
Prototype (full-scale Hywind WindFloat small-
scale BlueH Sway etc)
International
Standards
IEC 61400-3 GL DNV BV and ABS an
extension of design code for onshore wind
turbines
Refer to offshore
codes for support
structures
Under development
Fixed
Foundation
Fixed
Foundation Fixed
Foundation
Floating wind turbine foundations
Floater spar semi-submersible and barge Mooring system catenary mooring and tension leg
Floating wind turbine foundations
HYWIND (Courtesy Statoil)
Floating wind turbine foundations
(Courtesy WindFloat)
Offshore Wind ndash Floating Demonstrators
(Courtesy Fukushima Forward)
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Design Considerations for Offshore Support Structures
bull Primary Purpose ie Ultimate Capacity
bull Maintainability
bull Transportation
bull Installation
bull CAPEX amp OPEX
bull Environmental Impact
bull Environmental Life-Cycle
European Water Depths
USA Water Depths
Image Courtesy of Google Earth
Offshore Wind Support Structures
Support
structure
Monopile gravity-based Tri-pod Jacket Floating
Water depth
(m)
0-40 10-40 30-80 gt50-100 ()
Industrial
development
Large commercial wind farms already exist
(Denmark UK the Netherlands Germany
Sweden etc)
Demonstration wind
farms (Beatrice
Alpha Ventus)
Prototype (full-scale Hywind WindFloat small-
scale BlueH Sway etc)
International
Standards
IEC 61400-3 GL DNV BV and ABS an
extension of design code for onshore wind
turbines
Refer to offshore
codes for support
structures
Under development
Fixed
Foundation
Fixed
Foundation Fixed
Foundation
Floating wind turbine foundations
Floater spar semi-submersible and barge Mooring system catenary mooring and tension leg
Floating wind turbine foundations
HYWIND (Courtesy Statoil)
Floating wind turbine foundations
(Courtesy WindFloat)
Offshore Wind ndash Floating Demonstrators
(Courtesy Fukushima Forward)
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
European Water Depths
USA Water Depths
Image Courtesy of Google Earth
Offshore Wind Support Structures
Support
structure
Monopile gravity-based Tri-pod Jacket Floating
Water depth
(m)
0-40 10-40 30-80 gt50-100 ()
Industrial
development
Large commercial wind farms already exist
(Denmark UK the Netherlands Germany
Sweden etc)
Demonstration wind
farms (Beatrice
Alpha Ventus)
Prototype (full-scale Hywind WindFloat small-
scale BlueH Sway etc)
International
Standards
IEC 61400-3 GL DNV BV and ABS an
extension of design code for onshore wind
turbines
Refer to offshore
codes for support
structures
Under development
Fixed
Foundation
Fixed
Foundation Fixed
Foundation
Floating wind turbine foundations
Floater spar semi-submersible and barge Mooring system catenary mooring and tension leg
Floating wind turbine foundations
HYWIND (Courtesy Statoil)
Floating wind turbine foundations
(Courtesy WindFloat)
Offshore Wind ndash Floating Demonstrators
(Courtesy Fukushima Forward)
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
USA Water Depths
Image Courtesy of Google Earth
Offshore Wind Support Structures
Support
structure
Monopile gravity-based Tri-pod Jacket Floating
Water depth
(m)
0-40 10-40 30-80 gt50-100 ()
Industrial
development
Large commercial wind farms already exist
(Denmark UK the Netherlands Germany
Sweden etc)
Demonstration wind
farms (Beatrice
Alpha Ventus)
Prototype (full-scale Hywind WindFloat small-
scale BlueH Sway etc)
International
Standards
IEC 61400-3 GL DNV BV and ABS an
extension of design code for onshore wind
turbines
Refer to offshore
codes for support
structures
Under development
Fixed
Foundation
Fixed
Foundation Fixed
Foundation
Floating wind turbine foundations
Floater spar semi-submersible and barge Mooring system catenary mooring and tension leg
Floating wind turbine foundations
HYWIND (Courtesy Statoil)
Floating wind turbine foundations
(Courtesy WindFloat)
Offshore Wind ndash Floating Demonstrators
(Courtesy Fukushima Forward)
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore Wind Support Structures
Support
structure
Monopile gravity-based Tri-pod Jacket Floating
Water depth
(m)
0-40 10-40 30-80 gt50-100 ()
Industrial
development
Large commercial wind farms already exist
(Denmark UK the Netherlands Germany
Sweden etc)
Demonstration wind
farms (Beatrice
Alpha Ventus)
Prototype (full-scale Hywind WindFloat small-
scale BlueH Sway etc)
International
Standards
IEC 61400-3 GL DNV BV and ABS an
extension of design code for onshore wind
turbines
Refer to offshore
codes for support
structures
Under development
Fixed
Foundation
Fixed
Foundation Fixed
Foundation
Floating wind turbine foundations
Floater spar semi-submersible and barge Mooring system catenary mooring and tension leg
Floating wind turbine foundations
HYWIND (Courtesy Statoil)
Floating wind turbine foundations
(Courtesy WindFloat)
Offshore Wind ndash Floating Demonstrators
(Courtesy Fukushima Forward)
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Floating wind turbine foundations
Floater spar semi-submersible and barge Mooring system catenary mooring and tension leg
Floating wind turbine foundations
HYWIND (Courtesy Statoil)
Floating wind turbine foundations
(Courtesy WindFloat)
Offshore Wind ndash Floating Demonstrators
(Courtesy Fukushima Forward)
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Floating wind turbine foundations
HYWIND (Courtesy Statoil)
Floating wind turbine foundations
(Courtesy WindFloat)
Offshore Wind ndash Floating Demonstrators
(Courtesy Fukushima Forward)
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Floating wind turbine foundations
(Courtesy WindFloat)
Offshore Wind ndash Floating Demonstrators
(Courtesy Fukushima Forward)
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore Wind ndash Floating Demonstrators
(Courtesy Fukushima Forward)
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore Wind ndash Novel
Concepts
The Aerogenerator X concept (Courtesy Wind Power Ltd and Grimshaw)
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Commercial amp Legislative Landscape
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Wind Power in the UK ndash October 2015
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Installed Capacity Number of
Turbines
Approx Number of
Homes Powered
Onshore 83 GW 5094 4278589
Offshore 5 GW 1452 3775226
Total 133 GW 5327 8053815
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
UK Offshore Wind World Leading Position
bull The total offshore generating capacity in UK waters is approx15 TWh
annually equivalent to the electricity consumption of around 38 million
homes
bull In addition to the 5GW already installed a further 119GW is either in
construction or has planning approval and a further 52GW is in the
planning system
bull Industry projections are for a total of 6GW of capacity installed by 2016
and around 10GW installed by 2020 by which point offshore wind will
supply between 8 and 10 per cent of the UKrsquos electricity annually
Data from Renewable UK October 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Renewable Electricity at 22 of UK Total
Official UK Government statistics showed in the final
quarter of 2014 Renewable Electricity providing 22 of
total UK supply with wind making up 12
Renewable UK Press Release March 2015
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Behind this pioneering successhellip
ldquoUS contractor
Fluor has lost
the major
arbitration case
against the
owners of the
Greater Gabbard
offshore wind
farm SSE and
RWE and will
take a pre-tax hit
of $400mrdquo
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Why Offshore Wind Structures are Different
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Structural Integrity
The dominant failure mechanisms of offshore structures
are associated with corrosion and fatigue cracking ie
progressive failure and dependent upon
bull Materialrsquos resistance to cracking
bull The extent of defects
bull Local applied and residual stresses
bull Environment
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Cost vs Reliability
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Stress-Life Approach
10
100
1000
100E+04 100E+05 100E+06 100E+07 100E+08
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of cycles
C1 - DNV Air
C1 - DNV Free corrosion
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
45
50
0 10 20 30 40 50
Str
es
s R
an
ge
(M
Pa
)
Number of Years
DnV C1 Air
DnV C1 Free Corrosion
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Jacket vs Monopile
Structures
bull High Degree of Structural Redundancy
bull Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Expensive
bull Little Structural Redundancy
bull Not Very Damage Tolerant
bull Relatively Inexpensive
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Progressive Damage Models LEFM
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
bull Chemically etched weld macro
bull 3-Dimensional geometry scanning
Quality analysis
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Quality analysis
bull Crack surface analysis
bull MPI (Magnetic Particle Inspection)
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Can we afford the lsquoStandardrsquo Stress-Life Approach
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Virtues and Perils of Standardisation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Expense of the Oil amp Gas
Legacy
Fabrication and
inappropriate design
standards that are largely 30
years old
A very different cost imperative
Manned (High Risk)
installations
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The standardisation ndash innovation dichotomy
bull Volume Services
bull Expanded and therefore more competitive supply base
bull Ease of regulatory and certification approvals
Advantages of standardisation
bull Can block the introduction of new technologies
bull Can restrict the supply base to only those who can meet standards
bull Can make incremental improvement difficult and radical innovation impossible
Dangers of standardisation
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Approaches to standardisation
bull Simple to implement
bull Low development costs
bull Easy to regulate and legislate for
bull Good protection against known risks
-----------------------------
bull Limits innovation
bull Multiple project failures might occur
bull Requires a high degree of competency
bull Innovative and efficient solutions
bull Better understanding of responsibilities
-----------------------------
bull Heavily dependent on technical competence
bull More difficult to verify conformity
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Developing Smart Standards
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Choice
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Standardisation approaches The choice
bull Prescriptive regulations that explicitly describe methods characteristics
materials fabrication installation and maintenance procedures
bull Goal (or Performance)-based standards that specify minimum
characteristics to protect health amp safety and against adverse environmental
impacts
bull Goal-based standards as above but supplemented with functional high-level
performance specifications
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Professor Paul Leinster Talking to the right people about the right things
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind
bull Designated as nationally significant infrastructure projects
bull This results in streamlined decision making process
bull Planning Inspectorate carries out certain functions on behalf of the Secretary of State
bull Underpinned by a National Policy Statement
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
National policy statements
bull Governmentrsquos objectives for a particular sector
bull establishes the need
bull overarching statement on energy
bull statement on renewable energy
bull Subject to public consultation and parliamentary scrutiny before being designated
bull Framework within which Planning Inspectorate make decisions
bull Supported by a Strategic Environmental Assessment
bull Provides reasons for the stated policy
bull Presumption in favour of development
bull Describes circumstances where it is particularly important to address the adverse impacts of development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Development consent process
bull Pre-application
bull Application acceptance (or not) within 28 days
bull is it the required standard
bull has consultation been adequate
bull Pre-examination 2 to 3 months
bull sets out timetable for examination
bull Examination 6 months
bull Decision
bull recommendation to Secretary of State within 3 months
bull Secretary of State then has a further 3 months to issue decision
bull Post decision
bull 6 weeks when legal challenges can be made in the High Court
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Rochdale envelope
bull Allows evolution of design within clearly defined parameters
bull Flexibility not to be abused
bull Environmental assessment to take account of likely significant effects within the full range of parameters including potentially cautious worst case
bull If necessary mitigation to consider a range of possibilities
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Pre-application period is crucial
bull Engage with Planning Inspectorate bull pre-application prospectus bull infrastructure planning leads
bull Actively engage consult and work with bull local communities local councils Crown Estate Marine
Management Organisation Natural England JNCC Environment Agency
bull Environmental impact assessment bull scoping bull preliminary environmental information bull draft environmental statement
bull Submit development consent order drafts for comment bull include all elements bull include associated development
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Managing the process
bull Actively manage the process bull Submit updated drafts at key stages bull Agree a phased approach if appropriate bull Consult and engage proactively and fully
bull talk to the right people about the right things bull NPS SEA EIA permits planning overall bull twin track where possible bull work in partnership
bull Ensure communications and project scope are clear and readily understandable by the general public
bull Fund agencies to carry out pre-application work bull Quality not quantity that is important bull Ensure as much as possible is agreed before formal
submission of an application
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Offshore wind projects
bull Most planning safety and environmental risks are in the early development phases
bull Considerable expenditure on developments which may never be built
bull Renewables UK statements
bull Round 3 projects will take up to 5 years to be approved
bull Development period to full operation around 10 years
bull Government agencies have been cut back and lack the resources and the skilled workforce required to speed up approvals (I believe this can be managed)
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
The Danish approach
bull Specific marine areas identified by government
bull Sites designated for a set capacity of wind energy
bull Governmentrsquos energy agency completes the development surveys and impact assessments
bull Then tenders for offshore wind projects of a specific size at each location with specific construction deadlines
bull The Dutch are now adopting this approach
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
David Nitek
The need for contractual clarity ndash lessons learned from an offshore wind dispute
wwwcranfieldacuksass4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hojgaard v EON a recent dispute arising out of an error in an international standard
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Offshore wind turbines in Solway Firth (Robin Rigg East and West)
bull Monopile driven into seabed
bull Transition piece fits on top of the monopile
bull Tower fits onto the transition piece
bull Monopile and transition piece are bonded together with grout
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull In 2004 International Standard J101 was published by DNV
bull Section B sets out a number of parametric equations including
bull States the interface shear strength due to friction
bull But there is an error in the equation δ does not properly define the
relationship between the height of surface irregularities and the pile radius
bull The effect of this error is that the equation overestimates the strength of the grouted bond to withstand the axial (downward) load of the tower
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contract imposed a variety of obligations on the Contractor
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Contractor designed in accordance with J101 and the DNV issued Foundation Design Conformity Statements
bull February 2009 ndash Works completed
bull September 2009 ndash grouted connection on a windfarm elsewhere started to fail DNV identified error in J101
bull April 2010 ndash grouted connection started to fail on the Robin Rigg turbines Remedial works undertaken with the parties then disputing who bore the cost of those works
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull Trial judge found in favour of the Employer ndash the Contractor had warranted that the foundation would last for 20 years
bull Appeal to the Court of Appeal
bull ldquoThe court is confronted in this case with contractual documents of multiple authorship which contain much loose wordingrdquo
bull Contracts can oblige a contractor to comply with particular standards and achieve a particular result Such a contract if worded with sufficient clarity may impose a double obligation upon the contractor He must as a minimum comply with the relevant standards He must also take further steps as are necessary to ensure he achieves the specified resultldquo
bull Did the contract in this case impose such a double obligation with the Contractor giving an overarching warranty that the foundation would last for 20 years
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull An apparent warranty in the Technical Requirements that the foundations would last for 20 years
bull However this was inconsistent with the standard of care provisions in the conditions of contract which required compliance with standards and good practice
bull It was also inconsistent with the rest of the Technical Requirements which refer to a 20 year design life ldquoIf a structure has a design life of 20 years that does not mean that inevitably it will function for 20 years although it probably willrdquo A design life is different from a ldquoguaranteed operational liferdquo
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
MT Hoslashjgaard -V- EON
bull If the Employer wanted a warranty that the foundation would in fact last for 20 years it should have included one in clause 81 of the general conditions not tucked it away in the TRs
bull In sum 3222(2) was too slender a thread upon which to hang a finding that [the Contractor] gave a warranty of 20 years life for the foundations
bull The fitness for purpose warranty was not free-standing because it was qualified by the words in accordance with the Specification using Good Industry Practice which was defined by reference to standards
bull If an Employer wants to mandate an outcome ndash for example a minimum life ndash he needs to do so very clearly
Science for the Green Economy wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
lsquoOffshore Windrsquo Standards Certification amp Litigation
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Q amp A
Julie Vaughan
The contents of this publication current at the date of publication set out in this document are for reference purposes only They do not constitute legal advice and should not be relied upon as such Specific legal advice about your specific circumstances should always be sought
separately before taking any action based on this publication
Herbert Smith Freehills LLP and its affiliated and subsidiary businesses and firms and Herbert Smith Freehills an Australian Partnership are separate member firms of the international legal practice known as Herbert Smith Freehills
copy Herbert Smith Freehills LLP 2015
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge
Science for the Green Economy
Thank you for attending
Next Event
Wednesday 13 and Thursday 14 January 2016
A National Debate in Technology and Governance for the Green Economy
Location Cranfield University
wwwcranfieldacuks4ge