Seòmar agus comataidhean

A contingent liability exists in connection with the proposed construction of the Forth Crossing where it impacts on the existing BP Fortes oil pipeline. The contingent liability is required to cover the remote possibility that the pipeline could be damaged as a result of the construction of the new bridge. This is a potential liability to the contract not a cost, and as such does not increase the estimated cost of the project.

Insurance will be taken out to cover damage to third parties as a result of the construction of the Forth Replacement Crossing. There are no contingent liabilities in respect of those third parties.

The issue has been discussed in confidence by the finance committee.

A decision was taken within the Energy Consents and Deployment Unit (ECDU) at the beginning of October 2010 to cease acknowledging representations in writing, due to the excessive costs involved. This meant that members of the public who submitted representations between the middle and end of September 2010, to the address energyconsents@scotland.gsi.gov.uk, or in writing, did not receive an acknowledgment.

The address energyconsents@scotland.gsi.gov.uk is not invalid, members of the public were asked to direct representations to the dedicated email address dundeebiomass@scotland.gsi.gov.uk to allow easier collation of these responses and to ensure they received the automatic acknowledgement. All representations received to either address have now been collated and logged.

There is no requirement under legislation to acknowledge, either in writing or electronically, representations received.

To date, the Energy Consents and Deployment Unit (ECDU) have received 36 consultation responses from a variety of organisations with an interest in the development. These responses are all available on the Scottish Government website. The ECDU have also received 3,292 representations from members of the public. These are not published on the Scottish Government website to protect the identities of individuals.

Press notices were placed in the Scotsman on 17 August 2010 and in the Dundee Courier and Edinburgh Gazette on 17 August 2010 and 24 August 2010 advising members of the public of the submission of the application. These notices advised members of the public to submit representations to energyconsents@scotland.gsi.gov.uk, which is the enquiries email address for the Energy Consents and Deployment Unit (ECDU). The second press notices for this development were placed in The Scotsman on 9 November 2010 and in The Courier and Edinburgh Gazette on 9 November 2010 and 16 November 2010. These notices advised members of the public to submit representations to the dedicated Dundee Biomass email address dundeebiomass@scotland.gsi.gov.uk, which had been implemented to deal with the level of representations being received. The biomass section of the ECDU website quoted the dedicated email address as the point of contact during the consultation. The ECDU enquiries email address is quoted elsewhere on the website as general point of contact, hence no amendment or correction was required.

All representations received to either email addresses have been collated and logged.

There is no requirement under legislation to acknowledge, either in writing or electronically, representations received.

Due to the excessive cost, both in postage and in staff time, it is no longer the policy of the Energy Consents and Deployment Unit (ECDU) to respond in writing to representations received. Should the representation have been submitted by email, to the email address stated in the press notices, dundeebiomass@scotland.gsi.gov.uk, the author will receive an automatic acknowledgement. All representations received are collated and logged and form part of the final determination process for the application.

Financial information relating to those costs is commercially confidential and cannot be released. In any event, the actual costs cannot be determined in the abstract and will depend on the particular facts and circumstances.

During 2008, Transport Scotland considered a number of alternative options for the southern connecting roads. An assessment of the options and the reasoning for their rejection is provided in the DMRB Stage 2 Corridor Report. The location of the BP pipeline was considered in this assessment. This is outwith the remit of the Environmental Statement.

The sum is typical of these types of arrangements in the Oil and Gas industry and was arrived at following negotiation with BP. The number represents the maximum potential liability under the Agreement and BP will bear any losses which exceed that amount.