Eia Report Russia Unofficial English Translation - 20081001 PDF

The Nord Stream offshore pipeline
construction project (Russian Sector)

Volume 8Environmental Protection
Book 1
Offshore section
Part 1
Environmental Impact Assessment
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- Feasibility study -0801(1)-6

NORD STREAM G-PE-LFR-EIA-101-08010100-06
Moscow 2008.
UNOFFICIAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION FOR COURTESY ONLY
The Nord Stream offshore pipeline

construction project (Russian Sector)
Volume 8Environmental Protection
Book 1
Offshore section
Part 1
Assistant General Manager
.. Arkhipov
Project Engineering Manager
G.V. Grudnitzky

Moscow 2008.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Prepared by
Full name
Balashova S.P.
Vilchek G.E.
Position
Signature
Chief of The Environmental

Bureau, Doctor of Technical
Science
Deputy Chief of Environmental
Bureau, Doctor of Science
(Geology)
Date
30.10.08
30.10.08
Rodivilova .V.
Chief of EIA Department, Doctor

of Technical Science
30.10.08
Goriunova V.B.
Deputy Chief of EIA Department,

Doctor of Science (Biology)
30.10.08
Poddubskaya M.B.
Chief Specialist
30.10.08
Perovskaya M.N.
Chief Specialist
30.10.08
Pavlov B.A.
Chief Specialist, Doctor of

Science (Biology)
30.10.08
Pankratova N.V.
Chief Specialist
30.10.08
Uvarov O.A.
Chief Specialist
30.10.08
Dzutzeva M.V.
Leading Expert
30.10.08
Chugunova N.A.
Leading Expert
30.10.08
Zhuravlev E.A.
Leading Expert
30.10.08
Lomakina .S.
Engineer
30.10.08
Matiko I.I.
Engineer
30.10.08
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Volume / Book
/ Part
Volume 1
Volume 2
Volume 3
Book 1
Book 2
The Nord Stream

offshore pipeline construction project (Russian sector)
includes:
Code of OOO Petergaz / code of
Docume nt name
Nord Stream AG
36/07-01---0101 / G-PEExplanatory Generic Report
LFR-REP-101-01000000
36/07-01---0201 / G-PEGeneral Layout and transport
LFR-REP-101-02000000
Technology and technical solutions
Pipeline water pressure and heat calculations
Book 4
Corrosion protection of the pipeline

Corrosion protection calculation of offshore section of
the pipeline
Corrosion protection calculation of onshore section of
the pipeline
Calculation of strength and integrity of offshore part of
the pipeline
Linear part of the pipeline
Part 1
Offshore section
Part 2
Onshore section
Part 3
Landfall Area
Book 5
Testing and commissioning
Book 6
Operation, maintenance, and repairs
Volume 4
Labour organization and working condition.

Manufacturing and facility management.
Volume 5
Construction and architectural solutions
Volume 6
Engineering equipme nt, systems, and networks
Volume 7
Construction organization
Project for building organization of offshore section of
the pipeline
Project for building organization of onshore section of
the pipeline
Part 1
Part 2
Book 3
Book 1
Book 2
Book 3
Book 4
Volume 8
Book 1
Logistics
Removing of the pipeline and other associated structures
36/07-01---0301 / G-PELFR-REP-101-03010000
36/07-01---0302(1) / G-PELFR-REP-101-03020100
36/07-02---0302(2) / G-PELFR-REP-101-03020200
36/07-01---0303 / G-PELFR-REP-101-03030000
36/07-01---0304(1) / G-PELFR-REP-101-03040100
36/07-01---0304(2) / G-PELFR-REP-101-03040200
36/07-01---0304(3) / G-PELFR-REP-101-03040300
36/07-01---0305 / G-PELFR-REP-101-03050000
36/07-01---0306 / G-PELFR-REP-101-03060000
36/07-01---0401 / G-PELFR-REP-101-04000000
36/07-01---0501 / G-PELFR-REP-101-05000000
36/07-02---0601 / G-PELFR-REP-101-06000000
36/07-01---0701 / G-PELFR-REP-101-07010000
36/07-01---0702 / G-PELFR-REP-101-07020000
36/07-01---0703 / G-PELFR-REP-101-07030000
36/07-02---0704 / G-PELFR-REP-101-07040000
Environme ntal Protection

Environmental Protection of offshore section of the
pipeline
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Volume / Book / Docume nt name

Part
Part 1
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of offshore
section of the pipeline
Part 2
Environmental Protection of offshore section of the
pipeline
Book 2
Environmental Protection of onshore section of the
pipeline
Part 1
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of onshore
section of the pipeline
Part 2
Environmental Protection of onshore section of the
pipeline
Book 3
Industrial environmental monitoring and audit (IEMA)
Book 4
Book 5
Volume 9
Volume 10*
Book 1
Book 2
Volume 11
Book 1
Book 2
Book 3

Nord Stream AG
36/07-01---0801(1) / G-PELFR-EIA-101-08010100
36/07-01---0801(2) / G-PELFR-EIA-101-08010200
36/07-01---0802(1) / G-PELFR-EIA-101 -08020100

36/07-01---0802(2) / G-PELFR-EIA-101 -08020200
36/07-01---0803 / G-PELFR-EIA-101 -08030000
Technical and biological reclamation
36/07-01---0804 / G-PELFR-EIA-101 -08040000
Waste management
36/07-01---0805 / G-PELFR-EIA-101-08050000
Engineering operations of civil defence. Operations for 36/07-01---0901 / G-PEthe prevention of emergency situations
LFR-REP-101 -09000000
Estimate documentation
* - no longer include d in project
content
Summary estimates for the offshore sections of the
pipeline
Summary estimates for the onshore sections of the pipeline
Industrial safety declaration
Industrial safety declaration (ISD)
36/07-01---1101 / G-PELFR-REP-101-11010000
Appendix 1 of ISD "Estimates explanatory report"
36/07-01---1102 / G-PELFR-REP-101-11020000
Appendix 2 of ISD "Information sheet"
36/07-01---1103 / G-PELFR-REP-101-11030000
Engineering surveys
Volume 12
(Appendixes)
Book 1
Part 1
Offshore section
Geotechnical surveys
Part 2
Engineering metocean surveys
Part 3
Ecological-engineering surveys
Part 4
Geodetic-engineering surveys
Book 2
Part 1
Onshore section
Geodetic-engineering surveys
Part 2
Geotechnical surveys
36/07-01---1201(1) / G-PELFR-REP-101-12010100
36/07-01---1201(2) / G-PELFR-REP-101-12010200
36/07-01---1201(3) / G-PELFR-REP-101-12010300
36/07-01---1201(4) / G-PELFR-REP-101-12010400
36/07-01---1202(1) / G-PELFR-REP-101-12020100
36/07-01---1202(2) / G-PELFR-REP-101-12020200
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Volume / Book /
Part
Docume nt name
Part 3
Engineering metocean surveys
Part 4
Volume 13
(Appendixes)
Technical requirements for materials and articles

specification
Book 1
Technical requirements for materials of offshore section
Part 1
Technical requirements for tubing
Part 2
Technical requirements for anti-corrosion coating
Part 3
Technical requirements for internal pipe coating
Part 4
Technical requirements for sacrificial anodes

installation
Part 5
Technical requirements for concrete weight coating
Part 6
Technical requirements for welding and non-destructive

testing methods
Part 7
Technical requirements for sacrificial anode material
Book 2
Technical requirements for materials of onshore section
Part 1
Technical requirements for weight-coating
Part 2
Technical requirements for ball valves
Part 3
Technical requirements for pig launcher
Part 4
Technical requirements for shut-off and control valves

NB 400 NB 50
Part 5
Technical requirements for pipes and items
Part 6
Technical requirements for isolation joints
Part 7
Part 8
Part 9
Part 10
Technical requirements for welding and non-destructive

testing
Technical requirements for field joint coating at
onshore section
Technical requirements for external coating of aboveground equipment
Technical requirements for external coating of
underground pipelines
Part 11
Technical requirements for anchor flanges
Part 12
Technical requirements for gate valve

Nord Stream AG
36/07-01---1202(3) / G-PELFR-REP-101-12020300
36/07-01---1202(4) / G-PELFR-REP-101-12020400
36/07-01---1301(1) / GPE-LFR-SPE-101-13010100
36/07-01---1301(2) / GPE-LFR-SPE-101-13010200
36/07-01---1301(3) / GPE-LFR-SPE-101-13010300
36/07-01---1301(4) / GPE-LFR-SPE-101-13010400
36/07-01---1301(5) / GPE-LFR-SPE-101-13010500
36/07-01---1301(6) / GPE-LFR-SPE-101-13010600
36/07-01---1301(7) / GPE-LFR-SPE-101-13010700
36/07-01---1302(1) / GPE-LFR-SPE-101-13020100
36/07-01---1302(2) / GPE-LFR-SPE-101-13020200
36/07-01---1302(3) / GPE-LFR-SPE-101-13020300
36/07-01---1302(4) / GPE-LFR-SPE-101-13020400
36/07-01---1302(5) / GPE-LFR-SPE-101-13020500
36/07-01---1302(6) / GPE-LFR-SPE-101-13020600
36/07-01---1302(7) / GPE-LFR-SPE-101-13020700
36/07-01---1302(8) / GPE-LFR-SPE-101-13020800
36/07-01---1302(9) / GPE-LFR-SPE-101-13020900
36/07-01---1302(10) / GPE-LFR-SPE-101-13021000
36/07-01---1302(11) / GPE-LFR-SPE-101-13021100
36/07-01---1302(12) / GPE-LFR-SPE-101-13021200
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Volume / Book
/ Part
Volume 14
(Appendixes)
Docume nt name
Approvals

Nord Stream AG
36/07-01---1401 / G-PELFR-REP-101-14000000
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Declaration of project conformity by Project Engineering Manager

Approved technical solutions are in compliance with applicable law,
regulations and rules of Russian Federation of fire, explosion, and
environmental and work safety, and ensure safety for life and health of people
in operation of industrial units, under prescribed measures, in compliance with
the relevant project documentation.
Project Engineering Manager
G.V. Grudnitzky
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

LIST OF DESIGNATIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS

INTRODUCTION
1. GENERAL
1.1.
INFORMATION ABOUT THE APPLICANTS/OWNERS
1.1.1.
Applicant and operator
1.1.2.
Participants of Nord Stream project
1.1.3.
Sphere of competence of the participants of Nord Stream project
1.1.4.
Summary of the project
1.2.
PROJECT HISTORY
1.2.1.
Objectives and structure
1.2.2.
1980-1990. Russian-Scandinavian initiatives to launch new
16
18
21
21
21
22
25
26
27
27
27
supply projects
1.2.3.
1990-1995. Yamal pipeline construction
1.2.4.
1995-2000. Nord Trangas Oy (NTG) studies Nord Streams
hour of birth
28
28
1.2.5. A brief excursus: Baltic Sea as an optimal new base case
31
route for Europes energy supply

1.2.6. 2001-2005: Gazprom returns NTG switches over to
35
North European Gas Pipeline

1.2.7.
Initiation of Nord Stream project
1.2.8.
Future prospects
1.3. RATIONALE FOR THE NORD STREAM PROJECT: ENSURING
1.4.
1.4.1.
1.4.2.
1.4.3.
1.4.4.
1.4.5.
1.5.
1.5.1.
36
37
39
EUROPES ENERGY SECURITY

1.3.1. New natural gas import capacities are needed to meet rising demand for natural gas within
the EU
39
1.3.2.
1.3.3.
The strategic importance of Russia as a natural gas supplier

The importance of connecting Russian natural gas reserves to the European market at an
early stage in the context of the rising demand for natural gas in Asia
42
45
1.3.4.
The Nord Stream pipeline as an essential element of the Trans-European
47
Energy Networks
1.3.5. Consequences of non-realisation of the project
1.3.6. To conclude:
DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS OF MAIN ALTERNATIVES
Zero alternative renouncing from planned activity
Using tankers to transport liquefied natural gas
Onshore pipeline
Offshore pipeline route options
Russian sector alternatives of Nord Stream pipeline
AN OVERVIEW OF TECHNICAL SOLUTION
Nord Stream routing (offshore section)
51
55
56
56
57
57
58
58
70
70
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

1.5.2.
1.5.3.
1.6.
1.7.
1.8.
1.8.1.
1.8.2.
1.8.3.
Pipeline design features

Methods of construction works
1.5.3.1. Crossing of the shore line

1.5.3.2. Laying
1.5.3.3. Free-span correction
1.5.3.4. Crossings
1.5.4. Testing and preparation for operation
1.5.5. Pipeline operation technologies
1.5.6. Decommissioning
1.5.7. Construction time schedule
DESCRIPTION OF POSSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT OF THE PLANNED
ACTIVITY ON ALTERNATIVES
73
78
80
81
84
86
86
89
91
91
92
APPLICABLE LAWS AND OTHER LEGISLATIVE ACTS

1.7.1.
International environmental legislation
1.7.2.
National environmental and nature management legislation during construction of offshore
section of Russian sector of Nord Stream pipeline
95
95
103
1.7.3.
National legislation and EIA guidelines
COMPLIANCE OF PROJECT DOCUMENTATION WITH NATIONAL LEGISLATION
EIA REQUIREMENTS
109
112
Explanatory Report for documentation in support

Measures to prevent and/or mitigate possible adverse environmental impacts
112
113
113
Uncertainties on the Environmental Impact Assessment of a planned economic or other

activity revealed during the assessment
1.8.4.
Outline of monitoring programmes and post-project analysis
2. NATURE USE RESTRICTIONS
2.1.
SPECIALLY PROTECTED NATURAL TERRITORIES
2.2.
GEOLOGICAL NATURE USE RESTRICTIONS
2.3.
RARE SPECIALLY PROTECTED BIRD AND MAMMAL SPECIES
3. CURRENT ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
3.1.
GEOLOGICAL AND GEOMORPHOLOGICAL CHARACTERISTICS
3.1.1.
Tectonics and seismicity
3.1.2.
Geological structure of pre-quaternary sediments
3.1.3.
Geological structure of quaternary sediments
3.1.4.
Geomorphological conditions
3.1.5.
Surface sediment parameters along pipeline route
3.1.5.1. Grain size distribution
113
114
114
116
117
118
118
118
121
122
126
130
130
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

3.1.5.2. Pollution levels of sediment surface layer

Lithodynamic processes
3.1.6.1. Coastal dynamics of sediments
3.1.6.2. Water circulation during storms
3.1.6.3. Seabed deformations along continental slope
3.1.6.4. Deformations due to submerged bars relocation
3.1.6.5. Long-term trends of shore development
CLIMATE AND ATMOSPHERIC AIR CONDITION
3.2.1.
Physical and geographical summary
3.2.2.
Air temperature
3.2.3.
Atmospheric pressure
3.2.4.
Wind
3.2.5.
Nebulosity and precipitation
3.2.6.
Adverse atmospheric effects
3.2.6.1. Fogs
133
140
140
142
143
148
149
151
151
153
154
155
156
158
158
3.2.6.2. Thunderstorms
3.2.6.3. Snowstorms
3.2.6.4. Spouts
3.2.6.5. Restricted visibility
3.2.7.
An overview of air pollution levels
OCEANOGRAPHY AND SEA WATER QUALITY
3.3.1.
Stream conditions
3.3.1.1. Seawater temperature
3.3.1.2. Sea water salinity
3.3.1.3. Currents and tidal oscillation
3.3.1.4. Wave conditions and sea level
3.3.1.5. Sea water transparency
3.3.1.6. Ice conditions
3.3.2.
Hydrochemical processes and water quality
3.3.2.1. Sea water hydrochemistry
3.3.2.2. Sea water pollution
3.3.2.3. Sea water quality assessment
WATER BIOTA LOWER TROPHIC LEVELS
3.4.1.
Bacterial plankton (in coastal landfall areas)
3.4.2.
Phytoplankton
3.4.3.
Zooplankton (invertebrates)
3.4.4.
Benthic communities
3.4.4.1. Benthic macrophytes
3.4.4.2. Meio
- macrozoobenthos
3.4.4.3. Typology and spatial pattern of benthic communities
ICHTHYOFAUNA
158
159
159
159
159
161
161
161
163
164
168
171
172
175
175
179
182
187
187
187
192
196
196
200
204
206
3.1.6.
3.2.
3.3.
3.4.
3.5.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

3.5.1. Biology of key fish species

3.5.2. Numbers, biomass and productivity of key species
3.5.3. Fish migration routes, spawning and nursery areas
AVIFAUNA
3.6.1. Numbers and biotopical confinedness of birds
3.6.2. Migration routes, focal points on nesting, wintering and stops during flights
3.6.3. Rare specially protected bird species
MARINE MAMMALS
SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONDITIONS
3.8.1. Summary of socio-economic conditions. Political and administrative borders
3.8.2. Fishery
3.8.3. Algae fishery and mariculture
3.8.4. Ship traffic (routes, anchoring areas)
3.8.5. Tourism and recreational areas
3.8.6. Cultural Heritage Site
3.8.6.1. Historical and archive information about cultural heritage sites in pipeline laying
area
3.8.6.2. Interpretation of the results from the geophysical surveys (SSS, ROV 2005-2007)
along the pipeline route
206
210
212
215
215
220
226
229
236
236
237
238
238
241
242
243
3.8.6.3. Expert assessment on historical and cultural value of identified submerged objects
along Nord Stream pipeline route within the Russian territorial Sea and exclusive
economic zone
Environme ntal Impact Assessment
4.1. IMPACTS ON THE BIOLOGICAL ENVIRONMENT
4.1.1. Construction period
4.1.1.1.Sources and types of impact
4.1.1.2.Impact on bottom sediments
4.1.1.3.Impact on the relief of the seabed
4.1.1.4.Impact on lithodynamic processes
4.1.2. Operational phase
4.1.2.1. Sources and types of impact
4.1.2.2. Impact on transport bottoms in deep waters
251
3.6.
3.7.
3.8.
4.
4.1.2.3. Impact on bottom sediments during incidental situations

4.1.2.4. Bed movement under pipeline
4.1.2.5. Impact on lithodynamic processes of nearshore section
4.1.3. Decommissioning phase
4.2. IMPACT ON ATMOSPHERIC AIR
245
252
252
252
252
253
267
268
271
271
271
276
276
278
279
281
281
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

4.3.
4.4.
4.5.
4.6.
4.7.

4.2.1.2. Impact assessment
IMPACT ON SEA WATER ENVIRONMENT
IMPACT ON SEA WATER BIOTA OF LOWER TROPHIC LEVELS AND
ICHTHYOFAUNA
281
282
286
286
286
286
287
287
287
288
306
306
306
306
307

IMPACT ON AVIFAUNA
4.5.3.1. Sources of impact
IMPACT ON MARINE MAMMALS
IMPACT OF PHYSICAL FACTORS
307
307
308
313
313
313
314
314
314
315
315
315
315
317
317
317
317
318
318
318
318
320
320
320
321
322
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

5.
4.7.1. Sources and types of impact

4.7.2. Assessment of impact of physical factors
4.8. IMPACT OF INDUSTRIAL AND CONSUMPTION WASTES
4.8.1. Characteristic of object as a source of waste generation
4.8.2. Calculation and grounds of waste generation volume
4.8.3. Determination of a hazard class for wastes
4.8.4. Waste types, physical and chemical features and sites of generation
4.8.5. Requirements for temporary waste accumulation places
4.9. IMPACT ON SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONDITIONS
4.10. TRANSBOUNDARY IMPACTS
FORECAST AND MEASURES ON PREVENTION AND ELIMINATION OF INCIDENTAL
SITUATIONS
5.1.
5.2.
322
323
327
327
328
329
331
333
334
338
340
CONSTRUCTION PERIOD
5.1.1. The main project characteristics and risks arising from project activities
340
340
5.1.2.
341
Risk analysis of hydrocarbons spills during construction of Nord Stream
pipeline
5.1.3. Assessment of ecological risks
5.1.3.1. Trajectory analysis of field of ecological risks of oil spills
346
348
5.1.3.2. Assessment of oil weathering

5.1.3.3. Fields of ecological risks of oil spills
5.1.3.4. Assessment of separate spill
5.1.4. Assessment of possibility of oil migration to specially protected natural territories
354
357
360
362
5.1.5. Impact on atmospheric air

5.1.6. Impact on sea water environment
5.1.7. Impact on marine biota
5.1.8. Impact on bottom sediments
OPERATIONAL PHASE
5.2.1. List of key factors and potential causes promoting risks
365
366
368
369
369
369
6.
5.2.2. Base cases of accidents

5.2.3. Impact on sea water environment
5.2.4. Impact on atmospheric air
5.2.5. Impact on the geologic environment
5.2.6. Impact on marine biota
MEASURES TO REDUCE POSSIBLE ADVERSE IMPACT
370
375
375
376
376
379
7.
ECOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC APPRAISAL
380
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

8. SIMULTANEOUS OPERATIONS ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND CONTROL

CONCLUSION
LIST OF REFERENCES
APPENDIXES
APPENDIX TO CHAPTER 1
APPENDIX 3.1-1 TO SECTION "GEOLOGICAL AND GEOMORPHOLOGICAL
382
384
388
422
423
435
440
441
CHARACTERISTICS"
APPENDIX 3. 1-2 METHODOLOGY OF CALCULATION OF POSSIBLE SEABED DEFORMATIONS
DUE
TO WAVES AND CURRENTS ALONG NORD STREAM OFFSHORE PIPELINE ROUTE
WITHIN THE PORTOVAYA BAY
APPENDIX 3.2 TO SECTION "CLIMATE AND ATMOSPHERIC AIR CONDITION"
APPENDIX 3.3 TO SECTION "OCEANOGRAPHY AND SEA WATER QUALITY"
453
455
APPENDIX 3.4 TO SECTION "SOCIO-ECONOMIC CONDITIONS"

APPENDIX 3.6 TO SECTION "AVIFAUNA"
APPENDIX 4.1 MODELLING OF SUSPENSION AND SPREADING OF SEDIMENTS
466
472
475
476
DURING PIPELINE CONSTRUCTION. RUSSIAN SECTOR

APPENDIX 4.1-1 SIMULATOR FOR PROGNOSIS OF THE SPREADING OF
515
448
SUSPENDED MATTER ON THE SHELF

APPENDIX 4.1-2 DESCRIPTION OF HYDRODYNAMIC CONDITIONS AND HYDRODYNAMIC
MODELLING
IN DREDGING AREAS
DURING PIPELINE CONSTRUCTION
APPENDIX 4.1-3 CHARACTERISTICS OF SEABED SEDIMENTS ALONG NORD
540
STREAM ROUTE
APPENDIX 4.2 MODELLING OF THE SPREADING OF SUSPENDED MATTER IN
570
THE MARINE ENVIRONMENT DURING NORD STREAM PIPELINE CONSTRUCTION

IN RUSSIAN SECTOR (SUPPLYING SEDIMENT FOR FREE-SPAN ELIMINATION
AND ENSURING PIPELINE STABILITY)
APPENDIX 4.3 PASSPORT OF GRANITE AGGREGATES OF ERKILA DEPOSIT,
659
VYBORG DISTRICT, LENINGRAD REGION

APPENDIX 6. NORD STREAM PROJECT PUBLIC
661
681
CONSULTATIONS PAPERS
APPENDIX 7. NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARIES
CHANGE SHEET
781
798
521
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

List of designations and abbreviations

Abbreviation
BOC
FL
HCH
HCB
AC
DP
DDT
EU
PS
AP
ICI
EEZ
EES
CS
KP
CA
MARPOL 73/78
MNR
RV
EIA
E
UN
SPNA
EP
DEGPHP
MAC
KO
CSPR
PCBD
SW
DTS
ISP
SCA
PIG
PO
LNG
PCS
PRS
SDW
LV
HELCOM
BSPA
Designation for abbreviations

Biochemical oxygen consumption
Fuels and lubricants
Hexachloro-cyclohexane
Hexachlorobenzene
Allowable concentration
Dynamic positioning
Insecticide dichlordiphenyl trichlormethyl methane
European Union
Pollutant
Affected party
Information controlling intersystem
Exclusive Economic Zone
Compressor station
Kilometre points at offshore section (1 per 1 km)
Competent authorities of the affected parties
International convention to prevent marine pollution from vessels 1973, changed by Protocol 1978 with
further amendments approved by International Maritime Organisation
Ministry of Natural Resources
Research vessel
Environment
United Nations
Specially protected natural areas
Environmental Protection
Dangerous exogenous geological processes and hydrological phenomena
Maximum Allowable Concentration
Kilometre points at onshore section (1 per 100 m)
Control system of pressure regulation
Polimeric-container ballast devices
Software
Data transfer subsystem
Intermediate Service Platform
Polychlorinated biphenyls
Sanitary Control Areas
Pipeline inspection gauges
Party of origin
Liquefied natural gas
Pressure control system
Pressure regulation system
Solid domestic waste
Pipelay vessel
The Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission (Helsinki Commission)
Baltic Sea Protected Areas
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Abbreviation
DSV
FJC
JCP
TEN-E
UNEP
Designation for abbreviations

Diving support vessel
Anticorrosion coating
Environmental programs in the Baltic region
Trans-European Energy Network
United Nation environmental program
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

INTRODUCTION
This document contains materials of environmental impact assessment (EIA) by construction and operation of the
Russian sector (0-125,5 km) of offshore pipeline Nord Stream (former name - the North-European gas pipeline,
Offshore section). The report was developed by OOO Petergaz (Moscow, Russia) under the contract 103-07, March 29,
2007 with business customer Nord Stream AG.
Nord Stream AG head office is located in Zug, Switzerland. Grafenauweg 2, 6304. Phone: +4141,7669191, Fax : +41
41 766 91 92.
Nord Stream AG branch office in Moscow : , .7, .3, 119019, , . Phone: +7 495 229 65
85; Fax : +7 495 229 65 80.
Contact Nord Stream AG
Technical Director Serdukov Sergei Gavrilovitch Phone: +7 495 229 65 85; Fax : +7 495 229 65 80.
Area manager of offshore section of Russian sector of Nord Stream pipeline Feygin Boris Lvovitch Phone: +7 495 229
65 85; Fax : +7 495 229 65 80.
The preparation of the EIA materials was based on construction and operation project data of offshore section of
Russian sector of Nord Stream pipeline; sections EIA and "Environment Protection"of Conceptual Design (investment
substantiation) of construction of the North-European gas pipeline, designed in 2005-2006 in accordance with technical
specification and schedule to the contract 6545-10 dated 5.09.2005 between OOO Petergaz and Giprospetsgaz
on the basis of research carried out by Nord Transgas in 1998 for a feasibility study of North-European gas
pipeline, stock and literary materials, the results of engineering and engineering and environmental investigations
conducted by OOO Petergaz along the pipeline route in 2005 - 2007.
In preparing this volume, international legal acts requirements have been considered (including The Convention on
Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (Espoo Convention) and The Baltic Marine
Environment Protection Commission (Helsinki Commission)): Environmental Impact Assessment is conducted before a
decision to approve or realize the proposed activity; the opportunity to participate in the procedures of environmental
impact assessment of proposed activities is given to the public of affected areas; environmental measures were
developed to ensure adverse effects do not occur along Baltic area during construction and operational phases.
In preparing EIA volume, were considered the remarks contained in expert assessment of OAO Gazprom 93 of
30.12.02 "Investment substantiation for Nord Stream pipeline construction project", remarks contained in state
environmental expert committee investment substantiation for adjustment of Nord Stream pipeline design in order to
increase the transmission capacity up to 55 bcm per year (Federal Service on the Supervision of the Use of Natural
Resources, 2007), as well as:
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Comments and suggestions expressed during public meetings on investment substantiation in

Vyborg of Leningrad Region, 21 September 2006;
Questions, comments, and suggestions expressed by public authorities, organisations, public

associations and private persons during project consultations under the Espoo Convention (129
comments available at Nord Stream AG web cite: www.nordstream.com ;
Questions, comments, and suggestions detailed in Coalition "Clean Baltic" letter addressed to
Russian Government;
Questions, comments, and suggestions of public, received during public hearings of 23

November 2007 in Vyborg on EIA Technical Scope discussion and consideration of a draft
version of EIA of Russian section of offshore pipeline Nord Stream.
Regarding the differences in the natural conditions of construction areas, as well as specifics of land and marine
ecosystems functioning, two components are highlighted in materials:
Book 1
sea component which includes underwater pipeline and landfall sites (till
isolation joint);
Book 2
onshore component including onshore section.
Materials of EIA and EP (volume 8) provide books and parts as follows:
Book 1
Environmental Protection of offshore section of the pipeline.
Part 1
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of offshore section of the pipeline
Part 2
Environmental Protection of offshore section of the pipeline
Book 2
Environmental Protection of onshore section of the pipeline
Part 1
Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) of onshore section of the pipeline
Part 2
Environmental Protection of onshore section of the pipeline
Book 3
Industrial environmental monitoring and audit (IEMA).
Book 4
Technical and biological reclamation.
Book 5
Waste management.
This book (Volume 8 Book 1 Part 1) provides materials of marine ecosystems impact assessment.
Structure and content of the present volume are in compliance with the following:
Practical development guide for section "Environmental Impact Assessment" to CP 11-101-95

"The order of development, coordination, approval and justification for the investment
substantiation in construction of buildings and structures" (.: CENTERINVESTproject State
enterprise, 1998);
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

"Regulation on the Environmental Impact Assessment of a Planned Economic or Other Activity

in Russian Federation" (EIA Provisions), adopted by the Order of Goskomekologii of 16 May
2000 No.372;
Legal regulatory and standards documents on environmental protection, natural resources,

industrial and environmental safety;
SNiP provisions, instructions, standards, and GOSTs.
Regulatory literature from Annex 1.1 was used in preparing the volume.
Technology, construction and technical solutions were developed with respect to climatic and geological conditions of
the area of construction, the existing environmental constraints on the environmental conditions during the construction
and operation of the designed objects. Design solutions are aimed at preventing and mitigating the adverse impacts of
planned economic activities on the environment, protection of technological facilities and systems against harmful
effects of natural and technogenic nature in order to reduce the likelihood of accidents and other emergencies.
Materials were developed by specialists of OOO Petergaz. The following scientific and design organizations were
invited as associate contractors: ZAO Engineering and Environmental Center Econeftegaz, Institute of Oceanology of
Russian Academy of Sciences named after P.P. Shirshov, groups of staff of the Computing Center, Russian Academy of
Sciences named after .. Dorodnitsin, Federal State Scientific Institution "State Research Institute of lake and river
fishing industry" (FSSI "SSILRF").
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

1.
GENERAL
Nord Stream is a trunkline to transport natural gas from Russia to Germany with onshore couplings to existing pipeline
networks of these countries. The pipeline system will be constructed by Nord Stream AG. The pipeline will go through
Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) of five countries: Russia, Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Germany, and the
territorial waters of Russia, Germany and Denmark. At full capacity, it will provide 55 billion cubic metres of natural
gas per year to West European consumers. Nord Stream is a priority project of Trans-European Energy Network (TENE).
The shareholders behind Nord Stream AG project are Gazprom, Wintershall AG a BASF AG subsidiary), E.ON
Ruhrgas AG (an E.ON AG subsidiary), and N.V. Nederlandse Gasunie.
The headquarters of Nord Stream AG is in Zug, Switzerland, with branch in Moscow. The Company is responsible for
the development and construction of the offshore pipelines, and will later on also be the operator of the gas transit
system.
Nord Stream project consists of two underwater trunk pipelines from Russia to Germany.
Nord Stream is strictly committed to environmental protection in the planning, construction and operational phases of
the project, as well as at future decommissioning Therefore, environmental constraints have played an important role in
the overall routing of the pipelines and environmental surveys has influenced the final topographic map of the route.
The detailed technical design will acknowledge the environmental constraint in the Baltic Sea, and a close connection
between the technical design and the environmental surveys will be established. Therefore, Nord Stream AG will do all
it can to minimise impacts on the environment during planning of the system, as well as at future construction and
operation.
The general information, participants and applicants, history and structure, description of main alternatives and main
technical solutions of the project are described below
1.1.
Information about applicants/owners

1.1.1. Applicant and operator
In 2000 the European Commission has recognised the northern European gas pipeline through the Baltic Sea as an
integral element of the Trans-European Network for Energy (TEN-E). The European Commission referred to the
project in September 2006 as one of the highest priority energy projects in the European Union and of interest to the
whole of Europe. Hence, TEN-E attained the new status.1
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

In September 2005, OAO Gazprom (hereinafter Gazprom), BASF AG (today BASF SE, hereinafter BASF) and
E.ON AG (hereinafter E.ON) reached an agreement on the joint assumption of responsibility for the development,
construction and operation of this natural gas pipeline system. The North European Gas Pipeline Company was founded
in November 2005 on the basis of the cooperative intent of these three companies. This company was renamed Nord
Stream AG (hereinafter "Nord Stream") in October 2006.
Gazprom holds a 51% interest in this joint project. Each of the European companies, BASF (indirectly via its 100%owned subsidiary Wintershall Holding AG, hereinafter Wintershall) and E.ON (indirectly via its 100%-owned
subsidiary E.ON Ruhrgas AG, hereinafter E.ON Ruhrgas), have each a 20% share. The gas infrastructure company
Gasunie Infrastruktur AG, a 100 % affiliate to the Dutch N. V. Nederlandse Gasunie, (hereinafter Gasunie) has a 9%
share. The pan-European nature of the pipeline is determined by the international composition of its participants and the
importance of the project, which goes far beyond the respective companies, both in organizing countries, and countries
in which Nord Stream pipelines shall be built. The headquarters of Nord Stream AG is in Zug, Switzerland.
1.1.2. Participants of Nord Stream project

The structure of Nord Stream ensures efficient and successful implementation of the project. The reliability and
competence of project implementation will be guaranteed by the shareholders Gazprom, Wintershall, E.ON Ruhrgas
and Gasunie. These companies have many years of experience in the fields of exploration, production, transport and
marketing of natural gas, which they bring to bear in Nord Stream. In the following, a description of participants and
skills is given below.
Gazprom
Gazprom is the largest gas-producing company in the world. It is listed on the Moscow Stock Exchange 50.002% of the
company is owned by the Russian state. The German energy company E.ON Ruhrgas owns a 6.4% share in Gazprom.
In 2006, the company employed approximately 432,000 people, of which the largest share, 65%, worked in natural gas
production.
Russia has 25.2% of the world's currently known natural gas reserves equal to 44,650 bcm. Russias natural gas
reserves are thus the largest quantity of confirmed natural gas reserves in a single territorial area in the world. Sixty
percent of Russias natural gas reserves are owned by OAO Gazprom, which corresponds to 15% of the worlds total
reserves. The amount of natural gas delivered by Gazprom in 2006 amounted to 556 bcm. Gazprom also has the worlds
largest network of pipelines for transporting natural gas, at a total length of 155,000 km. In consequence of this pipeline
network ownership, Gazprom has particularly strong competence in the operation of natural gas pipeline networks.
When subsidiaries are included, Gazprom is responsible for the operation of 463,000 km of the Russian pipeline and
distribution network. Thus, Gazprom is qualified both in the direct operation of pipeline networks and their continuous
improvement.
1
2
Ruling no. 1364/2006/EC of the European Parliament and Council.

From BP data of Statistical Review of World Energy, S.22, June 2008
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Gazprom is also active in planning and constructing new gas pipelines. In addition to experience with onshore pipelines
on the Russian mainland (onshore), Gazprom has competences of particular relevance to Nord Stream in the
construction of offshore pipelines.
Thus, in 2005, the Blue Stream pipeline, a joint project between Gazprom and Eni S.p.A., an Italian multinational oil
and gas company with a government share of 30%, was officially inaugurated. This pipeline runs from Izobilnoye in
Russia to Ankara in Turkey. 386 km of its total length runs under the Black Sea. This offshore section is shorter than
the Nord Stream pipelines route, but it is no less demanding technically. The maximum depth at which the Blue Stream
pipeline is laid is 2,150 m, many times deeper than the maximum laying depth of the Nord Stream pipelines, the deepest
point of which is approximately 210 m. Moreover, high concentrations of hydrogen sulphide in the Black Sea posed
particular challenges to the construction and material properties of the Blue Stream pipeline. Gazprom, implementing
this project as well as the others, possesses vast experience in building offshore pipelines; this experience will be used
during Nord Stream pipeline construction, taking into consideration the particular circumstances of the Baltic Sea
E.ON Ruhrgas
E.ON Ruhrgas AG (E.ON Ruhrgas) is a 100%-owned subsidiary of E.ON AG and responsible for E.ONs natural gas
business in Germany and Europe. The company, with its headquarters in Essen, has been active in the heating gas
market for approximately 80 years and in the natural gas market for approximately 45 years. E.ON Ruhrgas is
Germanys largest supplier of natural gas and among Europes leading gas companies. According to 2006 data, E.ON
Ruhrgas employed approximately 12,700 people and delivered 62 bcm of natural gas. E.ON Ruhrgas has also
substantial experience constructing and operating trunk offshore pipelines.
E.ON Ruhrgas has built competencies that are particularly relevant to Nord Stream, with involvement in important
European offshore pipelines in the North Sea. Thus it took part in construction of pipeline (IUK) between Great Britain
and Belgium; the Balgzand-Bacton Line pipeline (BBL) between the northern Netherlands and Great Britain; and the
Shearwater offshore pipeline connectingElgin/Franklin gas field in the central North Sea to Bacton terminal in Great
Britain.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Wintershall
Wintershall Holding AG (Wintershall) is a 100%-owned subsidiary of BASF SE. For more than 75 years, Wintershall
has been active in various regions of the world (today in Europe, North Africa, South America, Russia and the Caspian
Sea region) in exploring and extracting oil and natural gas. Over 60% of the natural gas and oil extracted by Wintershall
is produced from deposits in which the company itself acts as operator. Thanks to natural-gas extraction in the Dutch
North Sea, Wintershall acquired wide-ranging competence in the field of offshore pipeline building.
The natural gas trade, which Wintershall conducts via WINGAS GmbH & Co (hereinafter WINGAS) with its Russian
partner Gazprom, is, alongside exploration and production, another area of work for Wintershall. WINGAS has been
active in gas supply since 1993 and delivers natural gas to public services, regional gas suppliers, industrial operations
and power stations in Germany and elsewhere in Europe through a newly built pipeline network of WINGAS
TRANSPORT GmbH & Co. KG that is now more than 2,000 km long. In 2006 WINGAS delivered 23 bcm of natural
gas to its customers.
Nederlandse Gasunie
The Dutch company N.V. Nederlandse Gasunie is 100%-owned by the Kingdom of the Netherlands. The companys
headquarters is in Groningen. And Gasunie has 40 years of experience building and operating pipelines. The company
specialises in infrastructure projects in the field of natural gas supply. Its main areas of business are in the following:
management, operation and development of the national transport network; construction and maintenance of the
transport network; participation in international projects. According to 2006 data, the business employed approximately
1,480 people and transported 96 bcm of natural gas
Gasunie was responsible for the construction of the BBL pipeline, which was completed in December 2006. As Gasunie
owns 60% of operator company BBL, it indirectly owns the 60% in this project. Thus, Gasunie actually is responsible
for the operation and maintenance of the BBL pipeline, connecting Balgzand (Netherlands) and Bacton (UK)
including 230 km of offshore section.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

1.1.3. Sphere of competence of the participants of Nord Stream project
Figure 1.1-1
Organisational structure of Nord Stream
In addition to the employees of the above-mentioned shareholders, Nord Stream employs experienced international
experts from 17 countries. Nord Stream shareholders also work with leading European advisors from the fields of
environment, technology and finance. Moreover, in international tenders, contractors with many years of experience
were selected for individual assignment areas.
The contractor structure is further testament to the European character of the project. For example, in the field of
environmental assessment and permitting from environmental inspections, was invited the Danish company Rambll
and for engineering services the Italian company Snamprogetti were selected. In the field of project certification, the
independent foundation Det Norske Veritas, based in Oslo, was commissioned. The Swedish company Marin Mtteknik
AB is conducting unexploded munitions surveys on the planned pipelines route. Further environmental surveys and
field studies are conducted by well known international companies like Geological Survey of Sweden (SGU),
PeterGaz/Russia, Finnish Institute of Marine Research, DHI/Denmark, Fugro OSAE/Germany and Institute for Applied
Ecology/Germany. The German company Europipe will supply 75% of the pipes for the first pipeline, and the Russian
United Metallurgical Company (OMK) will supply the remaining 25%. For the pipelaying work, a letter of intent has
been signed with the company Saipem, registered in London.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

1.1.4. Overview of the project

The Nord Stream company plans the construction of two parallel pipelines that run on the seabed of the Baltic Sea. The
pipelines system, which will total about 1200 km in length, is to run from Portovaya Bay in the area of Vyborg/St
Petersburg in Russia to Lubmin in the Greifswald region in Germany thus connecting the integrated European pipeline
network with the worlds largest gas deposits in Russia. Nord Stream will be the projects commissioner and operator.
The first pipeline of the Nord Stream project should be completed by the end of 2011. With this first pipeline, a
transport capacity of approximately 27.5 bcm of natural gas per annum will be provided. In a second project phase, this
transport capacity is to be doubled by a second pipeline to run almost in parallel to the first, increasing the overall
transport capacity to approximately 55 bcm of natural gas per annum. The second pipeline is planned to be completed in
2012.
The Nord Stream offshore pipelines will transport natural gas to Germany, from where it can be shipped to Denmark,
the Netherlands, Belgium, Great Britain, France, Poland and other countries.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

1.2.
History of the project

1.2.1. Objectives and structure
The purpose of the history of the Nord Stream project given below is to give an overview of main evolutions that led to
the project as it is set up today rather than tracking back the numerous single decisions that were taken at different
stages of the project. This section also contains feasibility information for selecting the current pipeline route with
consideration of all national and international legislation requirements.
The project history is arranged chronologically and adequately describes basic economic principles of supply and
demand, approaches to evaluate necessary financing and spending, main aspects of corporate strategy of project
participants, geopolitical conditions, environmental issues, as well as technical development of the project.
1.2.2. 1980-1990: Russian-Scandinavian initiatives to arrange new supply projects

The idea of a natural gas transportation from Northern Europe to Western Europe is not a new one. Indeed, these plans
had been considered long before the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. See below how they evolved and finally shaped the
Nord Stream project.
Norwegian plans for gas supply to Sweden and gas transit via Sweden
In the early 1980s, when oil and gas prices were comparatively high and in Sweden discussions rose concerning nuclear
energy as a possible alternative to these fuels, several studies were conducted to determine feasibility of gas
transportation via Sweden.
The most ambitious project was the Trans-Scandinavian project, proposed by Statoil, to transport gas from the Barents
Sea via Sweden (and possibly Denmark) to Germany.
Besides, several plans were developed to bring gas from the Haltenbanken fields, in the Norwegian Sea, via Sweden to
Central Europe.
Several new systems have been developed in the recent years, for instance, Skanled offshore pipeline, connecting
Norway, Sweden, and Denmark, with a spur line through the Baltic Sea to Poland. At the same time, onshore pipeline
projects, like Scandinavian Gas Ring, were found unfeasible due to various reasons including market peculiarities,
environmental protection requirements, taxation issues and regulatory authorities requirements.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Russian gas transportation to Finland and Sweden via the Baltic Sea
In the late 1980s the Swedish gas company Swedegas, in cooperation with the Finnish company Neste, devised a
business plan for transportation of Russian gas to Sweden and Western Finland. In 1989 and 1990 feasibility studies
were performed for offshore pipelines north and south of the land Islands.
The breakdown of the Soviet Union and the following economic crises in Sweden and Finland were the reasons for
abandoning the project. In the late 1970s a sharp increase in oil and gas prices was followed by an equally dramatic fall
in 1986. OPEC decided to reduce oil extraction, and oil and gas prices started to grow as a result of the decrease in
supply. By that time time there was a strong lobby in Sweden against the use of natural gas. The projects did not attract
attention and feasibility study was not undertaken until the late 1990s, when the President of Russia Boris Yeltsin
visited Sweden.
1.2.3. 1990-1995: Construction of the Yamal pipeline

The Yamal pipeline runs from the West Siberian gas fields via Belarus and Poland to the Brandenburg State border in
Germany. The pipeline connects the German distribution network near Frankfurt on Oder. The total length of the
pipeline to the Russian city of Torzhok is 1,600 km, diameter is 56'' (1,420 mm), and gas supply to Western Europe
reaches 33 bcm per year. The Yamal-1 project was initiated due to expected growth in demand for natural gas in both
Poland and Western Europe. This also meant diversification of technical means of transporting Russian natural gas in
addition to those in service. The Yamal project was the first major pipeline construction project carried out by a newly
organized Gazprom after the collapse of the USSR. Construction began in the mid 1990s to bring gas to Poland. The
construction continued with long delays mostly due to complicated negotiations with Polish and Byelorussian
landowners and farmers. The pipeline is operated by a Russian-Polish joint venture set up by Gazprom, Polish state oil
company Polskie Grnctwo Naftowe i Gazownictwo SA (PGNiG) and Gas-Trading S.A. Gazprom and PGNiG each
hold 48% of the shares and Gas-Trading S.A. possesses 4% of the shares.
1.2.4. 1995-2000: North Transgas Oy (NTG) studies The Nord Stream project hour of birth
NTG project definition and participants
North Transgas Oy, established in 1997, was responsible for conducting a detailed analysis of two possibilities: to bring
gas to Scandinavia and transport gas via Scandinavia to Western and Central Europe. Finland and Sweden joined the
EU in 1995 and, from a Brussels prospective, they had to integrate into the European gas system.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

The NTG study was revolutionary for its time since it included a very ambitious, yet carefully detailed, feasibility study
with the budget of over $20 million larger than any similar project in Europe. The shareholders behind NTG were
Gazprom and Fortum Oil and Gas Oy, which was the result of a merger between Neste and IVO in 1998. Neste was a
Finnish company heavily engaged in natural gas transporting to Scandinavia in the late 1990s. Neste worked on the
Nordic Gas Grid study and on projects initiated by the Nordic Council of Ministers, an international organization for
cooperation between Denmark, Sweden, Finland, Norway and Iceland, to integrate those countries' gas systems. IVO,
whose full name was Imatran Voima Oy, was then Finland's largest energy company. The NTG headquarters were in
Helsinki, where the majority of work on feasibility study was performed.
Feasibility study Amount
The NTG study was conducted in 1998. Approximately 3,900 km in the Baltic Sea, Gulf of Finland and Gulf of Bothnia
were screened to identify a possible route for one or several pipelines. Over one hundred geological seabed samples
were taken for laboratory testing. The project considered three different route alternatives and sixteen pipelines landfall
locations. Furthermore, alternatives were analysed to avoid the islands of Gotland and Bornholm from the west and
east. The project considered the following three base case routes and pipelines landfall locations:
Option 1: Overland Finland and Sweden, including marine sector north of the land islands.
Option 2: Overland Finland with a spur line to Sweden or north of the land islands (Option 2a)
or north of Gotland (Option 2b).
Option 3: Totally offshore pipeline with spur lines to Finland and Sweden near Hanko and
Nykping respectively.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Figure 1.2-1.
Route options examine d in the NTG feasibility study in 1998.
Greifswald was considered as a terminating point for all options, however, alternative destinations (Lbeck and
Rostock) were also examined. Apart from this, there was also a brief evaluation of another terminating point, the island
of Usedom (east of the Greifswalder Bodden), however, due to technical requirements and high recreational
significance of the area, this option had been abandoned prior to the study.
NTG had no plans to perform construction works in the Baltic States and Poland, therefore, the pipeline was to connect
Russia, Finland, Sweden, and Germany, notwithstanding the option selected. The proposed amount of gas supply varied
from 35.5 bcm to 21.6 bcm annually. Thus, the two Nordic countries which joined the EU in 1995, would have been
fully integrated in the EU gas system. The study also included the possibility of reverse gas flows from the
Mediterranean, Middle Eastern and North Sea region via Germany to Scandinavia using diversified German supply
structures in case of supply bottlenecks from Russia.
Feasibility study Results
In 1999, after evaluating the routes and establishing their technical feasibility, the NTG company came to a conclusion,
than Option 2b which implies routing through the Baltic Sea would be the most appropriate. This route consisted of an
onshore section in Finland and an offshore section through the Baltic Sea to Germany. At the next stage it was decided
to lay the Finnish sector on the seabed of the Gulf of Finland, not onshore.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

However, these plans failed to be accomplished then - Fortum Oil and Gas Oy changed its priorities and more focus was
given to the energy sector: constructing new nuclear power plants in Finland and acquiring Swedish utility systems.
Hence, a gas pipeline connecting Scandinavia and Western and Central Europe was no longer included in Fortum's
corporate strategy.
Gazprom and the Russian Government put more emphasis on the Southern flank and signed an intergovernmental
agreement on the construction of an offshore gas pipeline Blue Stream connecting the Russian Black Sea coast and the
Turkish city of Samsun in 1999 to enhance the strategic partnership between Russia and Turkey. Gazprom participated
in this project in cooperation with the international Italian oil and gas company Eni S.p.A. As a part of the project,
Turkey and South European and South-East European states should receive 16 bcm of natural gas annually.
1.2.5. A brief excursus: Baltic Sea as an optimal new base case route for Europes energy supply
NTG's feasibility study conclusions were determined by a range of basic principles (see below).
Economic principles
As for supply, the Russian Baltic shore and its proximity to Russian gas fields make it a favourable starting point for the
pipeline. Nord Stream's key supply basis comprises gas fields on the Yamal peninsular and the Yuzhno-Russkoye gas
field in the short and medium term. Later it is also projected to use gas from the Shtokman field in the Barents Sea.
From an investment perspective, the market size targeted by the project is decisive. Thus, with regard to demand,
Western European region is becoming more and more luring as its own gas reserves have been depleting and the due to
stricter requirements for greenhouse gas emissions. Germany has an appropriate structure to assist a smooth transition to
a well-developed pipeline network and receive gas from countries outside the EU.
Constructing an onshore pipeline via the Baltic States and Poland is unfeasible from the economic perspective. West
European market potential appears to be more promising. The same reasons, as well as low population density and long
distances between prospective points of sales, determined the decision to reject the option of an onshore pipeline
through Sweden and Finland.
Political components
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

An argument of the market size at the time of the study was substantially enforced by another component, a political
one.
In its feasibility study NTG examined several pipeline route alternatives, however, all this was considered as the only
possible way of connection between Russia and the EU or between vast Russian gas reserves on one side, and major
consumers of 300 million people in the EU (1998 status) on the other side. Compared to an onshore routing via Poland
or the Baltic States, the legal situation in EU countries seems more predictable and stable. Though investment projects
are based on economic decisions, political backing can be an important factor as well. Thus, candidates from Central
and Eastern Europe to join the EU seek to reduce their dependence on Russian gas and diversify energy supply, while
West European countries face an issue of growing demand and securing energy supply.
Financing aspects
From the economic perspective in the late 1990s Russia was still one of the International Monetary Fund's receiving
countries and thus was not able to finance a project of such scale. Therefore, preliminary options of constructing an
onshore pipeline through Finland and Sweden were partially determined by financial requirements. Alternative options
of pipelines through the former Soviet-led states were unfeasible due to the lack of funds as well as other factors.
However, with the prompt recovery of the Russian economy, the assignment of credit ratings and a sharp increase in
global prices on energy, the construction of a direct line between Russia and Western and Central European countries
became possible.
Preliminary spending analysis
To complete the economic argumentation, a cost comparison between on- and offshore solutions seems to be adequate.
Therefore, it would be useful to discuss a feasibility study completed by Nord Stream. The Nord Stream offshore
pipeline was compared to onshore pipelines Amber and Yamal-Europe. For the needs of precise analysis it is necessary
to compare pipeline systems which connect supply points with distribution points for existing pipelines. Therefore, a
basic model was selected connecting such points of sales as Yamburg (East Siberian gas fields) and Murmansk
(Shtokman field) on one side and the German gas system Achim in Lower Saxony and Olbernhau in Saxony. Besides, it
is necessary to consider comparable transport capacities. That is why, on one hand, the Nord Stream project with a
transport capacity of 55 bcm (two lines) would be comparable with two Amber pipelines with a transport capacity of
27.5 bcm each and 55 bcm taken together. On the other hand, the Nord Stream pipeline would be comparable to a single
line of the Amber pipeline and the Yamal-Europe pipeline with a total transport capacity of 55 bcm or 2x27.5 bcm.
Finally, when comparing spending it is necessary to consider pressure under which the gas transportation would be
performed it should be comparable both for offshore and onshore pipelines. Based on the arguments mentioned above
three scenarios were developed for a subsequent analysis:
3
So-called Amber project - a pipeline which was supposed to connect Russia and
the Yamal-Europe line through Latvia, Lithuania, and Poland.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Scenario one considered the Nord Stream pipeline containing two lines and connections to
Russian supply lines and German distribution lines.
Scenario two refers to a model of two Amber pipelines including the aforementioned connection
lines.
Scenario three considers a combination of one Amber and one Yamal-Europe pipeline including
the aforementioned connection lines.
Key results are shown as follows: Nord Stream pipeline is shorter in length than the Amber or Yamal-Europe solution
and that the need for compressor power is significantly lower for the offshore route. The smaller number of compressor
stations require less fuel gas and, as a consequence, operational costs are reduced. This, in return, is an average cost
advantage for the Nord Stream pipeline in terms of modern common costs.
Costs accounting were based on several assumptions. Due to differences in considered connections to supply and
distribution points, assumed budget, pipeline diameters, technical parameters such as design pressure and wall
thickness, Nord Stream pipeline has more remarkable cost advantages compared to the Amber pipeline over an assumed
life span of 25 years. According to the project life cycle for the Nord Stream pipeline, decommissioning has been
estimated after a life span of approximately 50 years. This is additional economic advantage of the project.
Comparing Scandinavian alternatives, the route via Finland and Sweden will have a greater capital costs due to its
greater length. Onshore route via Finland and Sweden will be much longer - 1,400 km as opposed to the 1,200km
offshore route.
Environme ntal impact
From an environmental perspective, the Kyoto Protocol, signed at the end of 1997, has had an important influence on
energy related questions. Thus, the displacement of coal usage in Germany, the UK and other European countries by
dints of the natural gas pipeline will contribute to the reduction of carbon dioxide emissions on which parties to the
treaty, such as the EU, have agreed on. In addition, an offshore pipeline through the Baltic Sea will generate
significantly less carbon dioxide than onshore routes via Eastern and Central Europe. This is based on increased
efficiencies from higher design pressure.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

In the longer term, even rough comparison of potential environmental impact shows that an overland route will cause
much more environmental problems that offshore route. Firstly, an overland route will require a land allotment 40 m
wide, and lay rate for onshore and offshore pipelines will be different. Offshore pipelines construction is expected to
occur at a rate of 2.5 to 3 km a day. Onshore pipelines lay rate is much lower, therefore environmental impact will be
more intensive. Secondly, offshore pipeline construction is more favourable due to geographical specifics. Going
onshore via Scandinavia or the Baltic States - Poland corridor will require complex solutions for crossing lakes and
rivers; the pipeline itself will pass environmentally sensitive area. For example, in previously planned project of the
construction of an onshore section in Finland, which is 328 km for alternative 1 and 391 km for alternative 2, crossing
Kymijoki river would be required. Near Edvainen - one of planned landfall areas in Finland - the pipeline will pass
environmentally sensitive area; if pipeline landfall will be north of Hanko, construction of a complicated crossing of
Pohjapitejenlahti Bay will be required. In Sweden, the approximately 654 km onshore part would have faced two major
lake crossings and the environmentally sensitive Fyledalen valley. Moreover, seabed conditions around the Finnish
town of Hanko are rough and would have led to considerable intervention works.
Route through the Baltic States and Poland also passes through various environmentally sensitive areas. There are many
national parks in the north east of Poland, that host very abundant bird and animal life, for example, Wiger National
Park as well as Bibrzan and Natwian. In addition, numerous large and small lakes and wetlands are located in the area
close to the border to Kaliningrad and Lithuania. The largest of them are Mamry and Sniardwy lakes connected by
small rivers, canals and other lakes. Tourism and recreation are the most promising business around the lakes and the
national parks. Finally, the area south of the Kaliningrad border is characterised by an almost unspoiled mix of
agricultural activities, forests, wetlands, lakes and rivers.
A comprehensive environmental comparison would require a full impact assessment of possible onshore routes, which
is outside the scope of Nord Stream project. Moreover, such study has not been conducted by the involved EU member
states. Anyhow, nobody asked for EU funds planned to to allocate for the study, as appears from the Section below.4
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

1.2.6. 2001-2005: Gazprom returns NTG switches over to North European Gas Pipeline
From 2001 to 2005 the activities shifted from Finnish Fortum to Russian Gazprom. The Russians enhanced their
cooperation with German gas company Ruhrgas, which was taken over by E.ON AG and ultimately renamed E.ON
Ruhrgas AG in 2004, and German gas producer and BASF subsidiary Wintershall. As Fortum Oil and Gas Oy had
changed its business strategy, Gazprom bought Fortum's 50 percent stake in NTG in 2005.
Developme nt of new markets and improving technology are favourable events for construction of gas pipeline
across the Baltic Sea.
Name of the project has been changed. Now it is called North European Gas Pipeline. The project has also gained two
additional target markets: Denmark and the Netherlands. Due to a decline in gas production in the UK, the British gas
market got into more focus and supply route solutions from Russia via Denmark to the United Kingdom were assessed.
UK gas companies were considering alternative supply sources, next to Russian ones also Norwegian options and LNG
supplies. Due to the geographical proximity of the pipeline's starting point to Russian gas fields, NEGP would increase
the diversification of the EU's gas supply. From a technological point of view, the improvement of technology for large
diameter, high pressure and long distance pipelines was further developed mainly from Norway to the European
mainland and UK, but also in the Middle East. The milestone of the construction of the Bluestream pipeline at depths
upto 2150 m also paved the way for a new generation of technologically advanced offshore projects.
For the Baltic Sea offshore solution a gas supply of 19.2 bcm/year was foreseen with a pipeline diameter between 42
and 48 and design pressure of respectively 220 and 160 bar.
Eventually, it was decided to build the Langeled pipeline from the Norwegian offshore Ormen Lange field to the UK
and other offshore connections from Norway to British shores. Moreover, plans to develop the Shtokman gas field as an
LNG field for non-European markets were discussed. To diversify supply to the UK it was decided to construct a new
pipeline from the Netherlands, Balgzand-Bacton, along almost the same route as a section of North European Gas
Pipeline.
See It. 1.2.7.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Hence, no direct pipeline from Russia to the UK was required as the Balgzand-Bacton Line pipeline (BBL) could be
used to serve this market via transit through Germany and the Netherlands. Moreover, the possible use of intermediate
storage facilities in Germany turned out as an additional advantage.
To sum up, the promoters of the Norway-UK connection, Statoil and Hydro, as well as the main drivers of the BBL
pipeline, Dutch energy company Gasunie and Belgium gas corporation Fluxys, contributed indirectly, but considerably
to Nord Stream as it is set up today.
Route Optimisation and further plans
Several studies were conducted with regard to route optimisation. In 2004 PeterGaz, a Russian project company,
obtained an order for new survey of of the off-shore section of the pipeline in the Baltic Sea. The primary objective of
the survey was a detailed analysis of NTG data as well as other available data including commercial and publically
available. Second objective was a development of optimal corridor to conduct detailed geophysical survey in the Baltic
in 2005. This survey allowed to align the route for further evaluation and design activities.
The aligned route has been recognised as suitable for conceptual design and identified as the base case for further
development activities.
Several opportunities for optimisation have been identified during the route conceptual design to potentially further
reduce the impact and risks posed to the environment. Finally, the route had been revised, and in 2006 prepared for
visual inspection using Remotely Operated Vehicles.
Traced pipeline installation corridor extends from Portovaya Bay near the Russian town of Vyborg in the Leningrad
region to Lubmin near Greifswald in the German state of Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania. Its length is 1,200 km. Spur
line to Sweden is envisaged as well.
1.2.7.
Initiation of Nord Stream project
Signing contracts and official starting work

A basic agreement to construct the pipeline was finally reached in September 2005. Two months later, the North
European Gas Pipeline Company was founded and registered in Zug, Switzerland, whose hares originally being
distributed between Gazprom (51%), E.ON Ruhrgas AG (24.5%) and BASF/Wintershall Holding AG (24.5%). The
company was renamed to Nord Stream AG in October 2006. The final shareholder agreement on the construction of
Nord Stream from Russia to Germany via the Baltic Sea was signed in July 2007 and did not contain a Swedish branch
due to a lack of demand in this market. The company Gasunie Infrastruktur AG bought 4,5% share of the two German
shareholders, causing the company have a 9% share. The incorporation of the Dutch company to the membership of
shareholders guaranteed the opening of the BBL pipeline as a prolongation of gas transport network through the Nord
Stream pipeline to the United Kingdom.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

The routing selection decision proves its timeliness

The agreements foresaw construction of two pipelines, in order to grow annual productivity up to 55 BCM and to
ensure a higher level of flexibility of inspection and maintenance. The need for annual productivity growth was created
by pressures from EU countries, demanded to decrease carbon dioxide emissions by displacing coal with natural gas.
Once project of the joint development of the Yuzhno-Russkoye gas field are agreed upon, the supply side gained an
additional heavy argument. In addition, the project details from a demand perspective provided with the fact, that the
transportation companies of the two German shareholders E.ON and BASF respectively will operate the two large
diameter coastal pipelines to Achim and Olbernhau, meaning the routes for transporting natural gas to the integrated EU
gas system. Consequently, the pipeline can supply Denmark, the Netherlands, the UK, Belgium, France, Poland and
other countries. These perspectives of the project for the Europe are reflected in the decision of the European Parliament
and the European Council, which informs that the pipeline installation as part of the Trans-European Energy Networks
(TEN-E) is a "Project of European Interest". According to European Commissioner for Energy, Andris Piebalgs, the
pipeline installing projects Yamal II and Amber were selected in 2004 for a comparative feasibility study to which the
Commission was planned to allocate funds of approximately 1 million euros6. However, no feasibility study was
conducted as nobody showed interest in that. In addition, while the primary energies supply security for many West
European countries is becoming increasingly important, Polish Minister of Economic Affairs issued in 2007 a decree
about renouncing at additional Russian gas imports to Poland and focussing on the construction of LNG ports. In
contrast, attitude of EU towards the Moscow is quite open: In September 2008, the EU unanimously stressed its
inclination to keep tight economic relationships with Russia.
The decision of basing head office of Nord Stream in the financial hub proved to be a visionary one as well. Some
difficulties appear with funding the project after the real estate crises in USA in winter 2007 - 2008.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

1.2.8. Future prospects

The process of submitting the application to various environmental state authorities of stakeholders is presently going
on. Due to these activities on national levels, the Nord Stream pipelines, for which construction state-of-the-art
technology in the field of development, design installing and operating of pipelines are used, will meet the requirements
of highest standards set out by international authorities. An obligation to comply UNECE Convention regarding
Assessment of Environmental Impacts in a Transboundary Context was assumed for the project. In addition, Equator
Principles will be complied - the global list of environmental and social rates for the pertinent aspects of the project
financing management, which are based on standards in environmental and social spheres, developed by organizations
of World Bank Group (International Bank for Reconstruction and Development and International Finance Corporation).
The Nord Stream project is an example of successful uplifting of a challenging idea born in 1980s to an integral and key
component of Europes stable gas supply.
European Parliament: Decision 1364/2006/ of the European Parliament and the Council of 6 September 2006 laying down guidelines
for trans-European energy networks and repealing Decision No 1229/2003/EC.
6
Public hearing on 29 January 2008.
5
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

1.3.
Rationale for the Nord Stream Project: ensuring Europe's energy security
1.3.1. New natural gas import capacities are needed to meet rising demand for natural gas within the EU
Import share of the entire EU's gas consumption will increase.

In the EU, natural gas demand is expected7 to grow against the decline in the EU's own productive capacity and
reserves. As consequence import share of the entire EU's gas consumption will increase. It is estimated that natural gas
import requirements are expected to rise from 314 bcm per annum, corresponding to 58% of total demand, in 2005 to
509 bcm, corresponding to 81% of total demand, in 2025 8. Therefore, new import capacities are needed to prevent the
emergence of a natural gas import gap.
Figure: 1.3-1. Forecast supply and de mand in the EU. (The graph is based on the assumption that current gas
supply contracts will be prolongated).
The following section
shows why further growth is projected for EU natural gas demand
deals with the proposed decline in the EU's own productive capacity and reserves;
provides a detailed analysis of the proposed growth in EU gas import requirements.
The rising de mand for natural gas in the EU
EU includes 27 European Union member states

Based on data from European Commission: European Energy and Transport, updated 2007, p. 96. Figures are based on 10.3 kwh/m3 at 20 C.
The conservative scenarios for oil prices were adopted for the source. These and subsequent figures were rounded.
8
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Currently making up one quarter of the primary energy consumption, natural gas accounts for a significant proportion
of energy consumption within the EU. Moreover, EU natural gas demand is expected to grow at an average annual rate
of 0.74%: from 543 bcm in 2006 to 629 bcm in 2025 9. Over this 20 year period, the share of natural gas in the primary
energy mix is expected to rise from 25% to 26%, while the share provided by oil, coal and nuclear power declines. The
share of renewable energy sources will grow from 7% to 11%.11
Figure 1.3-2.
Developme nt outlook for the EU primary energy sources structure between 2005 and 2025.
Source: European Commission: European Energy and Transport. Updated 2007, p. 96.
Extra demand for natural gas in terms of total volume come mostly from Great Britain, Italy, Germany, Poland and
Spain12 reflecting amongst other factors as progressive replacement of oil and coal for electricity generation13. In
addition, natural gas consumption per household grows. In Germany, France, Belgium, the UK, the Netherlands and
Italy, households constitute the largest or second-largest source of gas demand 14. The EU Council Directive 2004/67/EC
of 26 April 2004 concerning measures to safeguard security of natural gas supply states: In view of the growing gas
market of the European Community it is important that security of gas supply is maintained, in particular in regard to
household customers.15
Environmental compatibility is the further factor contributing to the rising demand for natural gas in the EU. In this
respect gas as a primary energy source is beneficial in comparison to other fossil fuels: Due to higher hydrogen-carbon
molar ratio and ecologically cleaner combustion process, natural gas creates 30 50% less pollution and greenhouse
gas emissions through combustion than coal and oil, thus significantly contributing to an environmentally sustainable
energy supply.16
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
Based on data from European Commission: European Energy and Transport. Trends to 2030. Updated 2007, p. 96.
Based on data from European Commission: European Energy and Transport. Trends to 2030. Updated 2007, different pp.
European Commission: New document "Towards the European strategy of energy supply security". 2001, p. 42.
Based on data from European Commission: European Energy and Transport. Trends to 2030. Updated 2007.
EU Council Directive 2004/67/EC of 26 April 2004 concerning measures to safeguard security of natural gas supply.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Especially against the backdrop of the decision by the European Council in March 2007 to reduce the greenhouse gas
emissions by 20% by the year 2020 a further increase in demand for natural gas is expected17.
Use of renewable sources to meet EU primary energy demand is forecast to extend, but not sufficiently to cover the
forecast shortfall in EU gas supplies. While its importance will grow, the share of renewables in the EU primary energy
is forecast to rise only to 10% by 2020 and 12% by 2030. That means, that natural gas itself cannot be replaced by the
consolidated use of alternative primary energy sources until 2030.
Decline of the own natural gas reserves in EU
Against the background of increase in demand within the EU the decline in its own reserves takes place. Current total
proven natural gas reserves in the EU (about 2.800 billion cubic m) 19 are relatively low compared with projected
demand of 629 billion m per annum in 2025. The Netherlands, with 1250 bcm, has the largest proven reserves within
the EU. The UK, which currently contributes approximately 16% of annual natural gas production in the EU, has
reserves of only approximately 410 bcm.20 Moreover, no significant new finds of natural gas in the EU are expected. 21
As a result, the EUs self-sufficiency will decline further. At present, natural gas production in the EU covers
approximately 42% of demand,22 and production from existing natural gas reserves in the EU will decline from around
229 bcm per annum in 2005 to only 120 bcm per annum in 2025. 23
As a result, the EUs self-sufficiency will decline further. At present, natural gas production in the EU covers
approximately 42% of demand,22 and production from existing natural gas reserves in the EU will decline from around
229 bcm per annum in 2005 to only 120 bcm per annum in 2025. 23
Against the background of production having dropped and rising demand in the coming decades the EU Council sees
the necessity to acquire substantial additional natural gas quantities.24 New natural gas import capacities are needed to
cover the shortfall of natural gas within the EU.
16
http://www.umwelt.niedersachsen.de/master/ C24188911_N23067576_L20_D0_I598.html (consulted 26 October 2007)
17
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/etap/agenda_en.htm#4 (consulted 19 October 2007)

European Union: European Energy and Transport. Trends to 2030. Updated 2007, p. 96.
BP AG: Statistical Review of World Energy. June, 2008, p. 22.
BP AG: Statistical Review of World Energy. June, 2008, p. 22.
European Commission: European Energy and Transport. Trends to 2030. Updated 2007, p. 74.
Based on data from European Commission: European Energy and Transport. Updated 2007, p. 96.
Based on data from European Commission: European Energy and Transport. Updated 2007, p. 96.
EU Council Directive 2004/67/EC of 26 April 2004 concerning measures to safeguard security of natural gas supply.
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

The need for new natural gas import capacities to the EU

As a result of the decline in the EU's own productive capacity and reserves coupled with an increase in the demand for
natural gas within the EU, natural gas import requirements are expected to increase from 314 bcm per annum in 2005 to
509 bcm per annum in 2025. Therefore, new import capacities are needed to prevent the emergence of a natural gas
import gap.
Europe currently obtains natural gas primarily from three sources: Russia, that provides the most important share,
Norway and Algeria25. The size of reserves as well as their geographic proximity to the EU and the long term reliability
of supply will be important factors in the choice of future import sources. Apparently Russia does offer all that
advantages.
1.3.2. The strategic importance of Russia as a natural gas supplier

Russia may significantly contribute to maintenance of gas supply security in EU in future: (a) Russia has the largest
confirmed natural gas reserves in the world, (b) is geographically close to the EU, and (c) can show a reliable supply
relationship for over 35 years with natural gas customers in the EU
() Russia has the largest confirme d natural gas reserves in the world
The current composition of import volumes from natural gas-producing countries will shift in favour of regions with
long-term resources. Therefore, the size of reserves will be an important factor in the choice of future import sources.
Known world gas reserves are located in three main regions:
Europe and Eurasia: roughly 33,5% (Russia - 25,2%, Norway - 1,7%);
Middle East: 41,3% (Iran 15,7%, Qatar 14,4%);
Africa: 8,2% (Nigeria 3,0%, Algeria 2,5%).26
The remaining 17% of total world reserves are distributed in small volumes across various regions.
25
26
Eurostat statistical reports: Statistical data for natural gas and electricity market. 2007 edition, p. 56.
BP AG: Statistical Review of World Energy. June, 2008, p. 22. Please also refer to this source for a detailed definition of regions.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Figure 1.3-3.
General distribution of confirmed natural gas reserves: Russia, Norway, Iran, Qatar, Nigeria,
Algeria. Source: BP Statistical Review of World Energy for June 2007
Major gas supplies in all three above mentioned regions have been developed by EU from the countries which come
first or second in the list of remaining gas reserves - Algeria, Qatar, Norway and Russia.. No gas is being supplied
from Iran.
Algeria, that is situated not far from the countries of Mediterranean Europe, currently has 4520 bcm of natural gas.27
Increase in export volumes from the today's rate of 65 bcm per annum to 115 bcm per annum in 2015 is planned. 28
Qatar has the third-largest reserves of natural gas in the world after Russia and Iran (at 25400 bcm)29. Exports are
transported mainly in the form of liquified natural gas (LNG) because of the great distances to target markets. Current
efforts to encourage Qatari LNG exports are mainly aimed at the Japanese and South Korean markets. After decrease in
exports to EU in 2000 begun, measures to expand exports towards North America and Europe have been undertaken.
However in December 2006 part of the supplies planned for North America has been sold to Pacific region 30 , showing
the instability of LNG supply routes. Nevertheless, at present an official moratorium has stopped any further natural gas
production projects.
27
28
29
30
Based on BP Statistical Review of World Energy for June 2008, S.22.

German-Algerian chamber of commerce and industry: http://algerien.ahk.de/index.php?id=landesinfos, accessed on August 4, 2008
Statistical Review of World Energy.. June, 2008, p. 22.
Energy Information Administration: International energy perspectives in 2007, p. 41-42.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Hence the short-term and medium-term perspectives for LNG capacities expanding in Qatar are not clear.
Norway with 2960 bcm of natural gas 31 will continue to play an important role in the natural gas supply of Europe in
short-term and medium term. However, Norways gas export is expected to peak at 150 bcm per annum in 2020. By
2025, Norway's natural gas export is expected to attain merely 120 bcm per annum 32 , that accounts for 19% of the total
supply requirement in EU for 2025.
Natural gas reserves of Russia equal 44 650 bcm or 25,2% of the known world resources. 33 Their geographical
position is also favourable for their development: 90% of mining activities is being held in West Siberia. In future gas
will be extracted on the Shtokman field in Barents Sea and some remote offshore fields in the Kara Sea. The proven
natural gas reserves on the Shtokman field have been recorded to 3700 bcm being concentrated within one field not far
from EU, which is a big advantage.
The potential rise in gas exports from Norway, Algeria and Qatar are insufficient to cover medium- and long-term
growth in EU import requirements. Significance of the additional natural gas transport capacities from Russia to EU is
emphasised by the probability of the shortfall occurrence in gas supplies.
(b) Proximity of Russia to EU
Natural gas is imported to EU from different countries, whereby geographical proximity is the main factor in the choice
of import sources. Countries like Germany, France, Belgium and the UK obtain natural gas mainly from Russia and
Norway, most Italian and Spanish natural gas imports come from Algeria. Geographic proximity will be an important
factor in the choice of future import sources. Alongside unique resource base Russia offers such an advantage as
geographical proximity to the EU markets. In future the Shtokman gas field will significantly support the security of
energy supplies to EU.
(c) Russia has established a reliable supply relationship with natural gas customers in the EU
31
32
33
Statistical Review of World Energy. June, 2008, p. 22. Note: The gas reserves of Norway are not part of the natural gas reserves of the
EU.
German Ministry for the Economy: Monitoring- Bericht des BMWi nach 51 EnWG zur Versorgungssicherheit bei Erdgas, p.17
Statistical Review of World Energy. June, 2008, p. 22.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

History of the winning relationships between EU and Russia in domain of energy supply numbers over 35 years. Target
markets in EU account for 80% of total natural gas export from Russia.34 Russian reserves play an important role in
maintaining the EU energy supply security in future. The oil and gas industries constitute a major sector of the Russian
economy, accounting for two thirds of its export revenue in 2007. Gas export earnings are crucial to Russia's national
budget. The European Commission speaks of an evident mutual dependency on the part of the EU and Russia in respect
of energy partnership, and of the mutual benefit of Russia having greater access to the EUs natural gas market..35
Moreover, the exporting company is committed to make additional volumes of natural gas available. Russian Energy
company Gazprom has already contractually agreed to sell an additional 21 bcm of natural gas per annum to be supplied
via the Nord Stream pipeline to various purchasers. These contracts demonstrate that Gazprom's intention to export via
the new supply route is matched by the long-term demand for natural gas projected by the European energy companies
concerned. The Nord Stream pipeline system is thus a priority project, both for the provider Gazprom and for European
consumers.
Although a tried and tested supply relationship has existed between exporting companies in Russia and purchasers in
the EU, early connection of Russian natural gas reserves to the European market is also important given the increasing
competition between natural gas consumers. For more detailed information on this question please refer following
section.
1.3.3. The importance of connecting Russian natural gas reserves to the European market at an early stage in
the context of the rising demand for natural gas in Asia
China's geographic proximity to Russian gas fields in north Tyumen region is comparable to the EU's geographic
proximity. Given the increasing competitive pressure to access natural gas supplies, the strategic safeguarding of
sources in Russia is becoming increasingly important for the EU. This is primarily associated with the rising demand for
natural gas in Asian countries..36 Demand for natural gas between 2004 and 2030 is estimated to grow at 5.1% per
annum in China and 4.2% per annum in India, compared with 3.4% and 3.0% per annum for oil and 2.8% and 3.3% per
annum for coal.37 The Asia-Pacific region currently consumes 439 bcm per annum, about 81% EU levels.
34
35
36
37
Statistical Review of World Energy. June, 2008, p. 30.

Commission of European Council, 12 October 2006: Foreign relations in energy supply domain: principles and measures.
Federal Ministry of Economics and Labour: Energy Market Trends to 2030, 2005, p. 18.
International Energy Agency: International energy perspectives in 2006, p. 86, 112, 127.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

China is one of the largest and fastest growing target markets for natural gas in the region. Given the expected increase
in demand, China is likely to show a heightened interest in Russian natural gas exports. China's geographic proximity to
Russian gas fields will encourage the transport of gas from Russia to China.
Picture: 1.3-4. Existing gas reserves in Russia and construction of the supply network for China.
As energy trading relations enhance between Russia and Asia, there is a danger of the EU taking second place as a
customer for Russian gas from Tyumen region. An early strategic expansion of the connection from Russia to the
European market is therefore important in securing the supply of natural gas to the EU over the long term. Readiness of
OAO Gazprom to high level investments for the Nord Stream pipeline construction project shows the interest of the
world's leading natural gas producer Gazprom in a long-term supply relationship with the EU. This is a significant
benefit to the EU in the context of increasing competitive pressure in pursuit of the natural gas energy reserve.
Establishing a direct link between Russian gas reserves and the EU market is gaining in urgency. Therefore, the
European Commission supports projects aiming at the timely expansion of gas infrastructure to the EU from third
countries via the Trans-European Energy Network (TEN-E). Pipeline Nord Stream can to significant extent safeguard
the necessary additional transport capacities in EU and thus is of great importance for EU gas supply organizing. Nord
Stream was recognised by the decision of the European Parliament and the Council of 6 September 2006 as a project
of European interest , 38 and thus a part of the Trans-European Energy Network (TEN-E).
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

1.3.4. The Nord Stream pipeline as an essential element of the Trans-European Energy Networks
The Nord Stream pipeline in the context of the Axes for Priority Projects of the Trans-European Energy
Networks
Implementing the Trans-European Energy Network (TEN-E) involves improving the integration and development of
the energy transport infrastructure by furthering the connection, interoperability and development of natural gas
transport capacities. In the context of this programme, certain axes that must be expanded or newly created for natural
gas supplies to the EU from external countries and for increasing the efficiency of the EU's internal energy markets are
prioritised. 39 Procedures corresponding to the Priority Project Axes gain financial support from the EU. On 6 October
2006 six priority project axes have been defined by EU (from NG1 to NG6). 40
38
European Parliament: Decision No 1364/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of September 6, 2006 laying down guidelines
for trans-European energy networks and repealing Decisions No 96/391/ and No 1229/2003/EC.
39
European Commission: Trans-European Energy Networks: TEN-E Priority Projects
40
Decision No 1364/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of September 6, 2006 laying down guidelines for trans-European
energy networks and repealing Decision No 1229/2003/EC.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Figure 1.3-5.
Trans-European Energy Networks: Natural gas priority projects based on data from European
Commission
The NG1 axis covers a corridor from Russia to Great Britain via northern continental Europe (including Germany, the
Netherlands and Denmark) for the creation of a new import route for Russian natural gas. This axis aims at the
connection between Russian gas reserves in Western Siberia in general more particularly the Shtokman field - and the
EU. The Nord Stream pipeline as the backbone of this corridor will serve to realise exactly this goal. The
efficiency of the internal EU gas market should also be increased through the development of the export capacity
between continental Europe and the UK.
A pipeline network connecting Algeria with Europe is to be created on the NG2 axis. This includes several routes to
Spain and Italy. Besides of that, number of routes to France has been envisaged from this point.
On the NG 3 axis the connection of gas reserves from the Middle East and the Caspian region to the EU is planned via
the new Nabucco pipeline passing through Turkey, Bulgaria, Romania, Hungary and Austria.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

The aim of the projects, designated as NG4, is the construction of additional regasification terminals for liquefied
natural gas (LNG) in Belgium, France, Spain, Portugal and Italy. These projects, presupposing on the first stage
designing of flexible transport routes for transporting by ship, are intended to stimulate competition between natural
gas-exporting countries, providing an additional export potential and diversification of natural gas import sources.
However, already today the LNG world market is characterised by a strong competition between importing countries in
Europe, the United States and the Far East.
The aim of the projects, designated as NG5, -is to increase gas storage capacity primarily by constructing underground
storage facilities (e.g. depleted natural gas deposits, salt caves).
The NG6 axis focuses on expanding pipeline capacity from Libya, Egypt, Jordan, Syria and Turkey to EU Member
States in the Mediterranean region: establishing of the East Mediterranean Gas Ring.
The Nord Stream pipeline in the context of the various projects realized for the Trans-European Energy
Network
In accordance with the priority axes defined by European Commission a number of new projects concerning the gas
import infrastructure has been planned to implement. The Nord Stream pipeline is defined as one of TEN-E
infrastructure projects and the largest single project for new import capacity into the EU.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Picture: 1.3-6.
Trans-European Energy Networks: priority projects for natural gas
The Langeled pipeline, which runs from the Nyhamna Terminal in Norway to Easington in England, is one of the
strategic infrastructure projects mentioned. In combination with the development of the Norwegian Ormen Lange field,
this pipeline, officially inaugurated in 2006, is contributing approximately 20 bcm per annum to the EUs import
capacities.
Expansion of pipeline connections between North Africa and Italy or Spain is designed to increase annual EU import
capacity by up to 42 billion per annum starting in 2015 (pipelines GME, MEDGAZ, GALSI, Transmed, expansion of
the Green Stream pipeline). The Nabucco pipeline is planned as an import route for natural gas from the Caspian region
with import capacities of 20-30 bcm per annum starting in 2011 at the earliest.
The size of LNG production is planned to be at about 66 bcm per annum, gained on the additional regasification
terminals, which implies annual productivity growth at 180 bcm by 2015 approximately. Yet, most of the above-listed
projects are currently at the early phases of planning and in some cases their practical implementation is in certain
respect doubtful.
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


As a result of implementation in the framework of TEN-E of all the projects of pipelines building (both currently
planned and being under construction) EU export potential including Nord Stream gas pipeline will be increased by 140
bcm.
This corresponds to over 70% of EU additional gas import needs in 2025. The Nord Stream pipeline system
with a planned capacity of 55 bcm per annum, is meant to provide more than 25% of EU additional gas import needs,
and therefore makes a significant contribution to guaranteeing the security of EU gas supplies. As stressed by EU
Energy Commissioner Andris Piebalgs, Nord Stream should be seen as complementary to other projects, which will
also need to be completed, not competitive to them. 41 Besides its meaning in terms of the amount, the chosen Nord
Stream pipeline route, will broadly favour the "diversification of natural gas sources and transport routes".42It is
documented by the European Commission report about TENE priority projects dated 10 June 2004. 43 Diversification is
described by the EU in its ruling 1364/2006/EC dated 6 September 2006 as a priority in the future development of
Trans-European Energy Networks. In the same document the project of an offshore pipeline from Russia to Germany is
mentioned as a project of common interest of EU. 44 In consideration of strategic importance of Nord Stream gas
pipeline and its significant contribution in import potential rise, the project non-realisation seems unfeasible.
1.3.5. Consequences of non-realisation of the project
This section examines the consequences of eventual non-realisation of Nord Stream project for future gas supply to EU.
As detailed above, non-realisation of Nord Stream project will run the substantial risk to gas supply to EU security
because of lack of planned 55 bcm per year that should be supplied through the Nord Steam pipeline. The planned
pipeline system would cover more than one-quarter of additional gas import demand, estimated at up to 195 bcm p.a. by
2025. Non-implementation would seriously threaten EU energy supply security.
Significant contribution in import potential rise is planned to be largely provided by means of gas import projects listed
in section 1.3.4. All of these projects should be regarded as complementary in relation to each other. The supply gap
resulting from the non-implementation of the Nord Stream project would have to be covered by projects that are not
even yet under consideration not to mention planning.
41
Public Hearing of the Committee on Petitions, Brussels, 29 January 2008.

Decision No 1364/2006/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of September 6, 2006, Article 4.3. See also the communication from the
Commission to the European Council and the European Parliament entitled An energy policy for Europe, 10 January 2007, p. 6.
43
European Commission: Trans-European Energy Networks: TEN-E priority projects, 2004, p. 25.
44
Decision of the European Parliament and the Council No.1364/2006/ of 6 September 2006 about guidelines of Trans-European Energy Networks
arrangement, revoking the Decision No.1254/2003/.
42

Volume 8. Book 1. Offshore section. Part 1. EIA
pp. 51

Non-implementation of the Nord Stream project leads to necessity of consideration of the following items:
a) Other delivery areas;
b) Other transport routes of natural gas to EU;
c) Other energy sources.
Besides the analysis of these three aspects, it must be emphasized that, in addition to Nord Stream, other projects,
currently under consideration, are required to meet the rising demand for imported natural gas (see section 1.3.4), and
therefore, cannot be regarded as alternatives to the Nord Stream project.
(a) Other delivery areas
There is no comparable alternative for Russia,because:
Russia possesses the largest natural gas reserves in the world, and will be able to deliver natural gas to EU in
the long-term;
Russia is geographically situated near EU.
Russia is able to secure supply in the long-term;
In medium term transition to gradual increase in export volumes of Russian gas is possible.
Additional possible sources of gas:
Caspian and Middle East region transmission pipeline systems and LNG;
Algeria and Libya - Mediterranean Sea seabed pipelines;
Norway - Norway pipelines;
More distant sources LNG.
None of these possess all the advantages of Nord Stream project that connects EU with Russian gas reserves. In
addition, their implementation needs some years more than Nord Stream project implementation . Furthermore, e.g.,
LNG transportation is connected with high emissions of 2 creating.
(b) Another transport routes of natural gas to EU;
Another transport options to be compared with Nord Stream project by emissions - main environment aspect that must
be considered - are shown below.
Other aspects that are taken into account are safety and public perception of these means of transport.

pp. 52

The Nord Stream project offers distinct advantages in terms of CO2 emissions compared to onshore routes and LNG
transport, an important factor in view of the EUs goal of emissions reducing.
Shore pipelines
The energy needs for the operation of a pipeline, at even throughput volumes, are essentially related to the maintenance
of pipeline pressure necessary for maintaining natural gas transportation. With increasing pressure the specific pressure
consumption during transportation will drop due to the compressible nature of gases, thus reducing the number of
compressor stations necessary for gas transmission over a certain distance. With the maximum input pressure of 220 bar
for the Nord Stream pipelines system no intermediate compression is needed to transport gas over a distance of more
than 1200 km. Because shore pipelines are usually operated under pressure much more than 100 bar, much more
compressor stations will be needed to provide normal operation, therefore, fuel gas consumption will be increased. So,
CO2 emissions at Nord Stream pipeline operation will be less compared to a shore pipeline.
LNG transport
LNG transports are markedly less energy-efficient and involve higher carbon emissions than an offshore pipeline. The
difficult LNG production process includes gas liquefaction at high pressure in departure point, use of special vehicles
with the following regasification. All stages of the process involve significant energy losses and carbon emissions.
Analysis shows that a pipeline link from the Murmansk province where the Shtokman gas will be landed will involve
fewer energy losses and lower carbon emissions than transportation by LNG tanker to the North German coast. The
same comparative benefits of pipeline transmission over LNG transport also apply to a subsea link to North Germany
from Vyborg on Russia's Baltic coast. Planned transportation through Nord Stream pipeline substitution to LNG tanker
transportation means 600 to 700 trips yearly. Baltic water area will be severely affected, taking into consideration not
only carbon emissions, but also noise and other impacts.
Moreover, in a 2007 statement the European Commission observed that "completion of various LNG terminals
encountering significant delays" referring to TEN-E Priority Projects that are at least in the planning stage.45. In the
statement the construction complexity of additional LNG terminals which development has not currently started is
underlined.

pp. 53

(c)
Other energy sources
Renewable energy sources

By 2025 the European Union expects the Europe-wide share of renewable energy to be 11% of the primary energy
mix46. From an environmental point of view, renewable energy is a preferred option. However, the projects of use of
renewable energy sources can not provide for achieving the main goal of the project development, because their share in
energy mix remains very little. To replace the 55 bcm of gas to be provided via the Nord Stream pipeline, 240,000 wind
mills would have to be built, or approximately 90,000 to 100,000 square kilometres of corn fields would have to be
added for bio ethanol production. So, the projects of use of renewable energy sources cannot be regarded as alternatives
to the introduced project.
Fossil fuels
Natural gas creates 30 50% less pollution and greenhouse gas emissions than other fossil fuels such as coal and oil, as
natural gas has a higher hydrogen-carbon ratio and a clean combustion process. Therefore, use of gas impacts the
environment less than use of other fossil fuels. Satisfaction of needs for energy by use of other fossil fuels with nonrealisation of Nord Stream project would mean construction of 55 additional coal power plants or use of 150 additional
tankers per year in the Baltic Sea.
Further increase in the demand for natural gas is expected, especially against the background of the implementation of
the targets determined by the European Council in March 2007 for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions by 20%
by the year 2020 47. Projects used fossil fuels cause more negative impact on the environment than Nord Stream project
so they cannot regarded as its alternative.
Nuclear energy
An increased use of nuclear energy as an alternative to the use of natural gas might be an option if the long term supply
of natural gas through existing infrastructure proves to be less than the demand. Satisfaction of needs for energy by use
of nuclear energy with non-realisation of Nord Stream project would mean construction of 23 additional nuclear power
plants. Because of long nuclear power plants construction time covering the import gap in 2025 by nuclear energy is
practically impossible.
45
European commission: Report from the Commission to the European Council and the European Parliament: Priorities consolidation plan, p. 11.
European Commission: European energy and Transport. Trends to 2030. Update 2007, p. 96.
47
http://ec.europa.eu/environment/etap/agenda_en.htm#4 (consulted 19 October 2007)
46

pp. 54

In addition, use of nuclear energy has a number of environmental shortcomings. On the one hand nuclear power
generation has a positive effect on CO2 emissions. On the other hand, taking into account remaining uncertainty of
long-term influence48, electricity generation on nuclear power plants cause more negative impact on the environment
than Nord Stream project. Additionally it can be observed that the future use of nuclear energy is heavily challenged in
many countries of the European Union by public pressure. E.g. Germany has committed itself not to build any new
nuclear power plant and step-by-step to replace existing nuclear power plants by using other sources of energy. So, the
projects of use of nuclear energy cannot be regarded as alternatives to the introduced project.
The Nord Stream project offers distinct advantages in terms CO2 emissions compared to onshore routes and LNG
transport. LNG is method of natural gas transport connected with the most intensive carbon emissions. In contrast,
transferring gas in a submarine pipeline is one of the most efficient and safe ways to transport energy. In this respect, its
impacts on marine flora and fauna must be compared in the context of use of natural gas instead of other fossil fuels.
Taking into account that the construction of an offshore pipeline through the Baltic Sea is considered to be the
environmentally most favourable option for increasing the natural gas transportation capacity into the EU, and
considering that withdrawing from increase of import capacity into the EU is not a viable option, the following can be
concluded: Apart from renewable energy, any other projects aiming to supply the EU with required energy sources,
would result in more harmful effects on the environment.
1.3.6. Conclusion
Non-realisation of Nord Stream pipeline system providing delivery of 55 bcm per year that accounts over 25% of EU
additional gas import needs would seriously threaten EU energy supply security.
48
The Nord Stream pipeline system is an integral element of the TEN-E priority projects that aim at securing the
EU's gas supply.
E.g., uranium mining, safety issues and nuclear waste issues.

pp. 55

1.4.
The Nord Stream pipeline will connect the EU with the world's largest known natural gas reserves.
Nord Stream offshore pipeline is the environmentally most favourable option for increasing the natural gas
transportation capacity into the EU.
Compared with other gas transportation projects into the EU, the Nord Stream project is at a very advanced
stage of technical design and planning. It may be finished and put into operation in terms to help meet the EU's
growing demand for gas. Therefore, the Nord Stream pipeline is of major importance for meeting EU gas
demand as it will increase in the coming years.
Description and analysis of main alternatives
At preliminary stages of the Nord Stream Project development and early stages of EIA the following alternatives and
subalternatives of construction of the pipeline route design.
1.4.1. Zero alternative renouncing from planned activity
At not constructing the new natural gas pipelines from Russia to EEC countries no direct environmental impacts would
take place. Baltic Sea ecosystem condition remains unchanged in comparison to to the current state. However, it should
be assumed that enouncing from planned activity will have indirect environmental effects for Western Europe, as
foreseeable scarcity in gas supply unavoidably brings appropriate increase in the total import and consumption of oil. It
should be noted that petroleum and petroleum products burning is accompanied with considerable pollutant emissions
into atmosphere comparing with natural gas burning, and oil extraction, transportation and storage are fraught with
danger of its spill and appropriate negative impacts for ground and water ecosystems. In addition, failures connected
with use of petroleum products are over two orders lower for human life and health than failures connected with
transport use of natural gas. So renouncing from planned activity will in reality have negative effect for Europe
environment and population, although its scale quantitative estimation is difficult.
It may be expected that not building the Pipeline will also have negative socioeconomic impacts: subsequent oil and
other energy carriers prices grow (with appropriate consequences for national economics of all the countries importers),
growth of economical and subsequently political dependence of European countries from petroleum exporting
countries, first of all - from Middle East countries.

pp. 56

1.4.2. Using tankers to transport liquefied natural gas

As alternative of natural gas pipeline transporting is transport of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) which worldwide
popularity grows during past decades. LNG tanker transport obvious advantage is ability of accumulation of natural gas
considerable stores in relatively compact reservoirs (both in exporters and importers countries), gas supply
diversification, maneuverability of export-import currents depending on market conditions. From other hand, LNG
tanker transport is much more expensive than natural gas pipeline transport, therewith tankers are dangerous
manufacturing entity, risk of incidents with tankers is higher and consequences for humans and environment are larger
than in pipelines incidents. The last is of particular concern in Baltic Sea environmental conditions which has highly
trafficked shipping routes (especially in Gulf of Finland), high density of oil terminals and large volumes of oil tanker
transport. Construction of terminals for LNG shipment and reception and grows of tanker fleet may have highly
negative impact to Baltic sea environment.
1.4.3. Onshore pipeline

Different versions of gas pipeline laying to Germany overland Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Byelorussia, Poland are
repeatedly investigated last years. Positive aspects of onshore pipeline are less expensive maintenance and better
repairability. However, whatever specific routes, all of onshore versions have several negative consequences:
lead to increase of gas price for user because of necessity to pay for transit to the countries through which
territories the pipelines shall be built;
need transfer of territories, including agricultural and forest;
pass through the infrastructure objects numerous in Europe (highways, railways, pipelines,
telecommunications, high-voltage lines etc.), that both overburdens design, construction and increases risk of
incidents;
pass through the numerous water obstacles - rivers flowing in Eastern Europe mainly from south to north and
flowing into the Baltic Sea, increasing risk of pollution during construction not only the sea but also rivers
around it.
pass through the densely populated areas that identifies special heaviness of consequences in case of incidents
with gas ignition (in case of fire and explosion);

pp. 57

pass near borders of specially protected natural territories;

badly protected from unauthorized access to them.
Thus, negative environmental and economic effects from laying the pipeline onshore probably exceed positive ones and
make prefer sea version of the pipeline.
1.4.4. Offshore pipeline route options
Economically sea pipelines are more expensive during construction, but cost of gas for user proves to be lower than in
case of onshore transportation because of absence of expenses for gas transition payment. In case of sea pipelines
incidents risk for human life and health is not high especially if gas pipeline landfalls are situated in sparsely populated
area or protected from unauthorised access.
When chosing the alternative routes for the offshore part of the Nord Stream gas pipeline the following borders and
modes were considered:
of territorial Sea and exclusive economic zones of Baltic region countries;
of national and international level specially protected natural territories and their protective zones;
of restricted nature use zones, valuable and vulnerable land and sea areas;
of existing cables, pipelines, wind mills;
of main shipping lanes;
of main fisheries;
of military practice areas, mine lines, possible dumpsites of explosive and chemical weapon.
On the basis of these assessments, the principal pipeline route was chosen, and for its implementation Nord Stream AG
was established.
1.4.5. Russian sector alternatives of Nord Stream pipeline
Within the Russian territorial Sea and exclusive economic zone three landfall points were considered: Portovaya Bay,
surroundings of Primorsk and Vysotsk ports. Two last places are preferable for construction organization (availability
of developed infrastructure, including maritime one), however, intense shipping and especially presence of oil terminal
in Primorsk make to prefer Portovaya Bay. Further in Gulf of Finland route variants are limited by presence of specially
protected natural territories (Berezovye Islands nature reserve ('zakaznik') and proposed Ingermanlandsky Strict Nature
Reserve to the North, Vyborgsky zakaznik' in the South) and deposits of iron-manganese concretions to the North and
South of chosen pipeline route.

pp. 58

At the stage of investment substantiation the different route options in Gulf of Finland were investigated, and the route
north of Gogland (fig.1.4-1) was recommended to detailed design in environmental, technological and economical
criteria. Correctness of the chosen path was confirmed by State Environmental Assessments by Federal Service on
Environmental, Technological and Nuclear Control (Order No. 183 of 23 March 2007 "On approval the conclusion of
expert commission of SEECS of material "Additional correction of substantiation of investment of construction of the
North-European gas pipeline taking into account increase in export volumes of gas up to 55 bcm a year") and Federal
Service on the Supervision in the Area of Natural Resources Use (Order No. 187 of 26 June 2007 "On approval the
conclusion of expert commission of SEECS of material "Additional correction of substantiation of investment of
construction of the North-European gas pipeline taking into account increase in export volumes of gas up to 55 bcm a
year (Offshore Section, Russian Sector)"). However, despite the Environmental Assessments of Russian Federation that
approved northern route around the island of Gogland , taking into account heightened public interest to this issue
worldwide and in its commitment to unconditioned objectivity of documentation in support, Nord Stream AG took own
detailed studies of suitability of south and north alternatives of routes around the island of Gogland; for this purpose
comprehensive studies of archival and scientific data were performed and expeditionary researches on south and north
versions of routes around the island of Gogland. The findings of the alternative comparison are presented in Table 1.41.
Table 1.4-1
Environmental and other

constraints
Length of the pipeline
North to Gogland
~ 20 km shorter than south
alternative
Route alternatives
South to Gogland
Seabed morphology
Complex morphology, needed

relief corrections
Complex morphology, needed relief

corrections
Closed marine areas, military

interests zones
Military training practice areas

and exclusion zones are situated
to the south of route
Military training practice areas and

exclusion zones are situated to the north
and south of route in close vicinity
Underwater infrastructure and areas

with extraction of raw materials
Intersection with 1 telecom cable.

Extraction of raw materials is not
performed
4 cables crossed. In close vicinity of the

route iron-manganese concretions
extraction is performed
Ship traffic (fig. 1.4-1*)
Sailing routes (VTS)
Sailing routes (VTS) in

pp. 59

Environmental and other

constraints
North to Gogland
far from pipeline route
Route alternatives
South to Gogland
in close vicinity to pipeline route
Specially protected natural

territories (fig. 1.4-2)
No SPNA in vicinity to the route
Staging sites and migration routes

of birds (fig. 1.4-3-1.4-5)
Near the route there is no staging

sites and mass gatherings during
migration
Sea mammals breeding grounds

and migration routes (fig. 1.4-61.4-8)
Seals appear in the route area

rarely
The route crosses migration routes of

ringed seal
Spawning grounds
No spawning grounds in vicinity

to the route
Sandy and pebbly grounds with
low percentage of pollutants.
Secondary seabed pollution
during seabed correction is
unlikely.
The route crosses spawning grounds of

sprat
There is no reliable mass data about
pollution of seabed sediments, although
Sevmorgeo data indicate rather high
level of pollution with zinc and lead.
Pollution of seabed sediments
Near the route areas of proposed

Ingermanlandsky Strict Nature Reserve
are situated
Near the route there are protected areas
with mass birds staging sites. In the
southern part of Gogland island the birds
rest during the flight
figures are taken from Nature conservation atlas of the Russian section of the Gulf of Finland by Baltic nature
foundation of ROO St. Petersburg Naturalists Society, World Wildlife Fund.
Fig.1.4-1.
Alternatives of the pipeline route (to the north and south of Gogland island).

pp. 60

Fig. 1.4-1.
Sailing routes

pp. 61

Fig.1.4-2.
Specially protected natural territories

pp. 62

Fig. 1.4-3.
Flight routes and main staging places of swans in autumn

pp. 63

1.4-4.
Baltic winter bird fauna representatives distribution in spring-summe r (breeding) period

pp. 64

Fig. 1.4-5.
Traces of terrestrial birds spring migration

pp. 65

Fig. 1.4-6.
Baltic ringed seal rendezvous positions at herds and its migration routes

pp. 66

Fig. 1.4-7.
Grey seal distribution and its migration routes

pp. 67

Fig. 1.4-8.
Distribution of species of amphibians, reptiles and mammals included in Red Books

pp. 68
The comparative analysis of the two alternatives shows that the route north of Gogland is preferable due to less length,
distance from environmental sensitive areas, military practice areas, shipping routes. The north version was taken by
Nord Stream AG as basic one.
In 2005-2007 the 2 km wide corridor along the north route alternative was surveyed very closely. The results of
geophysical, geotechnical, metocean, engineering and environmental investigations are shown in Appendices to this
Project. Routes of two pipelines were chosen in the margins of surveyed corridor according to the following criteria:
Unevenness of sea bed and need for relief correction works (span correction, pipelines stability
ensuring etc.)
Presence of identified and unidentified potentially hazardous facilities (munitions);
Presence of wrecks and other potential cultural heritage sites;
Minimal length.
Route optimization involved several stages. At Conceptual Design stage first of all requirement of pipeline the route
minimization was taken into account. The next stage of optimization permitted to minimize the magnitude of necessary
excavation works (rock berms for construction of supports), exclude dredging (except for nearshore section). At the last
stage the route was corrected according to recommendations of archaeologists and requirements of Leningrad Region
Culture Committee to keep the distance 50-100 m from the found cultural heritage (wrecks, rigging parts). Thus, the
route presented in the Project is the safest for environment and cultural heritage albeit economically less advantageous.
The significant number of technological alternatives was also considered, comparative assessment of their potential
environmental impact was performed. The most environmentally significant are parameters of the ditch excavated for
pipeline laying in the shallow near coast area in Portovaya Bay because water pollution by suspended matters and
appropriate damage to water biota including fish stocks depends on volumes of soil developed. As a result of
engineering decisions optimization and ice gouging detailed analysis in the above area the near-shore trench length was
shortened from 5 km initially accepted in the Conceptual design up to ~ 1.4 km that minimized damage to the
environment.

pp. 69
1.5.
An overview of technical solutions
Detailed description of gas pipeline design, methods of construction, commissioning, operation features, methods of
decommissioning and removal are listed in Volume 1 "Explanatory Generic Report" and appropriate sections of this
technical and economic feasibility study. A brief description of used materials, technologies, designs is given below.
Two pipelines performance is equal to 55 bcm per year.
Nord Stream raw materials base at first stage will be Nadym-Pur-Tazovsky region reserves (Yamal-Nenets
Autonomous Area), later - reserves of Yamal Peninsula, the Ob-Taz Bay and Shtokman gas field (Barents Sea).
Contents of transported gas: methane (98.185%), ethane (0.6848%), other hydrocarbons (0.2789%), nitrogen
(0.8176%), carbon dioxide (0.0339%).
Construction of the pipeline will start at 2010 by preparatory works. End of construction - December 2012.
Project service life of the pipeline is at least 50 years.
1.5.1.
Nord Stream routing (offshore section)
Nord Stream pipeline will run from Portovaya Bay near Vyborg on Russias Baltic coast through the Gulf of Finland
and the Baltic Sea to Lubmin in the Greifswald area on the northern coast of Germany. The route proposed by the
project developer is shown on fig. 1.5-1. The red lines indicate the exclusive economic zones of Baltic Sea Region
countries.
Common length of subsea pipeline system is more than 1220 km. The system consists of two pipelines laid on the
seabed. The nominal distance between the two pipelines will be about 100 m, but that distance could be changed
depending generally on seabed topography.
The Nord Stream offshore pipeline will be connected to a compressor station at the Russian landfall in Vyborg district,
Leningrad region. Likewise, the pipelines will be connected to a receiving terminal at Greifswalder Bodden in
Germany. The terminal will be equipped with a metering station as well as pressure-regulation facilities to ensure
interface with the German gas network.

pp. 70
Fig. 1.5-1.
Proposed pipeline route
The choice of preferred subsea route between the specified coastal points was based on investigations of several
versions of the route. There were the following choice criteria:
minimization of total length of the route. Generally it allows minimize the term of seabed
continual loading and decreases the cost of comissioning and operational expenses. In addition, it
permits to maximize the general project specifications of the pipeline system;
avoidance of particularly important areas. These are nature reserves areas, areas with sensitive
flora and fauna, cultural heritage areas etc.;
avoidance of areas where other sea operations may be crossed and interfere with installation and
operation of the pipelines. These are areas of fishing, raw material extraction, zones of military
operations, offshore wind farms or established ships anchoring areas;
compliance with the conditions on shipping traffic directions. It minimizes the risks of pipelines
damage caused by sea ships (dropped anchors, submerged or grounding ships etc.);

pp. 71
avoidance of areas with unsuitable conditions of seabed and|or bathymetric data. Such areas may
destabilize the pipelines and increase the need of trenching and|or pipelines support using rock
placement or bunds;
to the maximum comply with routes of existing cables.
The route passes through the Exclusive Economic Zones (EEZ) of four EU member states: Finland, Sweden, Denmark
and Germany. In Denmark and Germany the pipelines route passes through coastal territorial sea. In addition, the route
passes through EEZs and territorial sea of Russia. In table 1.5-1 the pipeline length is shown.
Table 1.5-1
Nord Stream pipeline length, in Exclusive Economic Zones and territorial sea
Classification
Section length, Length through the
Total length, km
Route C10.3 W
km
country, km
Area of land
1,5
1,5
Territorial sea
122,2
124,0
125,5
Russia
EEZ
1,8
EEZ
369,3
369,3
492,6
Finland
Sweden
Denmark
Germany
EEZ
EEZ
Territorial sea
EEZ
Territorial sea
Area of land
Territorial sea
Area of land
506,4
46,1
89,8
28,6
55,9
0,5
55,8
0,5
506,4
135,9
999,0
1135,0
84,4
1163,5
1219,4
0,5
Area of
land|sea
1,5
1219,4
0,5
1220,4
0, 5
0,5
Boundaries of OOO Petergaz designing and of Russian sector of Nord Stream pipeline begin from isolation joints
situated at onshore section downstream after protective cranes of Portovaya KP and finish in Baltic Sea by intersection
point with Russian EEZ border. Russian sector of sea pipeline length is equal to 125.5 km.
Position of Russian sector of the pipeline is shown on fig. 1.5-2.

pp. 72
Fig. 1.5-2.
Position of Russian sector of Nord Stream pipeline within the Russian territorial Sea (red line border of territorial Sea, blue line - proposed pipeline)
1.5.2.
Pipeline design features
The pipelines system is designed ain accordance with Det Norske Veritas requirements, generally according to DNV
OS-F101 Submarine Pipeline Systems - with necessary adjustments to accommodate national regulations and rules on
agreement with the government standardization authorities.
The Nord Stream Project will consist of two parallel pipelines of steel pipes with total capacity of 55 billion m3 of
natural gas p.a.
The pipelines design life is equal to 50 years of operation.
The main characteristics of the pipelines are shown in Table 1.5-2.

pp. 73
Table 1.5-2
Parameters
Quantity of pipelines
Constant inner diameter
Wall thickness
Pipe designation
Steel strength grade by API 5L
Yield stress
Ultimate stress
Antifriction coating
Anticorrosion coating
coating thickness
density
Field joint coating
Weight Coating
coating thickness
Pipeline design within marine section

Units
Designations
items
mm
mm
2
1153
41.0 from KO3+56 to KP 0.5
34.6 from KP 0.5 and to the end of designed section
SAWL 485 I DF
70
485
570
based on epoxy resin
shop-built, 3-layer polyethylene
4,2
890
MPa
MPa
mm
[kg/m3]
-
Multicomponent liquid isolation coating

Continuous concrete solidification
60
mm
80
-
density
kg/m3
Eastern pipeline KP 0 - KP 79.53

Western pipeline KP 0 - KP 78.58
Eastern pipeline KP 79.53 - KP 123.984
Western pipeline KP 78.58 - KP 123.452
3040
Distance between the two pipelines is generally equal to 100 m. Maximal distance is 1568 m - in 84.5, minimal
distance is 20 m - in 0.
Quantity of route angles of rotation - 36 for western pipeline and 34 for eastern pipeline. Route angles of rotation are
performed as elastic bending with radius 2800 to 7000 m.
The Nord Stream pipelines will be constructed of long-length steel line pipe sections that will be welded together. To
reduce the risk of pipe break in certain places the protective armature (tube clamps) will be installed.
The Nord Stream project will use a double submerged arc, single seam, longitudinally welded SAWL 485 I DF grade
carbon steel line pipe. The pipelines will be assembled of pipe joints of 12.2 m medium length and connected by
welding. The wall thickness of the pipes is 26.8 - 41.0 mm

pp. 74
To reduce the risk of longitudinal pipe break the antideformative rings will be installed on the areas where the pipeline
lays at greater depths. Antideformative rings of the pipes (BA) are made of the same alloyed steel as the pipelines
themselves and their length is the same as the pipe sections. The total length of areas with antideformative rings is 240
km. Proposed interval is 80 sections (about 1000 m).
Welding of linear part of the pipelines will be performed using consumables similar and compatible to the composition
of the line-pipe material . The welding seams properties will be in accordance with minimal grade of steel, similar to the
pipeline steel.
The pipeline internal coating will be made of material based on epoxy resins. The coating is intended to decrease
hydraulic friction and increase the pipeline capacity. The coating thickness is equal to 70 +/- 20 m and it covers the
full length of pipe joint except for bitumen 30 +/- 10 mm at the pipes ends.
To protect the pipeline from corrosion the external coating will be applied. As anticorrosion coating three-layer
polyethylene (3LPE) will be used as shown on Fig. 1.5-3.
Fig. 1.5-3.
Principle of external anticorrosion coating
Three-layer coating consists of inner coating of epoxy composition (dark green), an adhesive layer in the middle (light
green) and a top layer of polyethylene (black).
The pipelines will have outside coating of concrete reinforced with iron ore. The concrete coating will be applied over
the anticorrosion coating (fig. 1.5-4) and will give the pipelines sufficient weight to remain stable on the seabed both
during construction works and in regular operation. The concrete consists of a mix of cement, water and aggregate
(inert solid bodies such as crushed rock, sand, gravel). The concrete coating will be reinforced with steel bars with 6.0
mm minimum diameter welded to the frameworks or with metal lath with 2.0 mm minimum wire diameter. Iron ore
aggregate will be added to increase the density of the weight coating.

pp. 75
Fig. 1.5-4.
Concrete coating on top of the three-layer anticorrosion coating
Concrete coating has the following characteristics:

concrete thickness 60-110 mm;
coating density 3.040-3.400 kg/m3;
water absorption 2% by weight;
length of shear plane 400 mm 10 mm.
Internal pipeline coating is applied by the pipeline producers, external concrete weight coating is applied at the coating
plants located around the Baltic Sea. After that the pipes are joined by welding. After being connected by welding the
field joints are screened using non-destructive testing. Coating ((FJC) is applied all around the field joints to fill the
space between concrete coating on each side of the field joint and to protect the joint against corrosion.
The inside parts of the pipes, compensators and vertical columns are coated at the manufacturing sites, the exterior is
coated at the coastal plants. After that the pipes are pulled to the offshore construction site for hyperbaric welding. After
pipe welding the welds are screened using non-destructive testing. There will be no coating at the hyperbaric field joint
locations, as anticorrosion protection is deemed to be sufficient.

pp. 76
Figure: 1.5-5.
Field joint without coating. Concrete coating is visible
Cathodic protection of the offshore pipelines will be made of zinc anodes (in the coastal area it will be a combination of
zinc and aluminium anodes). The anodes, approximately 1 m long, will be located according to specification (depending
on the weight coating width as well as the calculations of the cathodic protection). Figure 1.5-6 shows a standard anode
mounted on a pipeline.
Figure: 1.5-6. Sacrificial anode mounted on concrete-coated pipe

Estimated required materials are shown in table 1.5-3.

pp. 77
Table 1.5-3
Estimated required materials for two pipelines per 1 km of the pipeline
Density
Total weight (in Weight per 1 km of
Component
[kg/m3]
tonnes)
pipeline (in tonnes)
Steel (pipeline and anti-deformation coils)
7850
2186000
~ 1800
Internal epoxy coating
1400
431
~ 0.35
External anti-corrosion coating
30270
~ 25
Concrete coating
- iron ore
~1726000
~ 1425
- concrete (cement and aggregate)
~ 740000
~ 610
Cathodic protection
- zinc anodes
1602,981
~ 12,8
- aluminium anodes
8,378
~ 0,07
Field joint coating
118500
~ 1 00
1.5.3. Methods of construction works
Large-scale construction of the sub-sea section requires reliable coastal supply bases. These include: storage units for
pipes without coating and with anticorrosion/weight coating, coating equipment and coating materials, as well as
general storage units for providing consumables to vessels that lay submarine pipelines, e.g. spare details, fuel, tools,
section isolation valves, flanges and fittings, rigging (tackles, wire, anchors etc.).
The required logistic support of the construction works and the number of coastal supply bases were investigated in
2007. The preferred location sites are given below. Construction of the supply bases will naturally require national
authorization documents.
The pipeline sections with pre-coating that were produced at the existing plants in Russia and Germany and/or Japan
will be transported to the plants in Kotka, Finland, and Sassnitz-Mukran, Germany, for concrete weight coating with
addition of iron ore.
Weight-coating plants will be also used as open storage facilities, however, for logistical reasons weight-coated pipe
joints for construction of the middle section of pipelines will be transported to interim stockyards by coastal vessels (see
fig. 1.5-7). The supposed location sites of the interim stockyards are as follows:

pp. 78
Hanko area, Finland

Slite (Gotland), Sweden
Karlshamn, Sweden
However the final decision on the stockyards location are to be agreed between Nord Stream and the contractor:
Figure: 1.5-7. An example of pipes storing at the stockyard

Two pipelines will be laid and comissioned on the seabed separately. The width of the seabed corridor located directly
under the active pipelines, including the dredging area, if any, will amount to 100 - 150 m. However in areas where the
distance between the two pipelines will exceed 100 m, the corridor will be expanded accordingly.
Both pipelines will be laid through the certain areas for subsequent tie-ins. Sub-sea pipelines will be divided in four
submarine areas and two coastal areas which will total in six construction and mounting areas per pipeline. These zones
are displayed in Table 1.5-4.
Table 1.5-4
Pipeline construction areas
Area
LRF
1
2-1
2-2
3
LFG
Description
Landfall site in Russia, crossing in Russia and nearshore
section.
Gulf of Finland
North-eastern part of the route
Central part of the route
South-western part of the route
Landfall site in Germany, crossing in Germany and
nearshore section
Start, RP
0
Finish, RP
5
5
300
557
800
1194/1154*
300
557
800
1194/1154*
1221

pp. 79
* for the eastern pipeline

Based on construction methods, the sector in Russia is divided into three subsections:
Coastline section
Coastline intersection point
Deep-water section
The pipe-laying technology in the onshore area is described in Volume 7. Book 2. "Project for construction arrangement
for onshore section of the pipeline" and Volume 8. "Environmental Protection" of the Book 2 "Onshore Section".
1.5.3.1. Crossing of the shore line
The coastline area is stretched from the dragging board KO 3+56 to KP 1.5. The length of the western section is 1826
m, the length of the eastern section is 1828 m.
The Russian nearshore section belongs to the ice gouge area which is the main criterion when trenching the pipeline.
Taking into account the size of the sub-sea ridges the impact of the ice features is supposed to reach 14 m deep.
According to the project plans, the pipeline will be trenched throughout the section to the depth of 1.2-2.0 m from the
upper side of the pipeline concrete coating to the seabed surface. Each pipeline is laid in the separate trench 4.4 m wide.
The distance between the pipeline axes - 20 meters.
Prior to commencing construction of the pipelines 2 dams (one dam along the outer side of each pipeline) will be built
in shallow areas to protect the nearshore section of the prepared trench from the washing due to wave impact. These
installations are also used to develop the trench in the coastline area by means of land based equipment (dredgers from
the dams) that will allow to significantly speed up the trench development in the near-coast section.
The trench will be developed using:
onshore equipment from the dams (from coastline part to the depth of 2 m, overall length approximately 500 m);
back-hoe dredger mounted on water craft (from the depth of 2 m to the depth of 5 m);
scoop dredge "At Your Service" () with a dredger Liebherr P994 (from the depth of 5 m to
the depth of 14 m).
A portion of the developed material will be used for construction of the dams maintaining operation of the land based
equipment. The main portion of the developed material will be stored along the trench which will minimize
environmental impact due to redeposition of the sediment.

pp. 80
Crossing of the shore will be carried out by pulling the pipeline section from the PLB to the shore using the land based
winch. This will be done using the second-generation PLB with the shallow draft allowing to start operation at the depth
of 5 m.
After pulling the pipe to the shore the second-generation lay barge (PLB II) will continue laying the pipeline by
common S-lay method through the end of the section (1.8 km, isobath - 14 m). Upon arriving to the specified stake the
end of the pipeline will be lowered onto the seabed. All bevelling, welding, quality control and field joint coating
operations will be carried out from PLB.
After completing the pipelay activities the trench will be backfilled. The trench will be backfilled with the previously
excavated soil and dams material using dredgers. The offshore section of the trench will be backfilled with the stone
and gravel mix using dredgers from the water craft and an opening-bottom self-propelled barge or a barge with a lateral
fault.
1.5.3.2.
Laying of the main offshore section of the pipeline
Pipelaying operations in the main offshore area more then 14 m deep consist in manufacturing and laying on seabed of
the pipeline 244.5 m long, including the first section (122 km) and the second section (122.5 km).
In this area the pipeline is laid on the seabed surface without burial. The pipeline laying is carried out from the lay
barge.
The pipes will be laid by the common S-method using dynamically positioned lay barges or anchored vessels with the
support of anchor-handling tug, pipe-haul vessels and, typically, a survey vessel. Individual pipe sections of
approximately 12 m length will be delivered to a pipe-laying barge, where they will be assembled into a continuous
pipe string and lowered onto the seabed (examples of such lay barges are given later in this chapter). The processes
onboard the pipe-laying barge include the following steps, which are carried out continuously:
pipes welding;
non-destructive testing of welded joints;
preparation of a field joint;
laying of pipes onto the seabed.
Welding of the new pipes to the continuous pipe string will be carried out onboard by semiautomatic or automatic
methods. Example welding of a field joint is shown on Fig. 1.5-8.
The welds are tested by means of non-destructive testing. Non-destructive testing has been always carried out by X-ray
method. Lately, this method was replaced by automatic ultrasonic testing (AUT) - a higher-quality and safer method of
non-destructive examination of the Nord Stream pipelines. AUT will be used to locate, measure and record defects. The
criteria for the accepting of welding defects have been developed before the start of the construction and will be passed
for approval to the appointed certification bodies.

pp. 81
Fig. 1.5-8.
Welding (left) and automatic ultrasonic testing (right)

of a field joint
Upon completion of welding and AUT the field joints will be protected with anticorrosion coating. Multiple options of
anticorrosion coatings were investigated. One of the options is a heat-shrink sleeve, when a thin heat-shrink sleeve
made of polyolefin (or polyethylene) is applied directly onto the field joint. Polyurethane foam is poured into the
polyethylene form around the joints to fill the spaces between concrete coatings from each side of the field joint.
Upon completion of the sections tie-in process the vessel will move on for the distance equal to the length of one or two
pipeline sections (12.2 or 24.4 m). After this a new pipeline section will be connected to the stalk, as described above.
As the vessel moves on, the continuous pipe stalk is located at the rear end of the vessel in the water. The stalk is
supported by the stinger (floating stairs) 40-100 m long which is situated at the back and below the level of the vessel.
The stinger is designed to control and support the pipeline configuration. The stalk running from the stinger to the point
of contact with the seabed is held continuously under tension to avoid the risk of longitudinal cracking and damage to
the pipelines.
The force required to forward the lay barge is provided by anchors, or by steerable thruster, in case of using the
dynamically positioned vessel (DP). The average lay rate typically amounts to 2-3 km per day depending on weather
conditions.
In order to minimize obstructions during the pipes laying, a special area will be created around the lay barge from the
navigation side, within the distance of 2500-3000 m from the location of the furthermost anchor. Unauthorized ships,
including fishing vessels, will not be allowed to the area.

pp. 82
Laying of subsea pipeline is supposed to be carried out by several vessels of various purposes to support construction
works. One or two deep-water lay vessels (stationary anchor-positioned vessels (DP) or DP mono-hull vessels) will be
used to lay both pipelines. In nearshore areas of Russia and Germany shallow-water lay barges will be used.
According to the Project, an anchored lay vessel Saipem Castoro Sei will be used as a deep-water lay vessel (Fig. 1.5-9,
left). The vessel is positioned by anchoring vessels, which handle the anchors attached directly to wenches and
controlled by means of cables.
In shallow waters the pipes could be laid by Saipem Castoro Due - a second-generation flat-bottomed, anchorpositioned vessel (Fig. 1.5-9, right). The positioning is carried out by means of anchoring system controlled from the
anchored vessel.
Fig. 1.5-9.
Castoro Sei deep-water lay vessel (left) and Castoro II shallow-water lay vessel (right). Photo by
Saipem S.p.A.
The anchor-handling vessels are generally quite large, with overall length of 130200 m. Additionally, a lay barge
requires using of one supply vessel. Anchors positioning and supply will be carried out by a multipurpose DP vessel, for
example, Saipem Far Sovereign (Fig. 1.5-10).

pp. 83
Fig. 1.5-10.
Multipurpose supply vessel Far Sovereign and an anchor-positioning vessel. Photo by Saipe m
S.p.A.
A typical supply vessel used during the precommissioning phase is shown on Fig. 1.5-11. A vessel Saipem Bar
Protector is classified as a diving support vessel (DSV) and as such could be used for underwater tie-in activities.
Fig. 1.5-11.
The Saipe m Bar Protector is a multipurpose, dynamically-positioned supply vessel. Photo by

Saipem S.p.A.
1.5.3.3. Free-span correction

Laying the pipeline through uneven sea bed results in forming of free spans. In cases when pipeline will be exposed to
unacceptable forces and (or) turbulent vibrations, the free-span correction will take place, which involves construction
of supports made of stone-gravel material of estimated size (Fig. 1.5-12).

pp. 84
Fig. 1.5-12.
Free-span correction.
The unacceptable free spans removal is carried out by means of rock dumping, e.g. filling with rock. At the same time,
the backfilling of additional gravel supports is carried out, thus reducing the length of a free span. Filling operations in
consistency with Project data, will be carried out in stages. During the first stage, gravel supports will be constructed to
provide static stabilization before the laying of eastern and western pipeline sections. During the second stage, gravel
will be placed to provide static stabilization after the laying of both pipeline sections. During the third stage, gravel will
be placed to provide dynamic stabilization after the pipelines laying. During the fourth stage, gravel will be placed to
minimize lateral bend after the pipelines laying, and during the fifth stage, gravel will be placed to minimize vertical
bend after the pipelines laying.
Table 1.5-5 shows the amount of stone-gravel material required for free-span correction. According to the Project,
stone-gravel material will be transported from Erkila quarry located in Vyborg (managing company - "Vozrozhdenie Nerud").
Table 1.5-5
Stone-gravel material volume (m3)
Pipeline
Gravel support types
Eastern
Western
Pre-lay installation
30650,6
30088
Post-lay installation (static loading criterion)
42903
29783
Post-lay installation (fatigue destruction criterion)
5538
5043
Post-lay installation (bend buckling criterion)
668424
681959
Total
747515,6
746873

pp. 85
Figure 1.5-13 shows special vessel for rock dumping and fall pipe, used for rock dumping at the seabed.
Figure: 1.5-13. Flexible fall pipe vessel (FFPV) (left) and fall pipe for distribution of rock material around the
pipeline close-up
1.5.3.4.
Cable Crossings
In Russian section Nord Stream route crosses 3 cables. During pipeline construction measures in order to ensure
crossings safety will be taken. There are different options to secure crossings:
Cutting the cable and taking it beyond pipeline corridor in case the cable is not used and owner's
permission has been obtained.
Cable burial with a water jetting equipment.
Selecting crossing option depends both from individual environment conditions in the crossing point and from crossing
object owner requirements.
1.5.4. Testing and preparation for operation

Shank bore cleaning and pipeline testing are carried out once all construction and installation works in construction
section has been completed.
As there will be two stages of construction of two pipelines in Russian sector, testing also will be carried out in two
steps:
The first phase - testing of both of the landfall areas together with PIG launch chamber, as well as the offshore section
of the western pipeline. Offshore section of the eastern pipeline is laid from the dragging board to KP 5 (seabed depth is
20 m) and closed down temporarily until next construction season. In order to do that it will be dried and filled with
nitrogen.
The second phase/ Completion of construction of offshore eastern pipeline, testing and carrying out of golden weld.
Due to stepwise construction and different design pressure (hence, different testing pressure) whole Nord Stream
pipeline is divided into 5 testing sections:

pp. 86
Section name
Russian onshore section
First offshore section from 0 to 300
Second offshore section from 300 to 800
Third offshore section from 800 to 1200
German onshore section
Design pressure, MPa

22
22
20
17
17
Testing pressure, MPa

24,2
24,2
22
18,7
18,7
Nord Stream onshore testing section (both pipelines) in Russian coast starts from stationary PIG launch chamber and
finishes with temporary PIG reception chamber.
Each offshore section is restricted by temporary chambers of PIG reception and launch.
Testing of western and eastern pipelines in Russian sector will be held in first offshore section (from 0 to 300).
The activities in western and eastern pipelines offshore section are the following:
Flushing, gauging and cleaning of the offshore pipeline shank bore for mechanical impurities
removal;
Offshore pipeline flooding (flooding during flushing and gauging);
Pressure test ((Figure= 1,1 );
Depressurisation;
Water removal from pipe shank bore and flushing from salt;
Drying for irreducible water removal.
Sea water is used for flooding and pressure testing of the whole underwater pipeline. Pressure test water will be
extracted in the vicinity of the Russian sector in Portovaya Bay, Gulf of Finland. After pressure testing the water will be
discharged to Gulf of Finland near 6th isobath in a distance of 750-1000 m from the coastline. Seawater intake and
discharge will be made using pumping station or plough.

pp. 87
Water intakes are equipped with mesh fish-saving constructions in accordance with SNiP 2.06.07-87. During the water
discharged from the pipelines, at Russian coastline will be received 4 pigs for welding (remaining in the pipe after
hyperbaric welding) and 8-10 separator pigs. At receiving of each pig 200 m3 of water is discharged to settling basin for
screening manner (and if necessary for cleaning) before discharge into the sea. The total volume of cleaning water
discharged to settling basin after cleaning is 2,000 m3.
For the first stage of pressure test 1,289,200 m3 of seawater is necessary (water intake from Gulf of Finland).
No freshwater is necessary at the second stage of tests at the Russian coastline, and demand for seawater, and place of
discharge is similar to the first stage (1,289,200 m3 ). Thus, the total volume of seawater necessary for pressure test is
2,578,400 m3.
Cleaning and internally gauging of offshore sections of the pipeline will be made by transiting at least four gauging
pigs.
Flooding will start with the first section (0 - 300). Water will be filled by forcing pumps located at the Russian
coastline area. The vessel located at 300 will control air drain from pipe, arriving of cleaning pigs into underwater
pig receiver at 300 and bypass of cleaning water at the second offshore section. The cleaning water will bypass to
the second offshore section after pig receiving. Then the following 4 pigs will be launched from the underwater
launcher at 300. The second offshore section flooding will be made through the bypass at 300. Then cleaning
pigs will be received at KP 800. Bypass of cleaning water at 800 and pig launching will be made with the help of
the vessel in a similar way. Then the third offshore section will be flooded and pigs will arrive into temporary pig
receiver at 1200. All cleaning water will come to settling basin at German coastline. The total volume of water for
one pipeline cleaning is approximately 6,000 m3.
The uptake of seawater for pressure-test is to occur within the limits of Exclusive Economic Zone of Russian
Federation. Seawater will be taken from 6 m depth approximately 750-1000 m offshore. Water intakes are equipped
with mesh fish-saving constructions in accordance with SNiP 2.06.07-87. Filtered and chemically treated seawater is
used for flooding of offshore section. The total volume of seawater for offshore section flooding is 1,289,200 m3.
For the offshore section pressure increase is used a temporary pumping station located on the dragging border.
Dewatering of the offshore section of the pipeline will be carried out through the use of compressed air from a
temporary compressor station. Compressor station will be located on German landfall area.

pp. 88
Before dewatering of the offshore section several cleaning pigs will be launched to remove sediment (calcium
carbonate) from pipe surface. When taking these pigs at Russian landfall area 200 m3 of water in front of them and
water between them will be discharged to 3,000 m settling basin for analysis and cleaning (if required).
The space between first four separator pigs is filled with fresh water to remove salt from pipe wall, then with air.
Flushing with fresh water is necessary to remove salt from pipe wall. The total volume of water necessary to remove
salt is 3,000 m3. Fresh water filtering level is 50 m, sediment content in water maximum 20 g/m3.
To ensure that the pigs are not blocked and do not leak air, pigs movement speed is 0.5 - 1.0 m/s. All pigs must be
equipped with pig position sensors.
1.5.5. Pipeline operation technologies

Nord Stream AG as owner and operator of the pipeline system, and Gazprom as the owner and supplier of natural gas
transported by pipeline system reached an agreement on natural gas transporting. OAO Gazprom will supply gas to the
entry point in Russia and the company Nord Stream will carry out the transportation and return of the gas to the
receiving terminal in Germany.
Transportation can be defined as a continuous operation of Nord Stream pipeline system to transport natural gas by
pipeline. For reliable and safe achievement of this aim Nord Stream group will communicate with Gazprom on a daily
basis regarding the operation of the entrance compression station and commercial gas accounting and interact with
Wingas regarding the German landfall and the commercial gas accounting at the outlet.
The Nord Stream pipeline system contains high quality control and shutdown devices. Gazprom and Wingas will line
up their plants as required to deliver and receive the daily gas nomination.
Nord Stream, Gazprom, and Wingas will be aware of planned day's volume of gas transported and Nord Stream will
monitor pipeline gas transport to ensure that the pipeline system is operated within its normal operating envelope.
The DNV standard permits the pipeline to be divided into sections with different design pressures and without physical
barriers between the sections, provided that a suitable pressure control system (PCS) is installed. The Nord Stream
pipeline system is divided into three sections:
the Russian landfall at KP 300 220 barg;

pp. 89
from KP 300 to KP 800 - 200 barg;

from KP 800 to Germany landfall (LFG) - 170 barg;
Nord Stream Pressure control system (PCS) consists of a pressure regulating system (PRS) and two control systems of
pressure regulation (CSPR).
These three systems are completely independent and ensure high level of reliability. The Pressure regulation system
(PRS) is designed to ensure that the local design pressure of each pipeline section is not exceeded during normal
operation. Control system of pressure regulation (CSPR-1) and (CSPR-2) is designed to prevent any accidental
exceeding of maximum pressure of each pipeline section.
When a pressure regulating system signals about the approaching to the risk zone, Nord Stream will inform Gazprom
and Wingas and they will undertake necessary reinstatement measures. This will usually mean increasing or decreasing
of gas pressure, or a combination of both actions.
Nord Stream Pressure regulation system (PRS) will automatically decrease pressure level in the pipeline by compressor
station control room.
In an exceptional case, when the pressure regulating system (PRS) will not be able to maintain the pipeline system in
normal operation, Nord Stream control system of pressure regulation will automatically close the pipeline by Nord
Stream emergency shut-down valves.
The headquarters of Nord Stream AG is in Zug, Switzerland. The main control room of the pipeline will be located in
the same headquarters, where monitoring and management of the pipeline will be manned 24 hours per day. Branch
office in Moscow will have any necessary information about monitoring and management. It will operate during normal
working hours.
The Russian onshore section of the Nord Stream pipeline is supported by the following equipment required to ensure
normal pipeline operation: pig launchers to clean and monitor the pipeline; shut-down valves; local operator room
(LOR).
Landfalls in Russia will be regularly surveyed by staff.
Gas transportation control will be carried out remotely by controllers on duty from planned main control room in the
headquarters in Zug. Day and night shifts are planned. The controllers from main control room will maintain pipeline
operation in normal working hours. Procedures for planning and nominating daily transportation volumes, including
intra-day adjustments, will be established in the operating manual. The operating manual will also determine the rules
of everyday communication between Nord Stream, Gazprom and Wingas.

pp. 90
The main service personnel 24 hours per day will be at full readiness for emergency response to unexpected conditions
on the pipeline. Controllers of main control room will mobilize the on-call staff if necessary.
Nord Stream intends to enter into service contracts with the necessary contractors to produce more complex and labourintensive work on the scheduled maintenance of equipment, repair of buildings and equipment malfunctions.
During the operation of pipelines the cleaning is performed to remove the formed liquid sludge. Pigs or "pigs in trains"
will be launched from the inlet point and driven through the pipeline by the gas medium. The frequency with which
these inspections will be required will depend on the quality of gas fed into the pipeline system, and will be adjusted by
Nord Stream as necessary.
Every seven or ten years Nord Stream will carry out a more in-depth examination of the pipeline condition. An
intelligent pig will be sent through all the pipeline system to check for any corrosion or changes in pipeline wall
thickness caused by third party impacts. The principle of detection is based on electromagnetic monitoring of gas
leakages in the longitudinal direction of the pipeline.
Prior to the intelligent pig run, a so-called calliper pig will be propelled through the pipeline in order to ensure the safe
passage of the intelligent pig, particularly through line valves.
Landfall in Russia is a point for pig launcher to clean and monitor the pipeline.
1.5.6. Decommissioning
When de-commissioning offshore pipelines, there are two main alternatives: 1) complete dismantling and removal for
the subsequent disposal of the entire system and 2) conservation of the linear part of the pipeline in place. The second
option seems preferable from technological, economic and environmental points of view but current international
legislation requires the dismantling and removal of all engineering facilities after completion of operation. The decision
on decommissioning methods for the Nord Stream pipelines after completion of operation (in 50 years at least) will be
taken by the owner of the pipeline in accordance with legal requirements and technologies that will be then applicable.
1.5.7. Construction time schedule

The project was initiated with a feasibility study, in which Russian research institutes and the Russian-Finnish company
North Transgas Oy conducted thorough surveys and maritime research in the Baltic Sea. The study for the offshore
section, confirmed the technical feasibility of the pipeline project.

pp. 91
The phase of comprehensive planning has been started in 2007 in parallel with environmental surveys and preparation
of authorization documents.
The Permitting process on construction started on 14 November 2006, when a project information document on the
planned pipeline through the Baltic Sea was submitted to the responsible environmental authorities of Denmark,
Finland, Germany, Russia and Sweden in accordance with the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a
Transboundary Context (Espoo Convention).
The duration of the entire construction phase including pipe laying and pre-commissioning jobs is projected now to be
three years. Preparatory works for construction is scheduled to be in January-August of the first year of construction.
Construction of first phase of offshore and onshore areas of line 1 and line 2 is scheduled for the period June-October of
the first year of construction. Construction of the second stage - the main part of Russian sector (line 2) is scheduled for
the period June-December ( 1st - 3rd year of construction). Commissioning of the line 1 is scheduled for the end of the
2nd year of construction and 2nd line is scheduled for the last quarter of the 3rd year of construction.
Construction time schedule of offshore section is provided in Volume 7 Book 1 "Project for building organization of
offshore section of the pipeline".
1.6.
Description of possible environme ntal impact of the planned activity on alternatives
Nord Stream pipeline route in the Russian sector of the offshore section is characterized by the following special
conditions of construction:
concentration of significant environmental interests, including areas crucial to flora, fauna,

tourism;
existence of areas under the protection of international environmental laws, including:

Ramsar Convention and EC Directive on the Conservation of Wild Birds;
protected areas of the Baltic Sea with the status of ecosystem protected with Helcom
Recommendation 15/5/1;
natural reserves protected under national legislations;
areas of great importance for the reproduction of fish stocks;

pp. 92
intensive ship traffic;

active communications cables in the Baltic Sea;
areas for fishery with bottom trawling activities;
territories, objects, and communications of the Defence Ministry and Federal Security Service in
Portovaya Bay (Gulf of Finland).
The project is in compliance with rules, requirements and restrictions on the environment, taking into account the
impact of technological sources on natural objects. Comparison of the possible impacts on alternatives see p.1.4.5 ,
Table 1.4-1. The sources are divided according the nature of contact with the environment:
sources of impacts on air environment;

sources of impacts on sea water;
sources of impacts on geological environment;
sources of impacts on marine biota.
Sources of pollution are divided spatially into point, areal, and linear. The project envisages the construction of linear
objects - pipelines. The vessels to be employed in the pipeline construction can be regarded as the area
source (a set of point sources).
From temporal point of view, all sources of environmental impact can be classified as short-term. They are typical for
the period of construction and installation works.
Impacts of different sources on the environment can be divided into following types: mechanical, chemical, and
physical
The main impact on the atmospheric air is a chemical pollution with harmful substances emitted by construction
vessels.
Harmful physical factor is characterized by high acoustic background due to vessels operation.
Mechanical impacts are expected due to pipeline burial works, post-lay trenching to ensure sustainability of the
pipeline, dam construction, and a small chemical impact on the bottom soils in the Gulf of Finland is also possible.
Limitation of ranges of habitat and noise from the operating equipment will be important factors of concern for the
animal world.
Dredging, dam construction works, post-lay trenching will lead to the partial destruction of food supply of fish, partial
destruction of fish fry, and temporary partial reduction of the areas of fish habitat.
Analysis of the technological sources mentioned above, the effects of their impacts allow to evaluate the composition
and scope of environmental problems associated with the implementation of planned activities, to formulate priority
goals and minimize potential damages.
Possible kinds of impacts and effects from construction and operation activities of offshore section of Russian sector of
Nord Stream pipeline are given in table 1.6-1.

pp. 93
Table 1.6-1
Possible environme ntal impacts related to the construction and operation
of the pipeline
Mitigation measures in relation
Environme nt
Environme ntal impacts to environme ntal protection from
No
Residual adverse impacts
components
from activities
negative impacts caused by technology
1.
Atmosphere
Power units of vessels.
Instrumental measurements of
General increased content of
Welding on supply vessel. atmospheric air.
contaminants in atmosphere
Noise impacts.
compared to background
levels, but less than
Maximum Allowed
Concentrations (MAC)
2.
Marine
Suspended matter
Rapid elimination of accidental
Sea water interim excess
environment
pollutant from
spillage of oil or petroleum
pollution.
construction works.
products. Minimising of water
Unauthorized discharge
abstraction. Compliance with the
from vessels, accidental oil requirements of MARPOL to
/ fuel spills Pressure test
vessels.
water discharge
3.
Geologic
Dredging, soil dumping.
Use of modern equipment at
Changes in local grading of
environment
Unauthorized discharge
construction works to minimise
soil, and local changing of
from vessels, accidental oil effects on soils Rapid elimination the seabed.
/ fuel spills
of accidental spillage of oil or
petroleum products. Compliance
with the requirements of MARPOL
to vessels
4.
Marine biota
Noise impacts. Destruction Use of modern equipment during
Temporary exclusion of
of food supply of fish,
seabed intervention works to
nursery areas, temporary
destruction of fish fry
minimise sediment turbiding and
partial destruction of
associated with turbiding noise impacts. Equipment of water foraging resources.
and seawater intake.
intakes by mesh fish-saving
Reduction of the areas of constructions in accordance with
fish habitat associated with SNiP 2.06.0-87. Works schedule
turbiding and during the
harmonization with the timing of
consrtuction of the
migration of fish and marine
pipeline and dam. Creating mammals
obstacles to animal
migration routes

pp. 94
1.7.
Applicable laws and other legislative acts
Projection of offshore section of Russian sector of Nord Stream pipeline is performed in accordance with the current
environmental and nature management legislation.
The development of project documentation on construction of the offshore pipeline Nord Stream is performed in
accordance with national and international environmental regulations: Conventions, Directives, Laws, SNiPs, SanPiNs,
GOSTs, etc.
In EIA materials preparation of Nord Stream project have been also taken into account provisions of the Espoo
Convention and provisions of article 7 (Environmental Impact Assessment) of The Baltic Marine Environment
Protection Commission (Helsinki Commission).
This section lists legal regulatory and standards documents at federal and regional levels for business activities while
the pipeline is being laid across the Baltic Sea, to be considered at implementation of the Project of offshore pipeline
Nord Stream.
1.7.1. International environmental legislation

This section discusses the main International conventions and agreements relevant to the Nord Stream offshore pipeline
construction project. For the main International conventions and contracts ratified, signed or adopted by Russia, refer
the table 1.7-1.
Table 1.7-1
Main international conventions and contracts, ratified and signed by Russia
Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Vessels (MARPOL), London, 1973
Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes, Helsinki, 1992
Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Waste and other Matters, London, 1972
Basel Convention on the control of transboundary movements of hazardous wastes and their disposal, Basel, 1990
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Montego Bay, 1982
The Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area, Helsinki, 1974 and 1992
Convention on the Transboundary Effects Of Industrial Accidents, Helsinki, 1992
Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context

pp. 95
Main international conventions and contracts, ratified and

Espoo, Finland, 1991, signed by Russia but not ratified.
Convention on the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil, London, 12 May 1954.
Geneva Convention on the High Seas, 1958
International SOLAS-74 Convention
International Convention on Liability and Compensation for Damage in Connection with the Carriage of Hazardous
And Noxious Substances By Sea, London, May 3, 1996
UN Declaration on Environment and Development, Rio de Janeiro, 1992
On the Rio de Janeiro Conference on Environment the Declaration has been enunciated, a statement of 27 principles
directed to the protection of the environment and sustainable development.
The foundational Principle 1 reads: Human beings are at the centre of concerns for sustainable development. They are
entitled to a healthy and productive life in harmony with nature. The other 26 principles formulate missions of the state
to provide the fulfilment of the principle 1.
The announced in the Declaration principles have found their expression in the Russian legislation. So, the rights of the
Russian citizens on the wholesome environment are secured in Russian Constitution. The principles of international
cooperation in environmental protection are generally defined in the Russian Federal Law On Environmental
Protection.
Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Vessels (MARPOL), London, 1973
Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution from Vessels (hereafter - MARPOL), was signed in 1973, came into
effect on August 30, 1975. Convention has been ratified by USSR on December 15, 1975.
Convention is aimed on prevention of marine environment pollution by harmful substances or by effluents containing
such substances. Penalties for violation of Convention statements are defined in the legislation of the state, which flag
the vessel flies. The respective issues can be settled only at the national level. Monitoring is restricted to territorial seas
of respective states, in the high sea it is restricted to the so-called national flag principle operating in the case of vessels
flying the flag of separate state.
In accordance with the article 8 the accident caused by the discharge of harmful substances is to be reported in
compliance with the Protocol 1 statements of the Convention.

pp. 96
In this Convention and UN Convention the Baltic Sea has been granted a special status so that any waste is regarded
illegal. The special region status implies discharge prohibition of the following substances:
oily mixture with the insignificant exceptions (minor quantities from small-size vessels);
other harmful substances (chemicals) carried as bulked or fluid cargo;
sewage from the vessels if these are not processed mechanically or disinfected;
vessel wastes.
Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes, Helsinki,
1992 .
Convention on the Protection and Use of Transboundary Watercourses and International Lakes was signed in Helsinki
on March 18, 1992. Russia became a Party of this Convention on November 2, 1993.
Convention aims to enhance the measures preventing, restricting and reducing water pollution, which is likely to have a
transboundary effect, it also aims environmentally sound and rational use of water resources. These measures are to be
taken in the pollution source, whenever possible.
Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Waste and other Matters, 1972
Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Waste and other Matters was prepared on December
29, 1972 and came into effect on August 30, 1975.
The Convention has been ratified by USSR on December 15, 1975.
Convention aims to enhance measures preventing marine pollution by discharge of waste and other matters, which
could be dangerous for public health, inflict harm to living resources and marine life and cause damage recreational
zones.
Each willful removal of waste or other matters from the vessels, platforms etc. into the sea is qualified as "dumping".
No removal of waste and matters resulting in regular exploitation of the vessels, platforms etc. is seen as "dumping".
Basel Convention on the control of transboundary movements of hazardous wastes and their disposal, Basel, 1990
Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Waste and other Matters has been prepared on March
22, 1989. Ratified by Russia through the Federal Law No. 49-FZ of 25 November 1994.

pp. 97
This Convention pursues secure transboundary transportation of hazardous wastes. While carrying out economic
activities one shall take following measures:
to secure minimizing production of hazardous and others wastes within the enterprise with due
account for the social, technical and economical aspects;
to guarantee availability of respective disposal facilities for economically sound use of hazardous
and other wastes regardless of disposal location;
to minimize transboundary movements of hazardous and other wastes via ecologically sound and
effective use of such wastes;
to protect human health and environment from adverse impact caused by transboundary
movements of wastes.
Given bordering and transport role of the Baltic sea area, the significance of this Convention grows from year to year,
the more so that the issue of import-export of toxical wastes as such has become recently one of the most urgent both
for government authorities of EU states and for international ecological organisations.
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Montego Bay, 1982
United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (1982) and the predating UN Convention on the International waters
(1958) established an international legislative foundation, extended by bilateral agreements on marine borders between
the neighbour states. United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (1982) also includes statements concerning
protection of environment and special statements on sheltered and half-sheltered seas.
Convention grants the states certain restricted mandates enabling them to raise ecological claims to all foreign vessels
entering the waters of their economical zones. Especially thoroughly the questions of environmental protection from the
pollutions caused by vessel traffic are elaborated. Convention includes prohibition to dump oil, chemicals, discharge
water and fuel of vessel engines. Meeting of these prohibitions is being constantly controlled.
Convention on the Transboundary Effects of Industrial Accidents, Helsinki, 1992
Convention on the Transboundary Effects of Industrial Accidents has been signed in Helsinki on March 17, 1992
This Convention aims prevention of industrial accidents, securing of preparedness to them and elimination of their
aftermath if the accidents may cause a transboundary effects.
The Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area, Helsinki, 1974 and 1992

pp. 98
The Convention on the Protection of the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea Area, (hereafter - Helsinki Convention)
has been signed on March 22, 1974 by the representatives of the bordering Baltic states and came into effect on May 3,
1980. Helsinki Convention 1974 has been the first international agreement concerning all pollution sources on the
shore, offshore and also air pollution sources. The UNEP program on the ecology issues sees this convention as a model
for six further regional seas.
1992 the updated Helsinki Convention was signed and ratified by all states bordering Baltic sea and by EU
Commission. The Helsinki Commission - Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission - (HELCOM), where
EU, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Russian Federation, Finland, Sweden and Estonia are represented, is the governing body
of the Helsinki Convention. HELCOM takes decisions unanimously. Decisions on the measures of nature conservation
usually are recommendations and are subject to implementation in the framework of national legislation.
A key objective of Helsinki Convention is to prevent and liquidate pollution, thus furthering secure ecological
regeneration of the Baltic Sea area and maintaining its ecological balance.
Helsinki Convention includes registration system of large-size vessels and vessels transporting dangerous goods.
Environmental protection system in the framework of Helsinki Convention comprises a number of express prohibitions
(prohibition to discharge DDT and PCB, prohibition of waste dumping into the sea; prohibition of any dumping except
of the earth after excavation activities) and beside of that it contains some programme statements, requiring
development of further recommendations.
Monitoring and periodical assessments of the marine conditions are being held by all Baltic states. So, in 1988 and 1989
programmes of data acquisition and summarization on pollution of Baltic marine area have been implemented. In 1991
the first condition assessment of all coastal waters has been carried out by the HELCOM experts group.
It shall be noted that the policy of Baltic states concerning Baltic area is not limited with the joint investigations.
Declaration of 1988, signed by the environment ministers testifies the agreement to reduce inputs of nitrate, organic
matters and heavy metals into the Baltic sea to 50%. In 1992 the 14 states that signed the Baltic Convention in
cooperation with credit institutes launched implementation of Comprehensive Joint Activity Program aimed on the
improvement of marine conditions of Baltic sea within the next two decades.
By the realization of Nord Stream project the most serious attention is to be paid to some HELCOM Recommendations.
HELCOM Recommendation 15/5 "\System of the coastal and marine protected areas in the Baltic sea"

pp. 99
Adopted on March 10, 1994. In accordance with the Recommendation member states of the Convention have to take
measures to organize the system of coastal and marine protected areas in the Baltic sea (BSPA).
HELCOM Recommendation 9/1 "On Protection of the seals in the Baltic Sea Region" Adopted on February 15, 1988.
In accordance with the Recommendation member states of the Convention have to "exert efforts on design of nature
reserves for the seals to conserve the genetic fond of declining populations of the Baltic seals"
Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context, Espoo, Finland, 1991
As the Nord Stream pipeline runs through the waters of 5 states (Russia, Finland, Sweden, Denmark, Germany) the
question about the transboundary effects caused by implementing of the project gains in urgency. In 1991 the
Convention on assessment of enviromental impact in transboundary aspect (designated also as Espoo Convention) has
been signed. Since then the Convention has been ratified by the absolute majority of European states including all states
of Baltic region. Russian Federation has signed the Convention, yet it is not a Party of the latter. Nevertheless Russia
will act as Party of Origin as far as it corresponds to its national legislation. Clause 8 of Appendix I to the Convention
defines large-diameter oil and gas pipelines as objects in relation to which the Convention is to be invoked and for
which the EIA in transboundary context is required. Nord Stream completely fits that Clause and thus falls under a
jurisdiction of the Convention. Hence let us briefly consider the main provosions of the Convention and the defined
procedures.
Article 2 of the Convention describes general principles of Convention implementation and EIA application in the
transboundary context, so we present a selection of quotations from it:
2. Each Party shall take the necessary legal, administrative or other measures to implement the provisions of this
Convention, including ... the establishment of an environmental impact assessment procedure that permits public
participation and preparation of the environmental impact assessment documentation.
3.
The Party of origin shall ensure that in accordance with the provisions of this Convention an environmental
impact assessment is undertaken prior to a decision to authorize or undertake a proposed activity.
4.
The Party of origin shall, consistent with the provisions of this Convention, ensure that affected Parties are
notified of a proposed activity.
6.
The Party of origin shall provide, in accordance with the provisions of this Convention, an opportunity to the
public in the areas likely to be affected to participate in relevant environmental impact assessment procedures regarding
proposed activities and shall ensure that the opportunity provided to the public of the affected Party is equivalent to that
provided to the public of the Party of origin.

pp. 100

7.
Environmental impact assessments in accordance with the provisions of Convention shall, as a
minimum requirement, be undertaken at the project level of the proposed activity. To the extent
appropriate, the Parties shall endeavour to apply the principles of environmental impact assessment to
policies, plans and programmes.
In the following articles (as well as in recommendations and guidances added to Convention) activities of
the Party of impact origin (PO) and of the Affected Party (AP) are described. The procedure can be
summarized as follows:
1.
Party of impact origin sends Notification on the proposed activity, including brief description of
the project and its possible transboundary impact (recommended form of Notification is provided in
Annexes to Convention) to competent authorities (CO) of affected states.
2
AP shall respond to the PO, indicating whether it intends to participate in the EIA procedure or
not, and also provides (at the request of CA) the relevant information regarding the EIA procedure. To
coordinate further activities Party may establish a joint (bilateral and multilateral) body.
3
The program of EIA is to be submitted by CA of PO to CA of AP to display and agree with
concerned authorities and public. Furthermore the public of AP has to be informed on proposed activity
not later than the public of PO and dispose over the same time for display the documentation. Public
participation may be fulfilled with the help of mass-media, Internet, in form of public meetings etc.
4
CO of AP will submit to CO of PO comments, objections or additions to the EIA program.
5
CO of PO will submit to CO of AP the Report on EIA and project documentation to display and
agree with concerned authorities and public (s. c. 3).
6
CA of AP will submit to CA PO its comments, objections regarding EIA Report and project
at large.
7.
CA of PO will provide to CA of AP the final decision on the proposed activity, this information
shall also become available to the public of AP.
The other articles of Convention deal with procedures of dispute settlement, signing and ratifying of
Convention etc.
As it was defined by the Parties of impact origin (Germany, Russia, Denmark, Sweden and Finland) and
the Affected Parties (Poland, Lithuania, Latvia, Estonia) on the meetings in Hamburg (Germany) on April
19-20 and May 9, the procedures of Espoo Convention will be applied to the Nord Stream project in full,
although in a slightly modified form. The latter results from the fact that 5 states of impact origin are at
the same time affected parties, and the project as a whole is not appropriate to be divided into "national"
sectors. Therefore the decision about preparation of the consolidated Notification and the consolidated
EIA program for all states was taken.

p. 101

Germany, Denmark, Finland and Sweden consider themselves as Parties of origin in terms of Convention.
Russian Federation has signed the Convention, yet it is not a Party of the latter. Nevertheless Russia will
act as Party of Origin as far as it corresponds its national legislation. All 9 states of the Baltic region,
including Germany, Denmark, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Russian Federation, Finland, Sweden and
Estonia are regarded as Affected Parties in terms of Espoo Convention.
The requirement to notify the neighbour states on the proposed activity likely to have a transboundary
impact on the environment is contained in the Article 7 of Convention on the protection of the marine
environment of the Baltic Sea area (Helsinki, 1992) ratified by the Russian Federation.
Convention on the Prevention of Pollution of the Sea by Oil, London, 12 May 1954.
This Convention defines that all the vessels shall have an equipment preventing leakage of fuel oil and
diesel in oil contaminated waters, which content is discharged into the sea without being first cleaned in
oil-water separator.
Geneva Convention on the High Seas, 1958
It defines that each state has to take necessary measures to ensure safety of the ships flying its flag, i.a.
with respect to:
use of the signals, maintaining contacts and collision prevention,
labour conditions of the crews with respect to relevant international legal acts on labour,
construction, equipment of the vessels and their sailing characteristics.
Every state has to issue rules to prevent marine water pollution by the oil from vessels.
International SOLAS-74 Convention and the Protocol 1988 to it with amendments 1993-1999 which
became part of the Rules of Russian Marine Sailing register (RMSR).
SOLAS-74 Convention:
establishes comprehensive number of minimum standards concerning safe vessels

construction and core safety equipment (fire prevention, navigational, rescuing, radio
equipment etc.) that has to be available on board;

p. 102

requires vessel and its equipment to be maintained in the state ensuring its aptness at sea
without any danger for the vessel and people on board;
contains operational instructions, i.a. concerning procedures by accidents and provides

regular inspections of the vessel and its equipment, issuing of compliance certificates.
International Convention on Liability and Compensation for Damage in

Carriage of Hazardous And Noxious Substances By Sea, London, May 3, 1996
Connection with the
This convention defines the responsibility limits and size of damage compensation resulting from
pollution of environment, and also procedure of such compensation.
1.7.2.
National environmental and nature management legislation during construction of

offshore section of Russian sector of Nord Stream pipeline
The nature conservation legislation of Russia concerning construction of the offshore gas pipelines and
the assessment preparation of environmental impact of proposed activity is based on following
documents:
1.
Water Code of the Russian Federation (Federal Law No.167-FZ of 16 November 1995
versions No. 201-FZ of 04.12.2006, No. 232-FZ of 18.12.2006, No. 118-FZ of
26.06.2007, No. 258-FZ of 08.11.2007, No. 261-FZ of 08.11.2007 , No. 333-FZ of
06.12.2007).
Baseline norms and the legislative control principles for water resources use and aquatic medium
protection are regulated on the federal level by the Water Code of the Russian Federation No. 74-FZ of
03.06.06, Federal Laws "On environmental protection" No. 7-FZ of 10.01.2002, "On fees for use of
aquatic objects" No. 71-FZ of 06.05.98, and "On introducing amendments and additions in the Federal
Law "On fees for use of aquatic objects" No. 111-FZ as of 07.08.1998. The Federal Law "On
environmental protection" i. a. states:
"Authority scope of Russian state bodies concerning relationships associated with environmental
protection includes: ... ensuring of the environmental protection, particularly aquatic medium on the
continental shelf in the EEZ of Russia" (Article 5). It is also indicated that the environmental impact is
paid and the mode of payment for adverse effect on the environment is defined by the Federal Laws.
Adverse effects on the environment include:
emissions of pollutants and other matters into the atmospheric air;

p. 103

discharge of polluting substances, other matters and microorganisms into the surface and ground water
bodies and into the water-collection areas (Article 16).
Russian water legislation (Water code) regulates relationships in the domain of aquatic objects use and
conservation, i.a. for maintaining the optimal water use conditions; for maintaining surface and ground
waters in state complying with sanitary and ecological norms, for protection of aquatic objects from
pollution and clogs; for conservation of biological diversity of aquatic ecosystems. In relation to physical
geographical, hydro-condition and other features water objects are divided into: surface water bodies,
internal seawaters, territorial sea of Russia, ground water objects. The internal seawaters and territorial
sea of Russia constitute the state property.
Rights to use water bodies are being acquired on a basis of the licence for water use and the respective
water use agreement. Licences are being issued, executed and registered by MNR of Russia and its
territorial bodies responsible for the agreement with executive authorities concerned. A water use
agreement is compulsory for all facilities that have obtained a licence. Granting the use of a water body is
exercised pursuant to the "Rules for granting the use of publicly owned water bodies, establishing and
revising of the water usage limits, issuing of the water use licence and administrative licence" adopted by
the Decree of the Russian Government No. 383 of April 3, 1997.
By localizing, planning and constructing of offshore section of Russian sector of Nord Stream pipeline its
possible impact on the conditions of the aquatic objects and their environment shall be taken into account
(Art. 105).
According to Russian legislation Nord Stream pipeline project shall be approved by specially authorized
bodies, responsible for water use and protection, by specially authorized state bodies for environmental
protection, by State body for Sanitary and Epidemiological Supervision.
State Ecological Expert Examination of the project documentation shall be performed prior to the
beginning of the construction (Art. 80).
According to the Water Code (Art. 82, 90 and 109) standartization of the water use is conducted
implying: defining of the water use limits (water consumption and discharge); defining of the standartized
maximum permissible levels of adverse impact on the aquatic bodies.

p. 104

2.
"On Inside Sea Areas, Territorial Sea and Nearest Sea Water of the Russian Federation"
(Federal Law No. 155-FZ of July 31, 1998, version of August 22, 2004 No. 122-FZ
(version of December 29, 2004), of November 08, 2007 No. 261-FZ).
This Federal Law defined conducting of the economic and other activities in the inside sea waters,
territorial sea and nearest sea water.
Article 16, Clause 4. Procedures of construction, operation and use of artificial islands, installations and
plants for any purpose, and also laying of pipelines in the inside waters and territorial sea for any purpose
are defined by the Russian Government.
Article 32. Protection and conservation of the marine environment, nature resources of the inside sea
waters and territorial sea are fulfilled by the specially authorised federal executive bodies within their
authorities, and the respective executive bodies of the Russian subjects in compliance with Russian
legislation and international agreements signed by Russia.
Article 33, Clause 2. The marine environment of the inside sea waters and territorial sea are maintained in
the state complying with the environmental requirements, which is ensured by the defining and
monitoring of the standardized maximal allowed concentrations of the pollutants and standardized
maximal allowed impact on the marine environment of the inside sea waters and territorial sea and other
requirements and measures defined by the Russian legislation on the environmental protection and the
Russian water legislation.
All kinds of economical and other activities in the internal marine waters and territorial sea are to be
conducted only by the obtained positive decision of the State Environmental Expertise.
3.
"On the continental shelf of Russia" (Federal Law No 187-FZ of November 30, 1995,
version No. 188-FZ of November 4, 2006, No. 333-FZ of December 6, 2007).
Present Federal Law i.a. defines conducting of the economic and other activities on continental shelf.
Activity on the continental shelf is conducted with respect to ship traffic, fishery, marine scientific
investigations, other lawful activities and also with respect to ensured protection and conservation of
marine environment, mineral and living resources.
Activities on construction of artificial islands, installations and plants, and laying of the pipeline shall
comply with the norms of Russian and international right provided that no disturbance for the regional
geological investigation of the continental shelf, exploration and development of mineral resources or
exploitation of the living resources, exploitation and repairing of the already laid cables and pipelines are
caused, and the measures for protection and conservation of the environment are taken.

p. 105

Requests on construction of artificial islands, installation and plants on the continental shelf shall be
presented, reviewed, evaluated by the present Federal Law and international agreements signed by
Russia, these are also define the procedure on taking decisions on these requests.
Applicants who obtained the permission to construct an artificial islands installations and plants must:
satisfy the present Federal Law and international agreements signed by Russia;
ensure safe work of the permanent means signalling the presence of artificial islands,
installations and plants;
ensure free access to the artificial islands, installations and plants for the officers of
security bodies;
regularly communicate with coast guards of Russia and transmit within the adopted
international synoptic timeframe operative data of meteorological and hydrological
surveys to the nearest radio-meteorological centre of Russia in compliance with the
procedures of World Meteorological Organization.
Underwater pipelines are internationally protected in compliance with the norms of international right.
4.
On the Exclusive Economical Zone of Russian Federation (Federal Law No. 191-FZ of
17 December, 1998, version No. 126-FZ of 8 August 2001, No. 31-FZ of 21 March 2002,
No. 48-FZ of 22 April 2003, No. 86-FZ of 30 June 2003, No.148 of 11 November, 2003,
No. 90-FZ of 18 July 2005, 188-FZ of 4 November 2006, No. 333-FZ of 6 December
2007).
Present Federal Law defines status of the exclusive economical zone of Russia, sovereign rights and
jurisdiction of Russia in its exclusive economical zone and their exercising in compliance with
Constitution of Russia, universally recognized principles and norms of international right and and
international contracts signed by Russia. Questions concerning Russian exclusive economical zone and
activities conducted there, not envisaged by the present Federal Law shall be regulated by other federal
laws, applicable for Russian exclusive economical zone and conducted there activities.
In the internal sea waters, territorial sea, on the continental shelf and in the exclusive economical zone the
sovereign rights are being exercised by Russia for exploration, development and conservation of
nonliving resources and control of such resources, exploration of the sea bottom and its subsoil.
Regulation of the activities on exploration and development of nonliving resources, as well as their
protection falls within the competence of the Government of Russian Federation.

p. 106

Authority scope of federal control bodies in the internal sea waters, territorial sea and continental shelf
and in the exclusive economical zone comprises:
defining of the investigation strategy of finding, exploration and development of nonliving

resources, protection and conservation of marine environment on base of federal strategies,
programs and plans with respect to conclusions of the state ecological expert examination;
management of the subsoil of Russian continental shelf;
regulating the procedure of non-living resources exploitation including the procedure of

licencing with respect to proposals made by Russian local executive bodies of the
territories adjacent to the seashore;
registering research, exploration and extraction of non-living resources activities,

accumulating the federal reserve balance of non-living resources;
imposing restrictions on exploitation of subsoil in specific areas for the purpose of

enforcing national security and environmental protection;
controlling the rational exploitation and preservation of of non-living resources, protecting

the marine environment in cooperation with Russian local authorities of the territories
adjacent to the seashore;
conducting SEECSs, state environmental inspections and state environmental monitoring

in cooperation with Russian local executive bodies of the territories adjacent to the
seashore.
According to the Federal Law on the Russian Continental Shelf and the Federal Law on Subsoil
Resources, certain sections on the continental shelf can be allocated for regional geological research of
the continental shelf in order to evaluate the potential of oil and gas content of vast regions on the
continental shelf (regional geological and geophysical activities, geological survey, geotechnical surveys,
resource studies and other activities not causing significant damage to the subsoil integrity).
These sections are geometrical units, and their parameters are specified in the licence to perform regional
geological research of the continental shelf, exploration and extraction of mineral resources, including the
area of the seabed with coordinates of its borders.
Holders of such sections are obliged to follow applicable internationals regulations and standards, laws
and rules of the Russian Federation on protection of the marine environment, and mineral and living
resources.

p. 107

Resource studies of non-living resources, search, exploration and extraction thereof can be performed by
Russian citizens, Russian entities, foreign residents and foreign entities, foreign states and competent
international organisations in possession of a licence to study, search, explore and extract non-living
resources, granted by a specially authorised federal executive body for geology and subsoil exploitation,
subject to approval by specially authorised federal bodies: for defence, fishing, environmental and natural
resources protection, defence industries, at notice of specially authorised federal bodies: for border guard,
for science and engineering policy, for custom affairs.
The licence certifies the right to conduct activities of geological research of the subsoil.
The state licencing system is a single procedure of granting licences, which includes informational,
scientific analytical, economic and legal preparation and handling of materials. The state licencing system
aims to provide:
implementation of state programmes of mining industry and mineral raw material base
development;
enforcement of national security of Russian Federation;
protection of social, economic, environmental and other interests of the population;
equal opportunities to all entities and citizens when obtaining a licence;
development of market relations, conduct of antitrust policy in the field of the subsoil
exploitation;
indispensable guarantees to licence holders and protection of their rights to exploit the
subsoil.
Rights and responsibilities of the holder arise at the moment of the licence grant. The following
information should present in the licence:
on ecological provision of section usage, including environmental monitoring, coordinated

methods for recovering damages to living resources;
on measures to prevent and eliminate emergency situations;
on insurance.
It is prohibited to include in the licence: nature reserves, sanctuaries, areas of conservation or other
specially protected territories on the continental shelf, that are important for preservation, reproduction
and migration of valuable living resources.

p. 108

Protection and preservation of the marine environment and natural resources of the internal seawaters, the
territorial sea and the exclusive economic zone are organised in compliance with the Russian legislation
and international treaties of Russian Federation by specially authorised federal executive bodies within
the limits of their authority and by the relevant local executive bodies of the subjects of Russian
Federation.
In order to maintain the marine environment of the internal seawaters, the territorial sea and the exclusive
economic zone in condition that meets the relevant environmental requirements, standards for maximum
allowable concentrations of harmful substances and standards for maximum allowable impact on the
marine environment of the internal seawaters and the territorial sea, as well as other requirements and
measures under the Russian law on environmental protection and the water legislation of Russia, are
introduced and followed.
5.
Decree No. 251 of the Government of the Russian Federation of 24 March, 2000, List of
Hazardous Substances, Prohibited to Be Discharged from Vessels, Other Floating
Facilities, Aircrafts, Artificial Islands, Installations and Structures within the Russian
Exclusive Economic Zone.
This decree contains a list of hazardous substances, prohibited to be discharged from vessels within the
exclusive economic zone.
6.
Decree No. 748 of the Russian Government of 3 October 2000 on Maximum
Allowed Concentrations and Conditions for Discharging Harmful Substances within the Russian
Exclusive Economic Zone.
In decree No. 748 of the Government maximum allowed concentrations of harmful substances, allowed to
be discharged, are specified. As well as conditions for discharging harmful substances.
7.
Decree No. 950 of the of Russia of 29 August 1997 on Measures to Ensure Protection of
the Marine biological resources and the State Regulation in This Field.
1.7.3.
National legislation and EIA guidelines
The following documents comprise the fundamentals of the Russian legislation:
On Environmental Protection (Federal Law of 10 January, 2002 No. 7-FZ, rev. of 26 June,
2007 No. 118-FZ).
"On SEECS" (Federal Law of 23 November, 1995 No. 174-FZ, rev. of 18 December, 2006
232-FZ).

p. 109

Regulation on the Environmental Impact Assessment of a Planned Economic or Other

Activity in Russian Federation (adopted by the order of Goskomekologia of 16 May, 2000
No. 372).
SP 11-102-97. Ecological-engineering surveys for construction.
Practical guide to SP 11-101-95 for development of section "Environmental Impact

Assessment when justifying for the investment substantiation in construction of plants,
buildings and structures" (recommended for use by Goskomekologia of Russia of 19 June,
1998, Gosstroy of Russia, Centerinvestproject State Enterprise, 1998).
Main provisions of the EIA procedure are summarized as follows:

1.
Environmental impact assessment is conducted in relation to planned economic and other

activities that can cause direct or indirect impact on the environment, irrespective of the
legal status of an entity carrying out economic or other activities.
2.
The environmental impact assessment is conducted during the development of all

alternatives of pre-project (including pre-investment) and project documentation) which
substantiates planned economic and other activities in cooperation with public
associations.
3.
The requirements to the environmental impact assessment materials are introduced by

federal executive bodies which perform state regulation in the field of environmental
protection (Article 32).
Federal Law "On the State Environmental Expert Committee Survey" No.174-FZ as of 23 November,
1995 directly refers to the environmental impact assessment, where conducting of the state environmental
expert committee surveys is determined by the presence of "documentation .. , containing the
environmental impact assessment materials ..." (Article 14, Item 1, Paragraph 2) among the presented
materials.
A more detailed regulation of the EIA procedure can be found in "Regulation on the Environmental
Impact Assessment of a Planned Economic or Other Activity in Russian Federation" (EIA Provisions),
adopted by Order of Goskomekologia of 16 May 2000, No. 372. Discussions of the proposed economic
activity, governed by the EIA Provisions, with the community is an inseparable part of the EIA
procedure. The discussions are held by local self-governing authorities.
According to the "Regulations of the Offshore Pipeline Design and Construction" VN 39-1.9-00598, all
environmental protection activities must be included in the approved EIA plan when designing an
offshore pipelines system. The EIA plan must incorporate a set of structural, construction and
technological measures for environmental protection.

p. 110

During the EIA development the following factors are considered (quoted selectively):
evaluation of the present and projected environmental conditions and risk with a reference
to the risk source (technological impacts) and potential damages;
measures to monitor the technical condition of offshore pipelines system and promptly
eliminate emergencies;
monitoring of environmental conditions within the region.
Federal Law of 10 January, 2002 No. 7-FZ "On Environmental Protection" contains an article on
environmental expert committee survey (Article 33). It notes:
"The SEECS is organised and held by a federal executive body for environmental expert assessment and
by Russian local authorities in accordance with the procedure provided in the present Federal Law, other
regulatory documents of Russia, local laws and other regulatory documents."
The purpose of such a survey is to ensure that the proposed economic or other activity complies with
environmental protection requirements.
The procedure for the environmental expert committee survey is set by the Federal Law On
Environmental Expert Assessment.
A specific nature of the environmental expert committee survey is reflected in the Federal Law of 23
November, 1995 No 174-FZ "On the State Environmental Expert Committee Survey". According to the
first-mentioned law:
There are three targets for the SEECS at the federal level:
1)
drafts of normative-technical and instructive-methodical documentation on environmental
protection, approved by Russian public authorities;
2)
projects of federal target programmes covering the construction and operation of facilities of
economic activities that cause an environmental impact, in terms of their location with regard to the level
of protection of natural sites.
3)
draft of production sharing agreements;
4)
documentation in support of an application for a licence for an activity that can cause
environmental impacts, where the issuance of such licences is within the competence of the federal
executive bodies according to the Russian law;

p. 111

5)
drafts of technical documentation for new equipment and technology that can cause
environmental impacts as well as technical documentation for new substances that are likely to enter the
natural environment;
6)
data of the comprehensive environmental survey of areas, that substantiates granting these areas
the legal status of specially protected natural territories of federal importance, ecological disaster zone or
environmental emergency zone;
7)
the targets for the SEECS, mentioned in the Federal Law of 30 November 1995 No. 187-FZ "On
the Continental Shelf of Russian Federation", Federal Law of 17 December, 1998 No. 191-FZ "On the
Exclusive Economic Zone of Russian Federation", Federal Law of 31 July 1998 No. 155-FZ "On the
Internal Seawaters, Territorial Sea and Adjoining Zone of Russian Federation".
8)
a target for the SEECS, mentioned in the present article and formerly approved by the SEECS, in
case of:
enhancement of such a target with respect to comments provided by the previous SEECS;
target implementation with deviations from the documentation approved by the SEECS and in case of
corrections made in the aforementioned documentation.
the expiry of the approval by the SEECS (Article 11).
1.8.
Compliance of Project documentation with National Legislation EIA

Requirements
In accordance with a practice of preparing investment documentation and Item 4.1 provisions of SNiP 1101-95 "Instruction for Development, Coordination, Approval and Contents of the Project Documentation
for Constructing Plants, Buildings, and Structures" regulatory document, a range of sections of
documentation in EIA, specified by the Annex 2 to the Provisions for assessing environmental impacts of
the proposed economic or other activity in Russia (adopted by Order of Goskomekologia of Russia of 16
May, 2000 No. 372), are included in the project documentation in volumes of feasibility study, mentioned
below.
1.8.1.
Explanatory Report for documentation in support
A general explanatory report is presented in the project documentation as a separate volume 1. General
Explanation Report (G-PE-LFR-REP-101-01000000).

p. 112

1.8.2.
Measures to prevent and/or mitigate possible adverse environmental impacts
The description of measures taken to prevent and/or mitigate potential adverse effect on the environment
is included in the project documentation as separate volumes on environmental protection (Vol. 8. Book
1. Part 2. Environmental Protection of the Offshore Section of the Pipeline (G-PE-LFR-EIA-10108010200) and Vol. 8. Book 2. Part 2. Environmental Protection of the Onshore Section of the Pipeline
(G-PE-LFR-EIA-101- 08020200).
1.8.3.
Uncertainties in the Environmental Impact Assessment of a planned economic or

other activity revealed during the assessment
The main uncertainty of the completed EIA of the project is current lack of information on methods of
decommissioning of pipeline to be carried not earlier than in 50 years, in accordance with legal
requirements and technologies that will be then applicable.
1.8.4.
Outline of monitoring programmes and post-project analysis
A detailed description of the environmental monitoring programme can be found in a separate volume of
documentation of the feasibility study for the current project (Vol. 8. Environmental Protection). Book 3.
Industrial environmental monitoring and audit (IEMA)) G-PE-LFR-EIA-101- 08030000.
According to Appendix V of the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary
Aspect, the post-project analysis includes the following:
()
controlling the compliance with conditions set forth in the approval or stipulated at the time of
approval of the activity and the efficiency of mitigation measures;
(b)
analysing an impact type in order to ensure an adequate level of control and responsive potential
in uncertain conditions;
(c)
checking earlier forecasts to leverage the accumulated experience in the future when performing
similar activities.
The implementation of the industrial environmental monitoring and audit (IEMA) programme after the
completion of the project would allow to reach the main targets of post-project analysis (see the
aforementioned Book 3 of Vol. 8 of the feasibility study documentation (Industrial environmental
monitoring and audit (IEMA) G-PE-LFR-EIA-101- 08030000).

p. 113

2.
NATURE USE RESTRICTIONS
Nature use restrictions are a legally adopted responsibility imposed on economic activities when work is
performed in the areas with a special level of protection: specially protected natural territories, water
protection zones, coastal shelter belts, ranges of rare species of animals and plants, spawning grounds,
and hazardous exogenous geological processes. This responsibility is introduced in order to avoid
deterioration of environmental quality.
2.1.
Construction of the offshore section of the Nord Stream pipeline in the Russian sector does not affect
specially protected natural areas (SPNA) of federal, regional or local importance (Appendix to Chapter
2). A brief description of the SPNA sections closest to the proposed pipeline route is given below.
According to the letter of 2 August, 2007 by Rosprirodnadzor of the Leningrad region (Appendix to
Chapter 2), the offshore section route of the Nord Stream pipeline does not affect areas of the proposed
Ingermanlandsky state nature reserve. The nature reserve will enable Russia to fulfil its obligations to
HELCOM to protect the Baltic marine environment, the Baltic Sea Joint Comprehensive Environmental
Action Programme (JCP), as well as the Ramsar Convention on Waterfowl Habitats Conservation. The
main purposes for this nature reserve:
To preserve reference natural complexes of the Eastern Baltic, to maintain biodiversity.
To preserve traditional migrating wetland bird rest sites to maintain the functioning of the
migration passage from the White Sea to the Baltic Sea.
To preserve waterfowl (or the like) mass nesting places, to protect habitats of rare and
threatened species.
To preserve habitats of the Red Book marine mammal species - grey seal and ringed seal.
To realize international agreements from Russian side concerning environmental action

programmes in the Baltic area including creation of SPNA in bordering with Finland area;
integration with international SPNA system in the Baltic Sea.
Proposed Strict Nature Reserve consists of 9 islands; the distance to the pipeline route is:
SPNA
Dolgy Kamen
Kopytin
Bolshoy Fiskar
The distance to the proposed Nord Stream pipeline route

Min (km)
4,2
14,6
2,9
Average (km)
7,7
15,5
3,2

p. 114

SPNA
Skala Hally
Virginy
Maly Tuters
Bolshoy Tuters
Skala Virgund
Seskar
The distance to the proposed Nord Stream pipeline route |

Min (km)
Average (km)
9
10
16,8
18,6
28,5
33,3
31,6
35,7
38,6
43,3
34
38,4
The closest to the proposed pipeline is Bolshoy Fiskar Archipelago - total area of all islands is about 7 ha,
marine area is 204 ha. The border of the territory passes over a marine area at 10-meter isobath. Border
length is about 13 km. The section is not colonised. Part of Mannonen island (0.01 ha) with a lighthouse
with battery power unit is excluded from the section.
The archipelago is very interesting with its numerous birds breeding colonies. There are colonies of great
cormorants, gulls including black-backed gull, Caspian tern, Arctic tern, large and medium mergansers,
common eider, kiddaw and razorbill. Water area around the islands is used by fish eating birds to forage.
Prigranichny nature reserve of regional importance is located at a distance of 4 km. The nature reserve is
located on the coast and Gulf of Finland islands, near Russian-Finnish border. Its northern border comes
from Finnish border (at 6033' N; 2749' E) along Kirovskaya Bay coast). Eastern border is along
Chistopolskaya bay coast line from Serga river mouth to Cape Urpalanniemi (at 6029' N; 28 00' E).
Southern border is from Cape Urpalanniemi along coast line to Gorny Island, then on marine area southeastward at 10-meter isobath to the crossing of the isobath with Finnish border at 6028' N.; 2744' E.
Western border is along Finnish border from 60 28.20' N; 2744.80' E.
Nature reserve area is about 5,825 ha, of these land is about 3,225 ha and marine area is about 2,600 ha.
The main purposes of the nature reserve are:
maintaining biological diversity;
preservation of rare animal and plants included in Red Books of the Russian Federation,
Baltic region, Eastern Fennoskandia, Leningrad Region and specially protected objects in
Europe;
preservation of migrating wetland bird rest sites and flying routes from the White Sea to
the Baltic Sea.

p. 115

Suursaari is 6.6 km from pipeline route. The nature reserve is created in order to preserve unique
geological structure of Gogland island with its scenic nature, peculiar relief, many rare and sensitive
species of of flora and fauna (fig.2-1). Nature reserve area is 1,044 ha.
The overall length of nature reserve borders is 25.5 km.
Figure 2-1.
Suursaari proposed nature reserve landscape
The nature reserve is designed by St.Petersburg University Institute of Biology in 2003-2004 to preserve
valuable geological, hydrobiological, geobotanical and botanical, zoological objects, including
ornithological and theriological.
Existing nature reserves of regional importance are to the pipeline route: The Beryozovye Islands - 15
km, Vyborgsky - 19 km, Kurgalsky - 34.7 km respectively. Pohjaskorkija proposed natural monument is
3 km from pipeline offshore section route.
2.2.
Geological Nature Use Restrictions
Main nature use restrictions during offshore section construction related to geologic environment and
relief conditions involve:
ice gouging development within the Portovaya Bay;
high degree of breaks in deep-water route section;
distribution of lithodynamic processes in in the coastal zone of construction area.

p. 116

2.3.
Specially protected rare bird and mammal species
The analysis of contemporary state of bird fauna shows that bird fauna in Nord Stream offshore pipeline
proposed section area in Russian waters has rich diversity of species and large proportion of rare,
specially protected species (bittern, mute swan, gadwall). See Section 3.6 of these Volume for detailed
description of specially protected bird species.
There are three species of seal in the Baltic Sea: grey seal (Halichoerus grypus), harbour seal (Phoca
vitulina) and ringed seal (Pusa hispida). All these species are included in the Red Book of Russia and
International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources [259].
Chosen pipeline route does not cross seal migration routes included in Russian Red Book and does not
coincide with seal rendezvous positions outside migration seasons (see Appendix to Chapter 2).
The project includes measures to reduce adverse impact on animal life during Nord Stream offshore
pipeline construction, described in Volume 8. Book 1. Part 2. EP
Conclusion: Chosen Nord Stream offshore pipeline route does not affect SPNAs of federal, regional or
local importance, both existing and proposed.

p. 117

3.
CURRENT ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS

3.1.
Geological And Geomorphological Characteristics
3.1.1.
Tectonics and seismicity
The seabed in the Gulf of Finland in proposed offshore section area of Russian sector of Nord Stream
pipeline has typical platform two-layer morphology.
Lower layer is a foundation formed by North Karelian plicate zones with possible presence of
transformed anticline or block anticline Archaean structures. It is further formed with masses and small
negative structures of Gothic layer, its peneplained surface is sunk at an angle of maximum 15' - 25'
south-south-eastward.
The foundation with sharp structure unconformity is overlapped almost entirely with plate mantle forming
upper laying and presented by late Baykal complex. It has flat-lying monoclinal bedding with plunge in
southern rumbs. The research data shows the sameness of strata isohypse foundation surface drawing and
Vendic mantle plates which emphasises preserving stratigraphic power of individual subdivisions and
secondary denudation nature of their cutting. Dead mantle embedding is complicated with faults and
flexures in some places. There are slight changes of regional trap slope angle [58].
As such, regarding faults in the mantle, one can speak about low amplitude of their dip slip which is not
more than 10 to 20 m, nonlinearity, "segmenting" of transgressions in scheme, or their development in the
mantle, and unstable stretch parameters, as well as prevailing north-east and east-west stretch, which
indicates extremely weak reactivation of old structural scheme.
According to Map of general seismic zoning of Russian Federation territory OSR-97 (SNiP II-7-81
(2000) "Construction in seismic areas", proposed offshore section of Russian sector of Nord Stream
pipeline is within the area of shocks of force 5 on MSK-64 scale (fig. 3.1-1) for average soil.

p. 118

Figure 3.1-1.
Map of design seismicity with the area of proposed pipeline route
In the map of Northern Eurasia OSR-97 construction section is in ground vibration peak acceleration zone
0,2 m/s 2 . Source zones (SZ) maps, included in this set of maps, which is the base for seismicity
calculations, can be found on Fig. 3.1-2.
Figure 3.1-2.
Source zone (SZ) fragme nt of OSR-97 for proposed object place ment area

p. 119

According to the map, pipeline route is within large, stretched north-eastward domain where is 4.
In joined domains to the north-east and south-west of the Gulf of Finland is defined as 3.5. Return
period of seismic events is unknown in all cases or more than 5,000 years.
A significant part of source zones is not in isometric areas, but in linear zones (in figure 3.1-3 are
indicated as I, II, III, IV).
Legend:
1 earthquake focuses, symbol size is equal to /60 magnitude;
2 zones of seismic activity;
3 Nord Stream pipeline Russian section.
Figure 3.1-3.
St. Petersburg area earthquakes
Zone of seismic activity (III) in the immediate vicinity of the route has low activity ( from 2 to 3) and
shallow embedding of sources ( from 1 to 5 km). Within the zone, near Loviisa nuclear power plant in
Finland, a high-frequency digital seismograph net of four stations worked in 1990s. During 1987-1989
this net recorded 29 microquakes with =2. Here in 1951-1956 the largest swarm in Finland with about
100 weak events of force 4 occurred in 1951-1956.
There are no natural resources in the list of State Reserves Register within Russian sector of Nord Stream
offshore pipeline. By Decrees of Russian Government dated 07.02.2006 No. 170-r, 171-r, 172-r, OOO
Petrotrans was granted a right to use a section of Russian territorial sea subsoil in the Gulf of Finland in
order to explore and extract ferrimanganese concretions of Vikhrevoye, Koporskoye, Kurgalskoye fields.
The border of the latter, near Sommers island, is 7 km to the south of the offshore pipeline corridor
(Appendix 3.1-1).

p. 120

3.1.2.
Geological structure of pre-quaternary sediments
Lower - upper Proterozoic (poorly defined formations) (PR 1-2).

Pre-quaternary sediments in the Gulf of Finland basin include Archaean-early Proterozoic metamorphic
and intrusive complexes forming lower structural layer, and Vendic - Phanerozoe plate mantle rock of
upper layer. In spite of additional interpretation factors, such as some static spatial differences in
metamorphic and intrusive complexes relief as well as distinctness of Hogland acidic effusives (due to the
highest erosion resistance), division of Lappee type granitoids and effusives of Hogland series seems to
be almost impossible. For this reason, these formations within proposed pipeline zone are described as
poorly defined (PR 1-2).
Lower Proterozoic (PR1). Among early Proterozoic formations there are quartzite, carbonate rock.
aluminous gneiss and amphibolites found in seabed rock material and on Gulf of Finland islands. They
differ with mosaic-linear slightly reduced magnetic field different from the one typical to Vyborg mass
phases.
Some indirect data shows that the presence of similar formations is possible within sags of rapakivi
overlying bed of east-west zone of increased differential magnetic field south of Bolshoy Berezovy
island, including south-east tip of the latter. It is proposed that the rock is represented by migmatised
garnet-biotite and cordierite-garnet-biotite gneiss, as well as development in amphibolites cut. There are
no direct geologic data on composition and age of the complex.
Upper Proterozoic (PR2). Lower Riphean (R3). Stratified rock, starting pre-quaternary sediments cut,
are represented by lower Riphean sediments and vulcanites (upper Proterozoic). Most of them are on
Gogland island, they also outcropped on Bolshoy and Maly Sommers islands. These rocks are described
as separate poorly defined Hogland series.
Upper Proterozoic (PR2). Upper vend (V2), Valday series. Sedimentary mantle is represented almost
everywhere by Valday Vend series sediments which are bedded gently monoclinally with dominated very
weak in 0.2 - 0.3 dip southward or south-south-eastward. Sandy-argillaceous formations of the series
taper out northward due to secondary denudation cutting, so that erosion damage led to complex
boundaries of outcrops of different subdivisions, on areal extent periphery of which there are groups of
correlant buttes.

p. 121

3.1.3.
Geological structure of quaternary sediments
Quaternary sediments are the most representative part of the upper unconsolidated sequence of the
considered seabed and at the same time, the basic foundation for the engineering projects. With the
variety of material composition, morphology, thickness and distribution they practically form the
continuous cover.
Minimum thickness of the coverage with local areas of its absence due to erosion limited to underwater
slopes of continental and island coastline. In this case, eluvial deposits comes out on the surface of the
seabed up to coarse clusts or undisturbed bedrocks belonging to nondesiccated Achaean layer migmatised
by composite gneiss of lower Proterozoic complex, as well as early Riphean granite intrusions of socalled Vyborg complex. The remaining areas of the seabed are overlapped by the Quaternary sediments,
with the thickness directly related to the erosion desiccation of the surface of the buried original
substance.
For the whole area of the planned pipeline seabed, the intense activity of continental glaciation was
typical during the Quaternary period, which led to the disappearance of traces of interglacial
transgressions. At the seabed of the Gulf of Finland only the sediments of final stages of Ostashkovskaya
glacial epoch can be reliably recognized in the form of glacial, fluvial-glacial and lacustrine-glacial
deposits of Luzhskaya and Nevskaya stages of the last glaciation, overlapped by glacial lake deposits and
the Holocene neptunian deposits [36].
Glacial deposits (lg IIIkr) (Moraine Luzhskaya)are presented at the seabed of the Gulf of Finland almost
generally. Moraine Luzhskaya normally lies at the base of Quaternary strata, forming the structure of flow
in relation to the uneven pre-quaternary layer. The thickness of Moraine Luzhskaya varies very widely
reaching a maximum of 50 m with average of 20-30 m. In some places in the middle of the underwater
slope of islands and along the northern shoreline of the Gulf of Finland it crops out on the seabed surface
more often in the form of residual plated couplet (boulder bridge). The age of Moraine Luzhskaya is
14,000 - 13,000 years.
Granulometric composition of moraine is extremely heterogeneous. Content of coarse clasts may be up to
30%, a fraction composition with less than 2.0 mm is three-component: aleuritic clay sands. Sediments
gradation is very bad. Humidity ranges from 15-20% (in the east) to 25-50% (west), the density is 2.10 2.75 g / cm3, the adhesion is greater than 5 kPa. Granite-rapakivi are dominated in the petrographic
composition of clasts. The presence of boulders in the form of iron with drift scratches is typical. In the
float fraction predominates quartz. Feldspar, muscovite, biotite, are also present. Clay fraction consists of
a mixture of micaceous clay, kaolinite and clinkstone.

p. 122

Heavy mineral is mainly represented by ore minerals (39.3-37.0%), amphiboles (hornblende) (37.430.4%), achmatite (12.0-11.0%). Almandine-pyrope garnets (9.6-9.5%) and zircon (8.8-4.2%) are also
present.
Stratigraphically above glacial sediments upward the sequence are water-ice sediments (fIIIkr).
Generally they are coarse-grained and medium-grained sands with the inclusion of gravel and pebbles (up
to 30-35%) with high rounding level. Their thickness vary from 3-5 to 10-12 meters.
Lymnetic - glacial sedime nts (lg IIIkr), were formed at the bottom of local glacial lakes (for the section
of the Russian sector of the pipeline it is so-called Lake Ramsey) after the glacier retreat. They often form
sheet-like landmasses in relief with variety of facial layers at different bathymetric levels when changing
depths of the sea in the Russian sector from minimum (shoreline) to maximum 70-80 m. Their thickness
ranges from 5 15-18 m.
In the north-eastern part of the Gulf of Finland lacustrine-glacial deposits are cropped out at the seabed on
the periphery of islands and underwater uplifts, as well as the underwater slopes of Moshchny and Maly
Islands. In general, they are not widespread because a large part of the seabed is overlapped by the Baltic
glacial lake sediments.
The variety of material composition of glacial lake sediments shows the whole spectrum of dimensions
from finely homogeneous and varved clays to coastal gravel and pebbles formations. Mostly in the
considered area they are represented by a very specific cross-rhythmically-laminated sediments, which
are a banded alternation of clay and sand-clay aleurites. The thickness of straticules usually grows down
the interval and in the same direction the total psephicity of sediments increases.
The composition of argillites is as follows: micaceous clay (60-80%), clinkstone (9-15%), kaolinite (1020%). Rock-forming minerals of float fraction are represented by quartz (75-89%), feldspar (10-20%),
clasts (3%).
The content of heavy mineral in these sediments is low (n10 -2 %). Among heavy mineral are dominated
authigenous micronoddles of barium sulphate, which ranged from 30 to 100% of the heavy fraction.
Among allothigenic heavy mineral are hornblende (30-70% allothigenic fraction composition 0.1-0.25
mm; 25-50% - 0.01-0.1 mm), almandine-pyrope garnets (5-30 %), black mica (0-60%), achmatite (1020%), zircon (up to 10%), titanic iron ore (up to 4%). As an accessory minerals there are sphen, apatite,
tourmaline, pyroxene.
Lymnetic - glacial sedime nts of the Baltic glacial lake (lgIIIbl).As a result of Luzhsky (Nevski) glacier
tongue retreat and the disintegration (melting) local glacial-lake basins junctioned with the formation of
the single largest freshwater glacial basin known as the Baltic glacial lake. Glacial lake deposits are
widely spread on the bottom of the Gulf of Finland in the form of extensive underwater terraced plains.
Above sea levels of overlying bed vary from 0 to 70-80 m and thickness ranges from 3-5 to 8-10 m.

p. 123

Baltic glacial lake deposits form a single sedimentary cycle consisting of a few members, regularly
changing in section (bottom-upwards): banded type clays with clear binomial structure and thickness of
rhythm 3-8 mm; mud shale, with lamination which resulted from the filamentary interlayers of a more
rudaceous stock; clays with barely visible horizontal bedding; band clays with interdigitation of thin beige
and gray stripes; the last member is a mud shales with sand-aleuritic lenses with thickness 1-3 mm, which
are gradually replaced by monotonous ball-clays. Deluviums are of reddish, brown, beige, gray tones,
they differ from the underlying banded clays vary by sharp decline in density.
By granulometric composition these deluviums are represented by clays and silt clays (Md = 0.0005-0.005
mm) with particles less than 0.01 mm - 80-95%, and less than 0.001 mm - 40-60%. The increase of clay
fraction upward the sequence, accompanied by a reduction in the number of sand particles, and the
median size is typical for the described deposits.
Clay minerals are represented by micaceous clay (70-85%), kaolinite (5-20%), clinkstone (7-15%). Float
fraction consists of quartz (70-85%), feldspar (15-30%) and clasts (up to 6%). Among allothigenic heavy
mineral are dominated: hornblende (25-45%), achmatite (0-20%), almandine-pyrope garnets (6-20%).
Baltic glacial lake deposits superpose Holocenic bodies. By analogy with the adjacent territories the
starting moment of the retreat of the glacier from ridge Salpauselka (10200 years ago) is considered the
lower boundary of the Holocene formations in the Gulf of Finland in the stratigraphic and
paleogeographic terms.
Usually the Holocene deposits have low thickness (ranging from 1-2 up to several meters), although there
are anomalous values up to 20-25 m. The genesis of Holocene deposits are typically associated with
lymnetic and neptunian conditions reflecting postglacial stages of the Baltic Sea (Gulf of Finland) habit.
There is also possible the local habit of chemogenic, biogenic and industrial sediments.
Lake deposits of Lake Antsilovoye typically superpose glacial lake deposits (Karelian and the Baltic
glacial lake). Their thickness is low and it ranges from the first meters (0.5 to 2.2 m). Above sea levels of
overlying bed within the water area vary from -10 to -60 m and around Berezovye Islands reach +20 m.
Lake Antsilovoye deposits are represented by gray or brown-gray clays or silt clays of very soft
consistency. The presence of micronoddles of authigenous sulphides (hydrotroilite) forming grouped in
chains concretions with 0.1-1.5 cm thickness is a differential characteristic of these sediments.
Enrichment of near-contact levels by these concretions is typical (upper and lower hydrotroilite levels). In
a number of cross-sections the complex of Antsilovoye lake deposits are covered by thin (20-30 cm)
member monotonous blue clays, which are enriched by authigenous sulphides (micronoddles of pyrite).
Another feature of the Antsilovoye lake deposits is a non-uniform composition due to the large number of
small-scale (split millimeter) xenomorphic aleuritic clusters. Among Antsilovoye lake deposits there
dominate well-graded sands with gyttja interlayers.

p. 124

Lake Antsilovoye clays and silt clays are marked by high content of aleuritic particles (up to 25%), which
leads in general to increasing of the median size and deterioration of gradation (d=0.01, S=2.66).
Particles less than 0.01 mm can take from 40 to 70 %, and less than 0.001 mm - max 30%. The
predominant types of deposits are aleuritic clays along with silt clays.
Humidity of Lake Antsilovoye clays is ranged from 65 to 79%, and density - from 1.55 to 1.66 g / cm.
The range of values of plasticity index varies from 14 to 32, due to uneven distribution of organic matter
in deposits.
Mineral composition of Lake Antsilovoye deposits not differ from the underlying glacial lake clays.
Argillites are represented by micaceous clay (75-80%), kaolinite (5-18%) and clinkstone (5-10%), and
terrigenous mineral fraction of float fraction are represented by quartz (75-80%), feldspar (10-20%) and
clasts (up to 8%).
Neptunian Holocene deposits (mQ IV) are different in age and genesis. Littorina and limnea stages stand
out within the water area (as well as nondesiccated Littorina-limnea) with presence of nepheloid and
wave genetic types.
Neptunian littorina sand deposits are of wave genetic type. They are considerable in the coastal shallow
waters and in some small uplands at water depths of no more than 10-15 m. The thickness of deposition
ranges from 8 to 12 m. Their development is likely to be connected with a decrease in sea level during
Antsilovoye lake regression, and initial stages of Littorina transgression.
Coastal facies of Littorina sediments are presented in the form of fine-grained and aleuritic sands as well
as semigravel sands. There is a thin layer of coarsegrained, gravel sands usually on the surface and below
they change to medium-grained followed by fine-grained sands.
The mineral composition of sandy deposits relatively uniform: it consists of subarcoses with high content
of feldspar clasts. The volume of heavy mineral in some areas is up to 3%.
Nondesiccated littorina-limnea deposits are mainly dark greenish-gray pelites and flowage silt pelites,
containing a large quantity of organic matter. Depending on the nature of organic matter distribution the
deposits have either a spotted or banded composition. Higher volumes of organic matter in deposits (>
5%) leads to black decay ooze silts with a specific odour of hydrogen sulfide. Most of these deposits have
lens, layers and accumulations of gray aleurit and incorporation of phytodetritus.

p. 125

Granulometric analysis of deposits shows the volatility of their composition: along with the dominant
pelites, silt pelites and silt clays there are three-component sediments - sand-aleuritic clays, aleuritic clay
sands and aleuritic sandy clays, the granulometric parameters upward the sequence are highly varied (Md
- from 0.05 mm to 0.001 mm, particles less than 0.01 mm - from 30 to 80%, less than 0.001 mm - from 7
to 40%).
A notable feature of the maritime area of Russian sector of offshore gas pipeline Nord Stream is the
presence of high concentrations of iron-manganese nodules (Annex 3.1-1).
Gas-containing subsoils are present in series of Holocene neptunian sediments throughout the projected
pipeline route. The source of gas is the gas generation process in decaying of soil organic matter.
According to literature data, the surface gas is almost always composed almost entirely of methane (the
specific smell testifies the presence of small quantity of hydrogen sulphide). The gas containing was
expressed in the form of areas with the loss of correlation in the acoustic images. The gas volumes were
not checked by technical equipment.
Biogenic sedime nts on islands consist of turf grade laterally in the lower part to gyttja. The thickness of
biogenic sediments is about 0.3 m, in rare cases 1-2 m. The radiocarbon dating showed that the biogenic
deposits on the terraced surface on the Bolshoy Berezovy island on above sea levels about + 5 m were
older than 200 years, and at the same location at about 10 meters up were formed during the Sub-Atlantic
period.
3.1.4.
Geomorphological conditions
Geomorphological conditions of the seabed in the area of the planned gas pipeline in the Gulf of Finland
are represented by glacial hilly-ridged plain, with some areas of rock outcrops. Crests of large ridges form
a chain of islands and banks. Subsea depths varying from 0 at Portovaya Bay shoreline to 88 m in the
central part of the offshore section. The mean depth of the route is - 40-60 m (figure 3.1-4).

p. 126

Figure 3.1-4.
Bathymetry map of the Gulf of Finland. Bottom profile of the gulf axial region
along line (On top)
Generally the area is characterized by moderate and high degree of breaks and the relatively low diversity
of its forms. The principal seabed-forming processes in the area of work are differentiated diastrophic
movements, and repeated glaciation. Hills are a small in square, round and elongated in plan view
landmasses grouped in chains of north-western stretch with the length 1 km and more. The hills and
ridges are separated by cols in width from 0,1 0,2 to 56 with a gradient less than 1 . Ridges are
intermittent and constitute a chain of uplifts (banks) with ordnance datum 5-10 m below sea level,
separated by cols with cleves, where the amplitude of the relief may be as high as 10-20 m. Hollow
bottoms have low angles to the south-east, and traced to a depth of 30 m.
As a similar forms of relief on the adjoining land, rises are formed by escars and kames. On land, these
forms are the result of the overlying bed prominence of Proterozoic rock foundation, overlapped by
blanketlike water-glacial sediments of a small (from 0.4 to 1.2 m) drift sheet. The amplitude of the relief
of solid rock and moraine is up to 40 m.
Directly in the corridor route from shoreline of Portovaya Bay to 0.250 pipeline passes through
subhorizontal undulating plain underwater continuation of Holocene marine terrace with depths from 0 to
0.3 m.
Starting from 0.250 the route crosses offshore shoreface. Underwater gradient at the site is 1 . The
water depth at the end of the area near 1.100 is 12.5 m.

p. 127

From 1.100 the route runs along the eastern coast of cape Portovy. Close to the 3, near the
Portovaya Bay exit, the route crosses a shallow area on the underwater extension of the Cape Portovy
with sounding marks from 13 to 15 m.
From the 4.700 abeam Maly Fiskar Island the route crosses the southern slope of this lifted block and
comes out on underwater plain with depths over 25 m near KP 5.300. In this area the route crosses the
lifted block of the bank Shevyakova - Zapadnaya ( 15), then goes to the east of Bolshoy Fiskar island
and Kouhuva Rock bank ( 18), then crosses the south-eastern continuation of the lifted block of
Hallikarti and Itakivi islands and bank Sitirock, then turn from the south-east elevation which adjoins to
Sommers island and Maly Sommers Rock ( 43).
From Maly Sommers Rock the route comes out into a hollow limited by 50-meter isobath, located east of
Gogland.
From 74 the route runs along the northern slope of the elevation which adjoins to the banks
Mordvinova and goes on to Gogland.
From 88 to 98 the route crosses underwater elevation adjacent to Gogland.
From 89, south of the bank Meririutta the route comes into hollow. Here the route crosses the border
of the EEZ of Russia ( 121). The water depth is 65 m here.
In the structure of most of the northern shoreline of the Gulf of Finland abrasion-accumulative coasts are
dominated. The main subtypes are the moraine (abrasion, slope beach with boulder armouring), sand
(accumulative, sandy beach with a band of front downs) and in some places mudflats (accumulative coast
with little accumulation of alevropelit sediments). Further to the west of the northern coast of the Gulf
takes a typically skerry nature. The following subtypes of the coasts are highlighted here: rocky (residual
forms of glacial exaration in the coastal area), moraine, muddy, and sandy in rare cases.
The main types of seabed of the Gulf of Finland were formed in the final stages of the Valdai glaciation.
As a result of glacial flows followed by water-ice, lake and ocean basins the following types of relief
were formed:
Accretion relief. As part of the accretion relief there are the greatest number of types of terrain. This is
because that during the upper quaternary age the bottom of the Gulf of Finland took the lowest
hypsometric position and therefore was an area of accumulative processes prevalence of different genesis
- glacial, water-glacial, lymnetic and neptunian. As a result a broad accumulative surfaces were formed
within the described underwater territory.
Undulating-morainic plain. This type of relief formed by the accumulation of moraine material is
pervasive primarily in the shallow zones. Morainic plains are located on the periphery of the islands and
along the continental coast in the north-eastern part of the Gulf of Finland. Because of this hypsometric
position the surface was subjected to significant erosion. As a result, there formed shoaly ridging surfaces
with relative elevations of 5-15 m and with a length of hundreds of meters (maximum 1-2 km). Ridges are
oriented parallel to the direction of glacier from the north-west to south-east. The landfall area of Russian
gas pipeline sector in the Bay Portovaya is typical for this type of relief.

p. 128

In addition to plains covering the coastal and shallow-water zones there are quite large accumulative
surfaces in the central part of the area at depths of 20-40 m, which are a series of table uplands and large
ridges, separated by localized degradations. The relative elevations are 10-20 m in here, and the size of
individual forms varies within 1-3 km.
Fluvio-glacial (glacial - fluviatile) plain. Fluvio-glacial relief is relatively limited. Most commonly it is
pervasive at Berezovye Islands, where fluvio-glacial sands form a hollow hilly outwash plains on above
sea levels + 15 ... +20 m. Such bodies are also noted on Gogland.
Quite large ridge-like elevation of Stirsudden banks with guidance from the north-west to south-east and
location in the eastern part of the area can be classed to the described type of relief within the water area.
Its height is 10-15 m. All this elevation is formed by anisometric sands. At the top there are ridges with
length of the first hundred meters, which are formed by semigravel sands with pebbles and isolated small
boulders.
Limno-glacial (lymnetic - glacial) plain. Accumulative lymnetic-glacial plains were formed over a
relatively long period of time. During the period of existence of local glacial meare the accumulation of
banded and banded type sediments in them led to a partial alignment of pre-glacial relief. This process
lasted with more intense and at the time of the Baltic glacial meare. Active accumulation in lymnetic glacial basins has led to very large (at some places almost complete) alignment of quite desiccated relief
of overlying bed moraine deposits. All this has led to the formation of subhorizontal or low-angled
levelled up surfaces. In some places there are ridging elevations with very flat slopes with a length first
hundred meters. The described plains cover very large areas in southern and western parts of the pipeline
route, and they are the most common type of relief.
Lake plain. This type of relief has very limited area of distribution, and in Gulf of Finland exists only in
Western parts. The lake plain is shaped due to clayey sediments accumulation in Ancyl lake. It presents
almost flat accumulative surface at depths 30-40 m. On the islands (Berezovye, Ceskar) the described
plain is situated on above sea levels +10 - +15 m.
Sea plain of non-wave genesis. Non-wave (basin) accumulation play the leading role in sea accumulative
processes. Due to rather intensive settling of sediments in the sea basins areas characterised by calm
hydrodynamic regime very uniform by morphological properties surfaces spreading both central and
coastal sea areas are formed. Plains or very sloping wavy plains having elevations no more than 1-2 m
prevail here. The described plains are situated on different depths from 20-30 up to 70 - 80 m. The period
of this plain formation is the period of existence of Littorina and post-Littorina sea basin.

p. 129

Sea wave plain The sea wave accumulation processes are naturally shown the most bright way in coastal
regions. Commonly impact of these processes leads to formation of low-angled surfaces, laid by sand
stuff. These surfaces are situated on depths from 0 up to 5-10 m and have slight inclination towards the
sea. Area of the described relief distribution is not large. Insignificant by surface accumulative sea plains
are shown at Maly and Ceskar islands as well as in Bjerkesund sound.
Abrasion-accumulative relief. This genetic category consists of only one type of relief - abrasionaccumulative plain. Its formation is stipulated by scour of sediments situated in shallow water, different
by age and genesis and deposition of scouring products virtually in place in local saddles. In the result
finely divided (relative elevations of individual forms no more than 2-5 m) low-angled or subhorizontal
surfaces are formed, within them abrasion and accumulative parts alternate. Similar relief is pervasive
along the Gulf of Finland coast in its north-west part and also in the sector "Yermilovskaya bay Stirsudden cape".
Abrasion relief. This genetic category as well as the previous one consists of one type of relief - finely
divided abrasion plain. Abrasion surfaces formation takes place due to scouring of sediments rising on the
seabed by the waves. As far as the depth up to which influence of wave processes in Gulf of Finland is
seen is not more than 15-20 m, the described type of relief is situated in shallow, predominantly coastal
zones. In the result of intense seabed sediments scouring the finely divided low-angled (to the sea)
surfaces developed on the sediments different by composition and genesis are formed. Such surfaces are
located on the periphery of Berezovye islands, along southern coast of Maly island, on the periphery of
Moshchny Island as well as along the continental shore.
3.1.5.
Surface sediment parameters along pipeline route
3.1.5.1. Grain size distribution

The pipeline route region within Russian sector may be divided into 3 areas by the surface sediment
parameters:
Portovaya Bay - sandy sediments prevail;
central area between Portovaya Bay and Gogland - consists mostly of greenish-grey and
black silts with high iron-manganese concretions content;
area near Gogland - sandy sediments.

p. 130

Grain size distribution of these sediments is shown on fig. 3.1-5 and 3.1-6, and space distribution of
fractions >0.1 and <0.05 mm - on fig. 3.1-7 and 3.1-8,
Figure 3.1-5.
Figure 3.1-6.
Average grain size distribution of surface sedime nts on areas of the route near
Portovaya Bay and Gogland
Average grain size distribution of surface sedime nts on central area of the route

p. 131

Figure 3.1-7.
Space distribution of fractions >0.1 mm in surface layer of seabed sedime nts on

Russian sector of pipeline route

p. 132

Figure 3.1-8.
Space distribution of fractions less 0.05 mm in surface layer of seabed sediments

on Russian sector of pipeline route
3.1.5.2. Pollution levels of sediment surface layer

Assessment of sediment contamination was performed by defined 6 areas on the pipeline route. The
averaging areas borders pass through the route turning points. Portovaya Bay is assigned as separate area.
The averaging areas diagram is shown on fig. 3.1-9.
The seabed sediments level of pollution along the route of the planned gas pipeline in the limits of
Russian gas pipeline sector has the following characteristics: Grounds chemical testing methods are listed
in table 1.7 (Vol.12 Book 1. Part 3. Section 1).

p. 133

Figure 3.1-9.
Map of gas pipeline route areas showing seabed sedime nts pollution class
according to "Norms and criteria of seabed sediments contamination assessment in St. Petersburg
water objects? 1996" Regional norm [211]
Organic carbon (Org.C) Organic carbon levels in gas pipeline sea area seabed sediments varies largely:
from 0.009 up to 23.5 g/kg of dry sediment in muddy grounds with smell of hydrogen sulphide.
Petroleum hydrocarbons (P.Hc). P.Hc levels in sea area seabed sediments varies relatively largely: from
4.9 to 239 microgram/kg of dry sediment. The least average levels of P.Hc are characteristic for seabed
sediments of areas 1 (Portovaya bay region) and 6 (Gogland region), and the most one - for area 3 (central
part of the route). The mean level of P.Hc. for seabed sediments along the whole route is equal to 54.6
microgram/kg of dry sediment. 3.1-10).

p. 134

Figure 3.1-10.
Average levels of P.Hc. in seabed sediments at different areas of pipeline route.
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). In seabed sediments along pipeline route all the 16 priority
PAHs group compounds were identified. Individual PAHs revealing rate made up for: naphthalene 95.8%, acenaphthylene - 31.3%, fluorene - 45.8%, phenanthrene - 95.8%, anthracene - 87.5%,
fluoranthene - 91.7%, pyrene - 70.8%, benz(a)anthracene - 79.2%, chrysene - 70.8%, benz(b)fluoranthene
- 100%, benz(k)fluoranthene - 95.8%, benz(a)pyrene - 75.0%, dibenz(a,h)anthracene- 81,3%,
indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene - 91.7%, benz(ghi)perylene - 95.8%.
Sum PAHs levels in seabed sediments changes from 5.2 to 612 ng/g of dry sediment.
Minimum PAHs sum levels in seabed sediments (same as P.Hc) were recorded in areas 1 and 6, minimum
ones - in areas 3 and 4, where levels of benz(a)pyrene, the most toxic compound of this group, reached
33.8 ng/g of dry sediment.
Mean PAHs sum levels in seabed sediments along the whole route is equal to 188 ng/g of dry sediment,
and of benz(a)pyrene - 5.5 ng/g of dry sediment.
Fig. 3.1-11 shows average levels of PAHs in seabed sediments of defined averaging areas along the
pipeline route.
Figure 3.1-11.
Average levels of PAHs levels and benz(a)pyrene in seabed sedime nts on different
areas along the pipeline route

p. 135

Organochlorines (OCh) 13 of 16 organochlorines pesticide were identified with different detection

frequency (14.6 to 100%). The most frequent in seabed sediments DDT and its metabolites (up to 100%
together), and also pentachlorobenzene (18.8%), hexachlorobenzene (45.8%), alpha-HCH (37.5%), betaHCH (45.8%), gamma-HCH (20.8%) are settled.
Maximum levels of HCH isomers sum, DDT and its metabolites sum, chlorobenzenes sum reached 0.77,
17.4 and 1.61 ng/g of dry sediment at areas 6, 5, 3 accordingly. Mean levels of HCH isomers sum, DDT
and its metabolites sum, chlorobenzenes sum along the whole route reached 015, 2.73 and 0.12 ng/g of
dry sediment
All the congeners of 9 analyzed particular s were fixed with detection frequency 33.3 to 100%.
Average levels of sum along the pipeline route are equal to 3.90 ng/g of dry sediment, and
maximum - 15.3 ng/g of dry sediment. Maximum levels of concentration of most congeners and PCB
sum were fixed at area 4 seabed sediments.
Average levels of PCB group, DDT, HCH and chlorobenzenes in the route seabed sediments are shown
on fig. 3.1-12 and 3.1-13.
Figure 3.1-12.
Average levels of PCB and DDT group in seabed sediments at different route areas
Figure 3.1-13.
Average levels of HCH and chlorobenzenes in seabed sedime nts at different route
areas

p. 136

Phenols. Levels of the most individual phenols in all the samples of seabed sediments were below
detection limit of used analyse method (<0.01 microgram/g of dry sediment).
Maximum phenol levels in seabed sediments (0.035 microgram/g of dry sediment) were detected at area
3.
Average phenol levels in seabed sediments along the whole route were in whole below the detection limit
(<0.01 microgram/g of dry sediment).
Heavy metals (HM). HM average levels in planned gas pipeline sea area seabed sediments contained:
iron - 19.89 mg/g of dry sediment;
manganese - 3.78 mg/g of dry sediment;
zinc - 101.1 microgram/g of dry sediment;
copper - 22.6 microgram/g of dry sediment;
nickel - 17.1 microgram/g of dry sediment;
cobalt - 11.9 microgram/g of dry sediment;
zinc - 23.2 microgram/g of dry sediment;
cadmium - 0.71 microgram/g of dry sediment;
chromium - 13.8 microgram/g of dry sediment;
arsenic - 5.79 microgram/g of dry sediment;
mercury - 0.083 microgram/g of dry sediment;
Maximum levels of all the range of HMs are identified in seabed sediments classified (by GOST 2510082) as clayey silts, situated at areas 3, 4, 5 and 6.
Maximum levels of iron (57.1 microgram/g), manganese (37.5 microgram/g), cobalt (48.8 microgram/g),
arsenic (41.1 microgram/g) are identified in seabed sediments at area 5.
Maximum levels of zinc (271 microgram/g), copper (64.2 microgram/g), lead (83.6 microgram/g),
cadmium (2.10 microgram/g), chromium (42.8 microgram/g) - at area 3.
Maximum levels of nickel (37.1 microgram/g) - at area 4); mercury (0.580 microgram/g) - at area 6.
Average levels of the most toxic HM in seabed sediments along the gas pipeline route are shown on fig.
3.1-14 and 3.1-15.

p. 137

Figure 3.1-14.
Average levels of copper, nickel and zinc in seabed sedime nts at different areas of
pipeline route
Figure 3.1-15.
Average levels of mercury and cadmium in seabed sediments at different areas of

pipeline route
Allowable level of contaminants in sediment is not specified by Russian federal regulations. Therefore,
assessment of sediment contamination levels in the area of proposed pipeline construction was carried out
based on the following:
requirements of regional regulation "Provisions and criteria for the evaluation of sediment
contamination in Saint-Petersburg water bodies", 1996.
recommendations SP11-102-97 based on the conformance of contamination levels to the

criteria for ecological assessment of sediment contamination according to Neue
Niederlandische Liste. Altlasten Spektrum 3/95.
On the whole, according to the Regional Regulation, sediment contamination along the proposed pipeline
route corresponds to the "zero" and "first" class (clear and slightly contaminated sediments) in sections 1,
2, 5, and 6, and to the "second"class (moderately contaminated sediments) in sections 3 and 4.

p. 138

Comparing the survey data from 2005, showing the allowable concentration levels (AC) and disturbance
levels (DL) of sediment contamination along the route within the Russian EEZ, with the Regulations of
Neue Niederlandische Liste (Altlasten Spektrum 3/95) showed the following.
The excess of AC in sediments collected at the offshore section of the proposed pipeline was detected for
the total hydrocarbons (up to 4.78 AC), total DDT (up to 6.97 AC), Gamma-HCH (up to 1.41 AC), from
the list of organic pollutants; and for zinc (up to 1.94 AC), cadmium (up to 2.36 AC), copper (up to 1.78
AC), cobalt (up to 2.44 AC), nickel (up to 1.06 AC), mercury (up to 1.93 AC) and arsenic (1.42 AC),
from the list of heavy metals.
In all cases the recorded contaminant concentrations were much lower than the disturbance levels.
The excess of the allowable concentration level of hydrocarbons in sediments was detected in 31.3% of
samples. The maximum concentration of hydrocarbons (up to 4.78 AC) was detected in sediments of
Section 3. The lowest levels of hydrocarbons concentration were detected in Sections 1 and 6 and did nit
exceed AC.
The excess of AC for DDT pesticide group containing in sediments of the observed marine area was
detected in 29.2% of samples. The maximum concentration of DDT group compounds was detected in
Section 5 and amounted to 6.97 AC. Based on average concentration of DDT group pesticide (2.20 AC),
the most contaminated area is Section 3. The lowest levels of DDT not exceeding AC were recorded in
Sections 1, 2 and 6.
The excess of AC for Gamma-HCH containing in sediments of the observed marine area was detected in
14,6 % of samples. The maximum concentration of Gamma-HCH was detected in Section 3 and
amounted to 1,41 AC. Based on average concentration of Gamma-HCH (0,6 AC), the most contaminated
area is Section 3. The lowest levels of Gamma-HCH not exceeding AC were recorded in Sections 1, 2
and 6.
Upon the surveys results, the average total concentration of PAH containing in sediments of the observed
marine area amounted to 188 mkg/kg of dry sediment (0.19 AC), including benzo[a]pyrene (5.50 mkg/kg
of dry sediment). As in the previous case, the maximum total concentration of PAH did not exceed AC in
any section and amounted to 612 mkg/kg of dry sediment (0.61 AC) in Section 4.
The AC excess for heavy metals was detected:
for zinc in 27.1% of samples amounting to 1.94 AC in Section 3;
for copper in 31,3 % of samples amounting to 1,78 AC in Section 3;
for nickel in 20.0 % of samples amounting to 1.40 AC in Section 4;
for cobalt in 12.5 % of samples amounting to 2.44 AC in Section 5;
for lead in 0 % of samples amounting to 0.98 AC in Section 3;
for cadmium in 37.5 % of samples amounting to 2.63 AC in Section 3;
for chrome in 0 % of samples amounting to 0.43 AC in Section 3;
for arsenic in 8.3 % of samples amounting to 1.42 AC in Section 5;
for mercury in 6.3 % amounting to 1.93 AC in Section 6;

p. 139

It should be noted that for the sediments collected along the offshore section of the proposed pipeline, the
maximum levels of heavy metals were detected only in seabed sediments at the certain stations of
Sections 3 and 5.
The average concentration of all types of HM in seabed sediments of the observed water area did not
exceed AC.
Radionuclides. According to surveys data from 2005, levels of Specific Activity of caesium -137 and
strontium - 90 in seabed sediments did not exceed the level of the Minimum Measured Activity and were
substantially lower than the value of Minimal Significant Specific Activity (MSSA) [213]. Significant
concentrations of other types of radionuclides in samples were not detected.
3.1.6.
Lithodynamic processes
3.1.6.1. Coastal dynamics of sediments

In the area of Portovaya Bay, the studying of lithodynamic processes in order to assess water circulation,
turbidity current and potential seabed deformations during storms, was carried out by means of numerical
modelling. The calculations were based on mathematical models designed by I.O. Leontiev (Leontiev I.O.
2007, 2008) [148, 149] (Appendix 3.1-2).
The calculations were carried out using the following input parameters:
original sea-bottom profile;
deposits characteristics (density, representative average size);
wind and waves parameters;
duration of wave disturbance.
The bathimetric survey was based upon the navigation map and echo-sounding data. The bathimetric plan
of the nearshore bay is depicted on Fig. 3.1-16 (isobaths are smoothened). The same Figure shows the
pipeline route, sampling points of soil the grain size distribution of which was used during modelling, and
the position of design profile.

p. 140

Figure 3.1-16.
Bathimetric plan of nearshore area of Portovaya Bay
The lower boundary of profile is located 10 m deep. According to preliminary assessment, in more deepwater areas, seabed deformation under existing wind and wave climate will be insignificant. The higher
boundary of profile corresponds with the forepart of boulder armouring specific to the shoreline in
Portovaya Bay.
The underwater slope has an average value of approximately 0.01, with the slope less steep near the
shoreline.
Throughout the profile there is a thick layer of coarse sand, particles of which distribute within the size
range of 0.5-1.0 mm. The calculation was performed using the middle-size value, e.g. d=0.75 mm. The
values of the sand density and porosity were estimated at 2.65 103 kg/m3 and 0.4 respectively.
The modelling was performed for the extreme storm events with a return period of 1/1, 1/10 and 1/100
years. It was assumed that the most strong storms were those of S-W and S points, and due to the deep
refraction, the waves in the inner bay distribute beyond the pipeline route practically at a normal curve
toward the shoreline, regardless of their original direction. [150].

p. 141

The main source of information on the extreme storms parameters used during the calculation, was the the
Snamprogetti Report data (hereinafter - "Wave data 1" (WD1)).
Additionally, during comparative evaluation were used design parameters of storms from the Research
Work report...[2004] (hereinafter - "Wave data 2 (WD2) and "Wave data " (WD3)).
All existing data is shown in Table 3.1-1
Table 3.1-1
Storm
Original parameters of the wave climate in Portovaya Bay

1/1 year
1/10 years
1/100 years
Wave data 1 (WD1)

Hs, m
T, s
+, m
-, m
2.1
6.1
1.63
-0.76
W, m s-1
Hs, m
tp , s
+, m
19
3.09
6.65
1.2
2.8
7.1
2.48
-1.12
3.5
7.9
2.85
-1.51
25
3.74
7.29
1.2
30
4.48
8.75
1.2
2.2
6.0
2.6
6.5
Wave data 2 (WD1)
Wave data 3 (WD3)

HS , m
Tp, s
1.8
5.4
Here are shown the significant values of wave height Hs and the periods of spectral peak Tp in the areas
with water depth of 14-15 m (WD1 and WD2) or in the open sea areas (WD3). WD1 also provides
information on the level increase during surge (+) and the level decrease during negative surge (-). WD2
propose significantly lesser value of maximum surge and provide characteristic wind speeds (W) that
were used during the currents calculation.
The proposed duration of storms during the modelling of seabed deformation estimated at 1 day.
3.1.6.2. Water circulation during storms
Fig. 3.1-17 shows a typical example of water circulation in Portovaya Bay under moderate South-point
storm conditions. The highest value of the currents speed was detected at the capes amounting to 0.5-0.6
m/s. In shallow-water areas at the top of the Bay the speed is changing to the range of 0.2-0.3 m/s.
However, for the most of the water area the value does not exceed 0.1 m/s.

p. 142

Figure 3.1-17. Water circulation during moderate South-point storms. The shades of green
indicate different levels of currents speed. The flow lines are given in m3s-1
The water circulation during storms is characterised by water shift along the shores toward the centre of a
bay and by its outflow to the deeper areas. Areas at the top of a bay are characterised by relatively
stagnant conditions which is indicated by the presence of water circulation.
The results of modelling of the extreme storm events with a return period from once a year to once in 100
years show that the highest speed values of the storm currents may amount to 1 m/s. However, the highest
speed of the currents is still detected near the bay shoreline. On the whole, the average speed of the
currents within the pipelines route will not exceed 0.3-0.4 m/s.
3.1.6.3. Seabed deformations along continental slope
The results of calculations of seabed deformation due to the storms, based on the wave data WD1, WD2
and WD3, are shown on Figures 3.1-18, 3.1-19 and 3.1-20. The negative values indicate the bed
movement.

p. 143

Figure 3.1-18.
Distribution of seabed deformations due to the storm events, based on WD1
The calculations based on WD1 were carried out for the normal level, surge and negative surge. The
seabed profile, as well as the maximum level deviations from average position are shown at the bottom of
Fig. 3.1-18. The distribution of deformations has undulating nature. Three areas of accumulation and two
areas of scouring can be distinguished. Under normal level and negative surge values the amplitudes of
positive and negative deformations are quite similar (0.4-0.5 m). The main scouring occurs in the areas
with water depth from 2 to 4 m. Accumulation takes place in areas with water depth from 5 to 8 m, as
well as directly along the shoreline). The deformations amplitude increase with the increase of storm
levels. As we can see, the scouring near the shoreline under normal level could be partly compensated by
the accumulation during negative surge.

p. 144

Figure 3.1-19.
During the surge, the conditions significantly change. The entire area of deformations shifts toward the
shoreline and the main scourging occurs at a relatively steep section of the beach. Seabed depression here
amounts to 0.5 m during storms with a return period of 1/10 years, and 1.2 m during storms with a return
period of 1/100 years.
Calculations based on WD2 (Fig. 3.1-19) refer to the normal level and surge value which is the same
under any climate. In fact, these calculations show the same distribution of deformations as in the
previous case, although the amplitudes are slightly higher. The most significant difference may be
observed during surge. The underwater part of the beach is being washed away, as it is in the previous
case. However, during the storm with a return period of 1/100 years, waves are forming a berm
(embankment) up to 1.4 m high in the above water part.

p. 145

Figure 3.1-20.
Seabed deformations based on WD3 (Fig. 3.1-20) almost do not exceed the depth of 5 m and their
amplitudes are significantly lower than in the previous cases. The scouring does not exceed 0.25 m.
Therefore, changing of input wave parameters apparently affect the character of the results. However, it
seems that there is a certain range of conditions under which the deformations will be similar despite
different input data. This is indicated by the precision of measurements based on WD 1 and WD2 at the
normal level. Probably the design assessment of deformations is not that critical for the precision of wave
parameters, if they do not fit in the "right" range.
Also, the calculations results show close connection between the beach dynamics and the height of surge.
Under the normal level and surge value up to 1.2 m, sediments can accumulate above the shoreline, and
after the level increase for 1 more meter accumulation gives place to significant scouring. At the same
time, this climate change points out the possible way for the recovery of material washed out from the
beach under high surges.
Table 3.1-2 shows the maximum deformations, both positive (h-) and negative (h+), as well as the depths
at which these occur. The negative depth values refer to the above-water part of the bank vault. All the
maximum values fall into the depth range of 8 to 3.2 m. That is the most active area of shoreline profile.

p. 146

Table 3.1-2
Maximum deformations (nume rator) and the corresponding depths (denominator)
1/1 year
1/10 years
1/100 years
Storm
h+
hh+
hh+
,m
,m
,m
,m
,m
h-, m
Wave data 1
Norm. level
0.32
-0.16
0.45
-0.26
0.38
-0.38
3.6
1.3
4.0
1.5
4.0
1.8
Negative surge
0.32
-0.24
0.26
-0.35
0.45
-0.40
4.0
1.8
4.0
2.4
8.2
3.2
Surge
0.12
-0.06
0.36
-0.58
0.29
-1.18
2.4
-1.8
-0.4
-3.2
3.2
-1.8
Wave data 2
Norm. level
0.44
-0.24
0.38
-0.34
0.56
-0.47
4.0
1.8
4.0
2.0
0.2
2.0
Surge
0.30
-0.14
0.58
-0.30
1.40
-0.46
3.2
1.5
-0.4
0.7
-0.4
0.9
Wave data 3
Norm. level
0.24
3.2
-0.10
1.1
0.35
3.6
-0.18
1.1
0.40
4.0
-0.25
1.3
Fig. 3.1-21 contains all calculated distributions of deformations related to different input data, return
periods of storm and level positions. As one can see, visible seabed deformations start from the depth of
10 m to the shoreline falling into value range of 0.5 m. At the shoreline and above the range expands to
+1.4 and - 1.2 m. The resulting values appear to be sufficiently representative for continental slope.
Figure 3.1-21.
Summary diagram for distribution of deformations resulting from storm events.

p. 147

3.1.6.4. Deformations due to submerged bars relocation

Significant sand deposits and relatively low-sloped bank vault could be considered as indirect features
indicating potential development of topographic mesoforms in form of submerged bars in the shoreline
area of the bay.
Figure 3.1-22.
Sche me of subme rged bars
It is known that during severe storms bars tend to shift towards the open sea, while under smooth sea
conditions they more often move toward the shore. Such movements occur at a range of some ten metres
resulting in seabed deformations with the maximum amplitude corresponding to the height of bar Z bar= ht
- hc , where ht and hc indicate the depths at a trough and above the top of bar [151] (Fig. 3.1-22).
There are internal and external bars located in the outer and inner parts of the coastline respectively.
External bars are characterized by large lateral dimension, but are less mobile and usually shorter than the
largest internal bar which is located in the area of the major storm waves crushing. The parameters of this
bar which are of great practical interest could be assessed using Leontiev's model [2008]. In this case the
storms with a return period of 1/1 year served as a basis for the assessment. As in the previous cases, the
calculations were based on wave data of the following types - WD1, WD2 and WD3. The results are
shown in Table 3.1-3.
Table 3.1-3
Wave data
WD1
WD2
WD3
Hs, m
2,1
3,1
1,8
Design parameters of the major submerged bar

Tp , s
h, m
h , m
ht m
1, m
6,1
6,6
5,4
3,5
4,7
2,7
2,4
3,4
1,9
3,2
4,9
2,4
47
61
37
11, m
Zbar , m
38
49
30
0,8
1,5
0,5
Here are shown the original wave parameters, crushing depth hB , depths above the bar hc and at a trough
ht , distance from the crushing point to the top of the bar lB , distance from the top to the trough centre lt ,
and hight of the bar Zbar . As can be seen, the design evaluations differ significantly depending on type of
the input data. For example, the bar dimensions predicted on basis of WD2 mainly correspond with the
conditions of the open Baltic coast.

p. 148

The most realistic bar parameters are those received from WD1. Taking them as a base we may estimate
seabed deformations resulting from the bar shifting at 0.8 m. Similar deformations are most probable at
the depths from 2 to 4-5 m.
3.1.6.5. Long-term trends of shore development
The problem in question are the trends of the shoreline transformations during the next several decades.
These trends are defined taking into account existing condition of sediment in the given morphodynamic
system. The balanced conditions provide the stability of the coast. If the incoming sediment does not
compensate the sediment loss, the coast is backing off. The main reserve for sandy shores constitute
gradient along the shoreline flow of sediments and transverse material flows through the bottom and top
boundaries of the shoreline area. Furthermore, the significant role play additional material sources and
and runoffs resulting from, e.g., river flow and sand extraction at a bank vault. Another consideration
should be paid to the changes of relative water level resulting from global processes (climate changes and
depends on the total of sediment reserve
the tectonics). The speed of the shoreline shifts
elements and could be calculated using the equation (12) in Appendix 3.1-2.
In Portotvaya Bay there is no alongshore sediment flow. Neither there are any additional material sources,
other than small streams flowing into the bay. Therefore, there are three main components: flow across
the bottom boundary q*, eolic flow across the top boundary qAeol, and virtual flow subject to level changes
with the speed w. Therefore, balance equation (12) takes the following shape
where h* and zc indicate the depth at the bottom boundary and the coast rising at the top boundary, and lX indicates the distance between the profile boundaries.
Calculation of values included in the equation requires the data on return periods of different hight
gradations and wave periods throughout the year. Such data contains only in array WD2. It was used as a
basis for calculating the required parameters. Moreover, the fact is that the wave heights in WD2 are
approximately 1.5 and the periods 1.1 higher than in WD1. Taking this into account, the resulting values
were recalculated for WD1. The result shows estimates for the parameters of sediment reserves and
shoreline shifts based on both data arrays. The results are shown in Table 3.1-4.
Table 3.1-4
Parameters of sediment reserves and long-term coast transformations
Parameter
Wave data 1
Wave data 2
Significant wave hight H 0.14% , m
2,6
3,8
Avg. wave period T 4% , s
3,6
4,0

p. 149

Parameter
Closing depth h*, m
Top boundary zs , m
Vert. scale h* + zs , m
Horiz. scale lX, m
Parameter S2
Flow at the bottom boundary q*, m3m-1 year-1
Flow at the top boundary qAeol, m3m-1year-1
Virtual flow wlX, m3 m-1 year-1
Accumulation, m3m-1year-1
Coastal accretion , m year-1
Wave data 1
5,2
3,5
8,7
450
10,5
9,2
3,0
0,8
5,2
0,6
Wave data 2
7,6
3,5
11,1
680
12,3
10,5
3,0
1,1
6,7
0,6
As the Table shows, in spite of different input data, positive sediment reserve (accumulation prevails) is
predicted in both cases. Concerning the quality, calculations confirm the stability of the considered coast.
Furthermore, it may be shifting toward the sea in the future. The sand reserve on the seabed is sufficient
to support this process for a long time (at least for several decades).
Even assuming accelerated raising of the World Ocean level for 0.005 m per year (as some forecasts
[Church et al., 2001] predict) the reserve is still positive. Therefore during the next decades, the coast in
Portovaya Bay is expected to remain stable or even to grow.
On the whole, assessment of lithodynamics natural system in the coastal area of the pipeline section
within Portovaya Bay allows to conclude the following:
1.
Under existing dynamic conditions and sedimentation features along the pipeline
route within Portovaya Bay, significant deformations will occur at the depth of 10 m
and gradually increase toward the shore.
2.
In the area of continental slope with water depth from 10 to 4-5 m maximum
amplitudes of deformations resulting from storm events fall into value range of 0.5
m.
3.
In the area with water depth of 3-4 m the presence of submerged bar is possible, the
shifting of which can result in seabed deformations with amplitude of 0.8 m. It
would be appropriate to take this value as a model to assess maximum deformations
for the entire profile from the depth of 4-5 m to the shoreline.

p. 150

3.2.
Climate and air conditions
3.2.1.
Physical and geographical summary
The Eastern part of the Gulf of Finland is located in the temperate climate zone with typical slight daily
and annual variation of air temperature, high humidity, significant cloud amount and frequent
precipitation. Although water masses of the Gulf of Finland serve as a some kind of capacitor
accumulating heat during summers and giving it back during winters, however it does not have any
decisive influence, due to relatively small area of the Gulf and shallow water column. The climate of the
Eastern part of the Gulf of Finland is more severe than the climate of the rest of the Gulf and the open
area of the Baltic Sea [10,16].
Location of the main hydrometeorological stations collecting the climate data is shown on Fig. 3.2-1 [61,
62, 63].
Figure 3.2-1.
Location of the hydrometeorological stations in the Eastern part of the Gulf of

Finland
The nature of atmospheric macroprocesses in the Eastern Gulf of Finland is governed by the prevailing
influence of air masses from the Atlantic. As a rule, cyclones move from the West to the offshore area of
the Gulf of Finland during all seasons. Moreover, during autumn and winter, there is a great possibility of
their repeated shifting from the North-West, and in spring and summer in this area often occur SouthWest cyclones [39]. Table 3.2-1 shows the return period of cyclones course originating from different
directions, both per season and per year.
Table 3.2-1
Return period (%) of cyclones courses beyond the Eastern part of the Gulf of Finland
Direction
Season
N
NE
E
SE
S
SW
W
NW
autumn
1
8
11
51
29
winter
1
3
14
48
34
spring
1
3
25
43
28
summer
4
11
28
34
23

p. 151

Season
Aver. annual
N
1
NE
-
E
-
Direction
SE
S
1
6
SW
20
W
44
NW
28
It is thermic regime of the air that is mainly used as a criterion of the season. It is considered the
beginning and the end of the winter season the date of bringing the average daily temperature of air over
0, and the beginning and the end of the summer season - bringing over 10.
Winter in the Gulf of Finland area begins in mid November and ends in 1st ten-day period of April.
Cyclonical activity is the most significant process in this season. Western and southern airflows dominate,
consequently, lukewarm humid weather with temperatures of air between 0 and -8 is the most
frequency (around 60%). Warm humid air with temperatures between 3 and 6 is reported in warm
quadrants of incoming Atlantic and Mediterranean cyclones (with frequency 10%) [96]. Thaws and most
significant precipitations are associated with these cyclones. Inrush of air masses from north and northeast took place from January, due to arctic anticyclone increasing (with frequency around 5%) and cold
arid weather is setting with air temperature between -17 and -25. Daily air temperature range is short
and at average is 1-3. Lower-cloud clear sky becomes twice likely from December to March, and
precipitation becomes generally widespread and falls about a quarter of its annual rate.
Spring takes place in April and May, and cold's comebacks and late snowfalls are often reported during
spring. Precipitations are rarer, than in winter, and their duration is shorter, than in other seasons. In
spring, relative humidity is the least in a year, and daily air temperature range in this period at average is
greatest (6-8) and can extend 20 in discrete fair days.
Summer - is temperately warm and takes place between early June and mid-September. Dominating
western airflows bring humid air masses with temperature close to normal (12-20). Rarer south-eastern
transports (with frequency around 12%) ensure warm arid weather, and penetration of air masses of arctic
origin in the Gulf of Finland's area decreases temperature to 5-10 in rear-parts of north-western
cyclones.
Autumn begins in mid-September and is associated with common weather deterioration - temperature
decreasing, turbidity, and lower cloud increasing. Cyclones migrating over the gulf bring lingering foul
weather periods. Duration of precipitation during October and November is 2-3 times longer than in
summer, but most of them are widespread; consequently, sum of monthly precipitations is less than in
summer.
Due to air masses of vary origin repeatedly issuing over the area of the Gulf of Finland, essential
deviations of some characteristics from the average annual ones may occur in certain seasons [310, 311,
312, 313].

page 152

3.2.2.
Air temperature
The coldest months in the eastern Baltic area are January and February. Average air temperature in these
months is -5 - -8. Air temperature in the eastern Gulf of Finland may decreases to -25 - -30, when
arctic air masses inrush. However, thaws, when air temperature increases to 5-10, are possible. Colds
are observed between September-October and May. The most frequent they observed between December
and March.
The warmest month in Baltic area is July. During this time, average monthly air temperature in the open
sea is between 16 and 18, and on the coast is between 14 and 20.
Fig.3.2-2. shows the air distribution of the average air temperature in January and in July over Baltic
Proper [99, 100].
Figure 3.2-2.
Monthly average air te mperature in distribution in Baltic area
Air temperature is typically decreased by northwestern and north-eastern winds and increased by southwestern and south-eastern ones.
Characteristics of temperature regime for stations are shown in Table 3.2-2.
Table 3.2-2
Air temperature, coastal stations in the Baltic area,
II
III
IV
VI
VII
VIII
IX
XI
XII
Annual
average
Gogland
Island
Moshchny
Island
Vyborg
Station
Months
-8,0
-8,4
-4,9
1,9
9,0
14,5
17,6
15,6
10,3
4,4
-0,7
-5,3
3,8
14
21
28
32
32
32
27
20
12
32
-37
-38
-31
-21
-8
-1
-6
-14
-22
-36
-38
-5,5
-7,0
-4,7
1,1
7,3
13,4
17,4
16,6
12,2
6,7
1,7
-2,4
4,7
11
21
26
29
30
30
26
20
11
30
-31
-30
-31
-20
-5
-4
-14
-27
-31
Av.
-4,9
-6,2
-3,6
2,0
7,8
13,3
16,9
16,8
12,3
6,9
2,2
-1,8
5,2
Abs.
13
24
26
33
32
31
26
19
11
33
Av.
Abs.
max.
Abs.
min.
Av.
Abs.
max.
Abs.
min.

page 153
Max.
Abs.
min.
II
III
IV
Months
VI
VII
-29
-31
-28
-18
-5
VIII
IX
XI
XII
Annual
average
Station

-1
-7
-15
-28
-31
The season dynamics of air temperature is typical of the temperate latitudes - minimal levels are timed to
February and maximal - to July. Furthermore, continentality of the climate, which is characterised by
increasing of annual range, is growing eastward from the west of the Gulf of Finland.
Average monthly air temperature in July-September and March-April is more or less homogeneous across
almost the whole Gulf. It is between 17 and 18 in July, between 16,5 and 17,5 in August, between
11 and 12 in September, between -1 and -2 in March, between 2 and -3 in April. Air temperature's
horizontal gradients considerably increase in May-June and from October to February. In May, average
monthly air temperature increases from the west to the east from 8 to 10, and in June from 13 to 16.
From October to February temperature increases in the opposite direction: from 5 to 8 in October, from
-1 to 4 in November, from -3 to 1 in December, from -7 to -1 in January, and from -6 to -3 in
February. Furthermore, greatest temperature's horizontal gradients are observed in the easternmost part of
the gulf, and they are relatively low in the central and western parts.
Average continuous cold periods' duration is estimated to 7 days. Continuous cold weather's duration is
only occasionally observed to be between 20 and 30 days and its frequency is about 5%. The most
number of cold days is observed in January and February (22-23 days). Average number thaw days in the
near-shore area of the eastern part of the Gulf is: 20 in November, 12 in December, between 7 and 8 in
January, between 6 and 7 in February, between 15 and 16 in March. Thaw's duration is normally short:
most commonly it is between 1 and 2 days (with frequency 40-46%), and at the mean it is between 4 and
5 days [310, 311, 312, 313].
3.2.3.
Atmospheric pressure
The peculiar feature of the atmospheric pressure regime in the eastern Gulf of Finland is great temporal
variation, especially in the cold seasons, that is also determined by cyclonic activity. The atmospheric
pressure range is from 951 hPa (December, 1982) to 1065 hPa (January, 1907).
Winter season is characterised by increased pressure background due to effect of Asia anticyclone's
wedge, restructuring of the baric field to summer processes take place in spring with few pressure
decrease.
The annual atmospheric pressure range, measured over the proper is short, amount of the amplitude
(around 4 hPa) is normal for the offshore climate. Maximum of pressure on average is observed in May,
and minimum is observed in July. However, average monthly atmospheric pressure, measured in certain
years and by different stations, may greatly differ from perennial one, especially in cold half of year,
when such deviations may reach up to 15-20 hPa.

page 154

Average atmospheric pressure's maximums reach up to 1044 hPa, while minimums reach up to 976,9 hPa,
i.e., amplitude of average monthly atmospheric pressure's fluctuation over the Gulf of Finland reaches up
to 67,1 hPa. When a baric system rapidly moves through the gulf area, pressure may vary in 24 hours on
30-40 hPa in winter and on 15-20 hPa in summer [228].
3.2.4.
Wind
West, south-west and south winds dominate over the Gulf of Finland. Their average annual frequency is
above 50%, notably, winds of the dominating directions also are normally the strongest ones. East and
north winds are rarer observed.
Fig. 3.2-3 shows frequency (%) of wind directions in Vyborg and Gogland. 3.2-3.
Figure 3.2-3.
Frequency of wind directions, %
Wind rapidly accelerates in certain days when cyclones are passing through. Gales of winds (12 m/s or
more) are observed in zone of atmospheric front and in rear-parts of cyclones and mainly are directed
westward or north-westward. Short-time gales continuing for less than 6 hours are most frequently
observed. Frequency of strong gales with wind speeds of higher than 20 m/s is small (they are reported on
average less than 8 times per decade).
Number of windy days per year (when wind speeds reaches up to 15 m/s or higher at least once) is a
useful characteristic of the wind regime. On average, there are 20-25 windy days per year in the eastern
Gulf of Finland. Table 3.2-3 shows information about wind speeds with various frequency.
Table 3.2-3
Speeds range, m/s

<5
6- 10
11 - 15
16 20
Average frequency (%) of wind speeds in the Gulf of Finland

Spring
Summer
Winter
25
39
33
2,5
36
34
28
1,5
Autumn
70
26
4
0,1
28
39
31
16

page 155

Speeds range, m/s

>20
Winter
Spring
0,5
0,5
Summer
0,02
Autumn
0,4
Table 3.2-3 shows that winds with speeds between 6 and 10 m/s dominate over the eastern Gulf of
Finland in autumn, winter and spring; less than 5 m/s - in summer [32, 39].
The highest wind speeds (25 to 30 m/s) are reached in the Gulf of Finland. Table 3.2-4 shows probability
of highest wind speeds at coastal stations in the eastern Gulf of Finland. It can be seen from the table, that
wind speeds in the eastern Gulf of Finland is most likely highest at Gogland.
Table 3.2-4
The highest wind speeds (m/s) possible once per N years in the eastern Gulf of Finland
N years
Station
1
5
10
15
20
Vyborg
Gogland
22
25
26
28
27
30
28
31
29
32
Lomonosov
Nevskaya (St.
Petersburg)
19
20
22
23
23
24
24
25
25
26
3.2.5.
Nebulosity and precipitation
Average monthly nebulosity's variations in the Baltic Sea during year are from 5 to 8 points, only at a few
stations it is 9 points in November and December. The greatest amounts of clouds are reported between
October and February-March.
Average annual number of cloudy days (amount of clouds is 8 to 10 points) on the coast mainly varies
from 115 to 170, and in the Gulf of Finland area increases up to 190 to 220. Greatest number of cloudy
days takes place between October and February-March, when its average monthly value is equal 13 to 26.
Number of cloudy days at the most stations is equal 4 to 12 between April and September.
It is a few of fair days (amount of clouds is 0 to 2 points): 22 to 74 on the average per year. Average
monthly number of fair days varies from 1 to 8, the least number of fairy days (1 to 2 on average per
month) is observed between September-October and February.
Cumulus and cumulo-nimbus clouds are most likely to be observed in spring and summer, and stratus,
strato-nimbus and strato-cumulus clouds - in autumn and winter.
Cloudy weather (mount of clouds is 10 points or more) dominates during year over the Gulf of Finland,
and its frequency for total nebulosity is 75 to 85% in cold season. Lower-cloudy sky is also frequently
observed in winter (70 to 75%), and frequency of cloudy weather decreases toward summer time to 25 to
30%. One can estimate about cloudy weather's stability with number of cloudy days (with dominating
mount of clouds between 8 and 10 points). 160 to 170 of such days for total nebulosity and 90 to 110 for
lower nebulosity are reported on the coast of the gulf [326].

page 156

Similarly as for total nebulosity, average monthly mounts of clouds at lower level over the Gulf of
Finland slightly change. Maximal mounts of lower clouds during annual variation are reported in
November for all stations (except Pakri); limit range is from 7.8 to 8.3 (Moshchny Island). Minimal
mounts of lower clouds during annual variation are also high and vary over the Gulf proper in 1 point
(from 3.0 in Ozerki to 4.0 in St Petersburg). Minimal mounts of clouds over the gulf is mainly observed
in June, but at certain stations minimum may be reported also in May (Vyborg, St. Petersburg).
The Gulf of Finland belongs to the excessive precipitation area. Precipitation is not uniform during year:
approximately 70% take place in the warm season and 30% - in the cold season; and more than half of
precipitation falls in liquid form. Extended widespread rains with a relatively less intense (0.2 to 0.4
mm/h) dominate in cold months, their intense increases up to 1.1 to 1.3 mm/h in summer due to the
rainstorm precipitation.
Annual precipitation amount in the open area of the Gulf of Finland is from 550 to 790 mm. The most
precipitation (from 45 to 100 mm per month) falls between June- July and November-December.
Between January and May-June, average monthly precipitation is from 20 to 45 mm. The rainiest months
in the Gulf of Finland are August and September, and the dustiest ones are January and April. Number of
rainy days per year varies from 146 to 191, and it varies from 9 to 21 per month. The length of
precipitations is from 1030 to 1990 h per year and reaches its maximum in December-January and
minimum in June. Average daily duration of precipitations is from 10 to 11 h. in winter and around 4 h. in
summer.
Snow falls between October and April, and occasionally in May. It is especially often (up to 20 days a
month on average) from December to March [61].
Table 3.2-5 shows average monthly precipitation at the nearest stations.
Average monthly precipitation in the eastern Gulf of Finland, mm.

Months
Station
Vyborg
Moshchny
Gogland
1
47
27
27
II
36
22
22
III
31
21
21
IV
39
28
28
V
43
33
32
VI
59
40
39
VII
67
50
49
VIII
85
67
65
IX
79
63
62
X
67
61
60
XI
60
51
50
XII
52
42
41
Year
Table 3.2-5.
665
505
496
Analysing of seasonal features of the precipitation distribution allow to include the northern coastal area
of the Gulf of Finland, especially its north-western areas, to the most humid regions, whereas the central
and southern coastal areas of the Gulf obtain less precipitation. This precipitation distribution is likely
caused by orographic features of the northern coastal area and western and south-western winds
domination.

page 157

3.2.6.
Adverse atmospheric effects
3.2.6.1. Fogs
Fogs frequently occur in the Baltic Sea. Their frequency in the open sea is from 1 to 5%. Fogs are most
frequently observed from September-October to March-April, when monthly average number of foggy
days varies between 5 and 10. Fogs are least reported from May-June to August. Advective, radiation and
evaporation fogs are characteristic for describable area. Fogs are most frequently observed in spring and
summer. Advective fogs are characterized by high tolerance, significant vertical width and are very
extensive. Average duration of fogs in the open sea is from 5 to 6 h., and largest ones in certain months
reach up to from 50 to 60 h. Wefts are often observed over the sea in winter.
Table 3.2-6 shows number of foggy and thunderstorm days at station Vyborg [10].
Vyborg
10 11 12
Annual
total
Station
Number of foggy (F) and thunderstorm (T) days

Months
Number
of
observat
ion years
Table 3.2-6
31
30
14
26
The most frequency of fogs (from 5 to 10%, 12% at certain places) is observed from December to April.
Frequency of fogs is less than 5% in other months. Foggy days' number at the coastline varies between 30
and 75 per year. Fogs are most frequently observed from September-October to March-April, when
monthly average number of foggy days varies between 4 and 7, it reaches up to 10 at certain places.
Number of foggy days in other months is less than 3 per month.
3.2.6.2. Thunderstorms
Thunderstorms are rarely reported in the open area of the Gulf of Finland. Number of thunderstorm days
on average varies between 10 and 23 per year. Thunderstorms are normally observed from April-May to
September, but occasionally they may be reported in winter. Monthly average number of thunderstorm
days is from 1 to 6. Thunderstorm's activity is highest in July and August.
Information about average number of days with dangerous meteorological activities of the eastern Gulf of
Finland is shown in the Table 3.2-7 [310].
Table 3.2-7
Seasonal regime information about average numbe r of days with dangerous meteorological
activities of the eastern Gulf of Finland
Rain-withSeason
Fog
Glaze
Hoarfrost Snowfall Rainfall
Thunde rstorm
snow-fall
Autumn
13
2
<1
9
34
9
1
Winter
14
8
14
41
4
14
*)
Spring
13
1
3
12
17
7
3

page 158

Season
Fog
Glaze
Hoarfrost
Snowfall
Rainfall
Summer
41
Rain-withThunde rstorm
snow-fall
*)
12
Note: *) - possible rarely

3.2.6.3. Snowstorms
Snowstorms over the Baltic Sea are mainly reported from November to April, but they are most likely in
January and February, when number of days with them may reach up to 10. Their duration is usually less
than 24 hours.
3.2.6.4. Spouts
Spouts are rarely observed. Spouts are most likely to appear in warm season of a year. Spout velocity is
10 m/s on average. Wind speeds in spout reaches up to from 50 to 100 m/s. Rotation in it may be directed
clockwise or in opposite direction. Duration of spouts varies from a few minutes to several tens of
minutes [348, 355].
3.2.6.5. Restricted visibility
Visibility better than 5 miles dominates in the open sea areas of the Gulf of Finland during whole year, its
frequency in certain months reaches up to 95%. Best visibility is reported in summer. Frequency of
visibility worse than 2 miles is less than 15%, from November-December to March-April it increases up
to 20 to 30% in the upper areas of Vyborg Bay [310].
3.2.7.
An overview of air pollution levels
The geographical position of the projected pipeline (the sea area near unsettled islands and northern coast
line in the eastern Gulf of Finland) gives no active Rosgidromet stations of the air pollution's monitoring
in the area. The nearest residential areas at the Russian landfall are Bolshoy Bor, Primorsk, Svetlogorsk,
Vyborg, at the Finish landfall they are Virolahti and Kotka port.
The air pollution assesses based on the monitored rates comply with the established PDK and OBUV
according to the:
The Hygienic Norms GN 2.1.6.1338-03 - Maximum Allowed Concentrations (PDKs) of

polluting substances in the ambient air of residential areas.
The Hygienic Norms GN 2.1.6.1339-03 - Approximate Safe Concentration Levels

(OBUVs) for substances in the air of residential areas established.
Suspended matters, sulphur dioxide and nitrogen dioxide are known to be the most conservative in time
of presence in the lower layers of the atmosphere in a range of toxic polluting substances [220, 221].
"The Annals of the Air Pollution Conditions in Russian Towns and Areas", from 1997 to 2005 reports
pollution rate of the coastal area of the Gulf of Finland to be predominantly characterised as being low.

page 159

The characteristic feature of this area is no industrial plants affecting the atmospheric air.
The State Bureau "St Petersburg's CGSM-R" reports air pollution at the area of the Portovaya Bay with
the following substances (Appendix 3.2):
Suspended matter - 0.17 mg/m3.
Sulphur dioxide - 0.015 mg/m3.
Carbon monoxide - 1.5 mg/m3.
Nitrogen dioxide - 0.05 mg/m3.
Nitrogen monoxide - 0.021 mg/m3.

page 160

3.3.
Oceanography And Sea Water Quality
3.3.1.
Stream conditions
3.3.1.1. Seawater temperature

The annual variation in surface water temperature in the eastern Gulf of Finland generally follows air
temperature, which is the typical pattern for moderate latitudes.
From January to March, the Gulf of Finland is almost entirely ice-covered and the water temperature in
the eastern Gulf of Finland is close to 0. The lowest average monthly surface water temperature is
reported in March.
After the ice melts in the eastern Gulf of Finland in April to May, the surface water begins to heat up
rapidly. Almost all coastal stations in the eastern part of the Gulf record a water temperature shift from an
average of 3 during 16 to 28 April, and from an average of 10 during 10 to 27 May.
Water temperature's heating continues to the end of June to the beginning of August, when the maximum
appears in the annual variation of monthly average surface water temperature, reaching from 18 to 20.
Absolute maximum of temperature in the open Gulf in this period reaches up to 24 to 2620 in the
eastern area and 20 to 22 in the central area of the Gulf [250] .
In autumn the upper water layer begins to cool gradually: coastal stations in the eastern Gulf of Finland
record a water temperature shift from an average of 10 at the mean during 20 September to 5 October,
and from an average of 5 during 20 to 30 October. intensive radiational heating and windless weather
in summer result forming of a seasonal thermocline, in which strong vertical gradients of temperature
occurs (to 2.5/m), determining significant stability of water mass and hampering vertical mixing.
In autumn in the open Gulf, surface water temperature reaches uniform due to intensive wind and
convective mixing, seasonal thermocline is being destructed, and thermal stratification of the water of the
Gulf of Finland becomes unstable. Average, maximal and minimal water temperatures at the coastal
stations during recent years are shown in the table 3.3-1.
Table 3.3-1
Surface water temperature at coastal stations in the Gulf of Finland,
Value
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII VIII IX
X
Station
Vyborg
(1977-2000)
Moshchny
(1977-1993)
Aver.
Min.
Max.
Aver.
Min.
0,01
-0,30
0,50
-0,06
-0,60
0,00
0,00
0,40
-0,19
-0,50
0,11
-0,10
1,70
-0,11
-0,50
2,00
0,00
11,30
0,97
-0,20
10,18
0,60
21,90
8,98
-0,10
16,75
9,90
24,90
15,32
6,00
19,43
13,30
26,30
18,59
11,60
18,57
13,60
24,80
17,32
10,40
13,19
6,50
19,70
12,08
4,60
7,19
0,80
13,10
6,93
0,00
XI
XII
1,93
0,00
6,70
2,62
-0,40
0,22
0,00
3,70
0,37
-0,50

page 161

Station
Value
II
III
IV
VI
VII
VIII
IX
XI
XII
Gogland
(1977-1996)
Max.
Aver.
Min.
Max.
2,30
0,17
-0,60
3,20
0,20
-0,09
-0,50
1,40
0,80
0,08
-0,40
2,80
11,50
1,16
-0,30
9,90
20,50
6,78
0,00
18,60
26,80
13,33
7,00
25,60
26,90
17,01
8,80
25,60
25,80
17,32
13,00
24,10
18,90
13,21
7,60
19,40
12,80
8,76
6,00
13,40
7,90
4,60
-0,20
8,50
5,10
1,56
-0,60
6,00
Annual variation of temperature of deep water in the open Gulf of Finland differs significantly from
surface one: range of water temperature variation decreases, water temperature reaches its maximum
later.
The thermal regime of the coastal waters mainly exhibits the same pattern of annual variation as water
temperature in the open waters of the Gulf of Finland. However, due to shallow nature in spite of weak
wind and waves mixing, the whole water column becomes thermally homogeneous during a short period
of time. The heating in this area in spring is few quicker and water column temperatures are higher on
average of from 2 to 3 than in the open Gulf. The cooling of water column here in autumn is quicker
too and full homothermy is achieved earlier than in the open Gulf. That's why in spring and autumn
seasons in the coastal waters of the Gulf of Finland, thermic bar (offshore front) is often observed, where
water temperature's horizontal gradients reach up to 0.5 to 1.0/km. Figure 3.3-1 shows seasonal
distribution of temperature on the various levels in autumn.

page 162

Fig. 3.3-1.
Seasonal distribution of temperature on the levels of 0, 20 and 50 m in the Gulf of

Finland in September to November
3.3.1.2. Sea water salinity
The surface water salinity in the Gulf of Finland varies very small when compared with the water
temperature. Minimal monthly average salinity rates are observed during the spring/summer and maximal
ones - during the autumn/winter. Width of the water upper layer, where well-marked annual variation of
salinity rates is observed, is less than from 5 to 10 m. Salinity rate increases with depth. In the open Gulf
of Finland, a permanent halocline exists at depths of 60 - 70 m. Maximal vertical gradients of salinity is
reported in the upper of the eastern Gulf in spring and summer. Average monthly salinity rate in this
period is from 1 to 2 at the surface layer, at the depths of 20 m it is from 4 to 5 , and deeper than 50
m it is from more than 7 . In autumn due to the winds and waves mixing, salinity becomes vertically
uniform, increasing at the surface layer and slightly decreasing in the depth layer.
The space distribution of salinity rates at the surface layer of the Gulf is generally characterised by
increasing westward from between 1 and 2 to between 6 and 6.5 in all the season of year [63].
Therefore, the rate in the northern Gulf is slightly smaller than in the southern coastal area, due to
desalting impact of Finish rivers and general circulation of water in the Gulf of Finland.
Average, maximal and minimal water salinity at the coastal stations during recent years is shown in the
table 3.3-2.
Table 3.3-2
Station
Vyborg
(1977-2000)
Moshchny
(1977-1993)
Surface water salinity at coastal stations in the Gulf of Finland,

Value
I
II
III IV
V
VI VII VIII IX
X
XI
XII
Aver.
Min.
Max.
Aver.
Min.
1,15
0,13
2,40
4,93
3,71
1,05
0,21
2,44
5,04
2,67
1,13
0,16
2,80
5,13
3,75
1,11
0,27
2,24
4,72
1,91
1,08
0,21
2,36
3,95
1,87
0,72
0,15
2,22
2,52
0,00
0,55
0,12
1,46
4,30
1,69
0,81
0,16
2,34
4,34
2,92
1,15
0,34
2,31
4,45
3,06
1,35
0,41
3,10
4,42
3,00
1,49
0,27
2,80
4,51
3,19
1,35
0,08
2,93
4,79
2,83

page 163

Station
Value
II
III
IV
VI
VII
VIII
IX
XI
XII
Gogland
(1977-1996)
Max.
Aver.
Min.
Max.
6,74
4,48
0,82
7,20
6,58
3,67
0,00
6,60
6,65
3,10
0,45
6,65
5,39
2,57
0,17
6,83
5,84
4,45
0,10
7,00
5,73
4,80
2,29
6,21
6,02
4,91
2,85
6,24
6,49
4,90
3,89
6,15
5,66
4,88
3,04
7,30
6,13
5,05
2,66
6,30
5,97
5,08
3,65
6,54
6,40
5,05
1,93
6,98
Water temperature and salinity in the Gulf of Finland is subject to significant short-term changes. One of
the reasons for this variability is the coastal upwelling, which plays an important role in the formation of
the thermohaline structure of coastal waters. Horizontal magnitude of the upwelling areas is 100 km along
the coast and from 10 to 20 km offshore, surface water temperature's gradients reach up to 0.5 to
1.0/km (occasionally 4/km), and temperature differential between upwelling water and water in the
open Gulf of Finland varies from 2 to 10. In some cases, satellite subsequent imageries show upwelling
front's and its centre's movement at a rate of from 10 to 15 km per 24 hours.
The average duration of the effect of a coastal upwelling in certain months varies from 1 to 10 days, in
most cases it is from 1 to 4 days. After the weather changes, the background distribution of water
temperature at the coastal area is restored in about 2-3 days. Upwelling events lasting less than 24 hours
occur when a thermocline lies fairly close to the Gulfs surface and wind direction changes rapidly. In
these cases, upwellings are far less extensive (tens of kilometres), but exhibit more abrupt temperature
contrasts.
Upwelling frequency in various areas of the coastal water of the Gulf of Finland differs from each other
in spring and summer. For example in certain months, more than five surface water temperatures may
take place in the coastal area. On average in May-June, upwellings generally more frequently are created
at southern coast of the Gulf of Finland, they are often observed near the coasts of Finland in July, and
their frequency is uniform in August-September.
3.3.1.3. Currents and tidal oscillation
General water circulation of the Gulf of Finland forms mainly by exchange with the Baltic Sea, and it, in
turn, - with the North Sea, and, to a lesser extent, by the river runoff's input. These two factors cause
horizontal and vertical inhomogeneity of density field. Figure 3.3-2 shows general current pattern of the
Baltic Sea.

page 164

Fig. 3.3-2.General water circulation pattern in the Baltic and the North Seas
Vertical water circulation in the Baltic Sea, including the Gulf of Finland, is owing to saline North-Sea
water input and desalted water output. The vertical currents pattern is mainly determined by stratification
of the water body of the Baltic Sea.
Figure 3.3-3 shows principle pattern of water movements at the vertical plane.
Figure 3.3-3.
Water circulation pattern at the vertical plane in the Baltic Sea
The desalted and lighter water in the upper layer, mainly from the Gulf of Finland, flows unimpeded to
the North Sea.
The saline and thus denser water of north-sea origin, flowing at the deep layer to the Baltic Sea, comes
across obstacles of submerged ridges (steps) and deeps. It can fill the deeps only in case its density
exceeds density of the old bottom-water. But typically, this water, mixing with the water in the depth of
halocline, currents along it. The depth of the halocline differs depending on the density ratio of the new
north-sea incoming water and old Baltic one.

page 165

Deep water rising is reported in the lifting areas, turbulent circulation forms in the deep areas. Whereby,
while it is mainly cyclonic at the upper and intermediate layers, it is anticyclonic at deeper layer of the
deeps.
Wind currents, long-wave currents play a major role, and runoff, tidal and inertia currents - a minor role,
in currency pattern in the Gulf of Finland.
Wind currents in the Baltic Sea and the Gulf of Finland develop in the upper layer to thermocline in
summer (20-30 m) and to halocline in winter (60-70 ) due to wind impact on underlying water surface.
In the water depth current speeds drop rapidly. It is considered, that on the surface wind current speeds in
the Gulf of Finland exposed areas are not more than 50 cm/s, in 90% of all cases not more than 20-25
cm/s [182]. Known statistical evaluations of dependence of wind current speed from depth and wind
speed are shown in Figure 3.3-4 diagram.
Figure 3.3-4.
Wind current speed change on the surface against wind speed and de pth
Long waves and related currents play key role in formation of currents conditions in the Baltic Sea,
especially in the Gulf of Finland. There are stimulated and free long waves. Stimulated long waves in the
Baltic Sea arise as a reaction of the basin to moving nonhomogeneous field of atmospheric pressure
(cyclone). This type of wave movements grasps whole water column and is followed by strong currents.
It is considered, that the speed of such currents in Gulf of Finland coastal areas can exceed 100 cm/s, and
on exposed areas can reach 50-70 cm/s [149].
Free long waves (seiches) are fluctuations of level with natural frequency of basin, maximum seiche
range in the upper parts of the bays reaches 70-100 cm, in the open sea it is 10-20 cm. At extreme seiche
oscillation ranges current speed in central Baltic Sea does not exceed 15-25 cm/s, in the shallow coastal
basins and upper parts of the bays (in the Gulf of Finland) reaches 80-90 cm/s.

page 166

In the depth seiche current speeds damp out rapidly and, accordingly, in the open sea at depths of more
than 30 metres do not exceed 10 cm/s [149].
Inertial and flood currents. Inertial currents are result of Coriolis force impact to any tide; they are
exhibited as elliptic loop in current progressive vector diagram. Inertial currents period in the Baltic Sea,
including Gulf of Finland, is 13.3-14.6 hours. Duration of period with distinct current inertial fluctuations
does not exceed 2-3 days. Inertial currents are typical generally for central Baltic Sea; their speed does
not exceed 15-20 cm/s.
The influence of the tide in the Baltic Sea and the Gulf of Finland is not large, therefore flood currents are
small. Flood currents in the Gulf of Finland do not exceed 2-3 cm/s.
Average and maximum speeds assessments of different types of currents in the Gulf of Finland are shown
in the Table 3.3-3.
Table 3.3-3
Average and maximum speeds assessments of different types of currents in the Gulf of Finland
Gulf of Finland, narrow places
Current type
Speed
0..20m
20..50m
>50m
Permanent
Wind
Long waves
Seiche
Inertial
Flood
Av.
Av.
Max.
Av.
Max.
Av.
Max.
Av.
Max.
Av.
Max.
10
10
40
5
5
10
2
0
0
>100
20
90
0
0
2
3
>100
10
70
0
0
2
3
>100
0
0
0
0
2
3
Average current speed in the Gulf of Finland exposed area is 5-15 cm/s, maximal - 75 cm/s. Close to the
coast current directions are along the coast, in all such areas, except upper Neva Bay, where westward
currents prevail, current direction can be either towards upper bay or opposite, proves their high
variability [28].
Water dynamics in the Gulf of Finland, as well as the entire Baltic Sea mainly depends on atmospheric
processes, which develop over the marine area. Actual current picture is a complex of movements of
different scale and different nature. According to their nature all kinds of movements can be divided into
quasiperiodical and quasistationary. First include wave processes and related currents, which contribute to
water circulation variability above all and are the main reason of the deep sea dynamics. Second kind of
movements deals with horizontal heterogeneity of physical fields and initiates definitely directional
movement of the water mass in the sea.

page 167

Quasiperiodical processes in water column caused by stimulated long waves during deep baric formations
movement play the key role in overall currents in the Gulf of Finland. The duration of such processes is
from 1 to 5 days. In some coastal areas, including Gulf of Finland coast, the speed of currents caused by
them can reach 100 cm/s. In the open sea during normal baric conditions the speed of these currents rarely
exceeds 15-20 cm/s.
3.3.1.4. Wave conditions and sea level
Wind-induced wave in the Gulf of Finland is strongest from September to December. Table 3.3-4 shows
the results of systematization of published data on wave regime in the Gulf of Finland received by
summarising vessel surveys data.
Table 3.3-4
Height range, m
<1
1-2
2-3
3-4
4-5
5-6
6-7
7-8
8-9
9-10
Frequency of wave height 3% probability

Winter
Spring
Summer
27
48
17
5
2
0,6
0,2
0,11
0,05
0,04
Autumn
Gulf of Finland
27
43
49
39
17
13
5,8
3,3
0,4
1,1
0,5
0,4
0,17
0,1
0,08
0,06
0,03
0,02
0,02
24
51
17
5,1
2
0,6
0,2
0,06
0,02
0,02
In winter there can be waves more than 9 m (in the Gulf of Finland exposed area). Waves less than 3 m
high are observed in 70-80% of all cases (with probability 3%). In summer wave intensity is much less:
about 80% are waves less than 2 m high. Usually there are waves of small periods, less than 5s, in the
Baltic Sea, especially in the Gulf of Finland.
Changing sea levels in the eastern Gulf of Finland is caused by a number of physical processes both in the
Gulf itself and in the Baltic Sea as a whole. Mean level of the Baltic Sea smoothly rises from the Danish
Straits to the upper Gulf of Finland averagely 1 cm every 70-80 km. Mean long-term level of the Baltic
Sea in relation to Kronstadt tide-gauge zero on data is shown in figure 3.3-5.

page 168

Figure 3.3-5. Mean long-term level of the Baltic Sea (cm) in relation to Kronstadt tide-gauge 0
Overall variability of the sea level is characterised by total variance of fluctuations of level. The value of
total variance of fluctuations of level (cm2) is shown in Figure 3.3-6.
Figure 3.3-6.
Total variance of fluctuations of level (cm2)
Interannual variability is caused by global climatic and geophysical factors influence. The key
contributors to this kind of variability are processes causing the change of air flow forms.
Interannual variability of the level increases from the Danish Straits to the upper Gulf of Finland and to
Bothnia. For example, root-mean-square deviation of average annual level near the Danish Straits is 9-10
cm, in Kronstadt region is 19.4 cm.
Seasonal or within-year variability (month - year) of the levels is caused by seasonal changes of water
balance constituents, including alteration of water exchange with the North Sea and seasonal changes in
atmospheric processes. Overall in the Baltic Sea minimum variability of average monthly level values
occurs in May to August, maximum in September to April.

page 169

The proportion of this kind of variability in total variance of fluctuations of level changes considerably
along the sea. Annual range of average monthly level values increases from the Danish Straits where it is
about 10 cm, to the upper Gulf of Finland, where it reaches 30-40 cm. It should be noted that fluctuations
of level within every year differ: dates of maximum and minimum values can shift, and fluctuation range
in certain months can reach 90-120 cm and more. The annual variation of mean sea level values on the
Gulf of Finland coast is shown in Table 3.3-5.
Table 3.3-5
Station
Period
Vyborg
Moshchny
1965-1990
1946-1964
1965-1985
1965-1990
Gogland
Mean sea level values on the Gulf of Finland

V VI VII VIII IX
I
II III IV
XI
XII Year
5
2
-2
2
13
7
8
6
21
-4
15
11
19
5
13
12
-9
-13
-12
-15
-15
-21
-17
-21
-12
-19
-15
-16
-19
-18
-23
-23
-7
-9
-12
-12
7
1
3
2
4
2
-1
-2
10
6
6
4
1
-5
-3
-4
The most stable element of annual variation of levels in the Gulf of Finland in interannual variability
range is summer level rise; the most varying from year to year is level positions in winter. Autumn
maximum, which is the main for the Gulf of Finland, is observed in October and rarer in September.
Secondary winter maximum falls to December. Spring minimum, the deepest, most often begins in March
- April, secondary autumn minimum - in November.
Fluctuations of level of synoptic scale (1-30 days) are mainly caused by atmospheric processes and
passage of cyclones, fluctuations of daily scale (6-24 hours) - by astronomic factors.
Largest tidal fluctuations of level in the Baltic Sea are in the Gulf of Finland where they do not exceed 10
cm, surging and seiche fluctuations of level play major role.
Summary of contribution of described kinds of fluctuations of sea level is in Table 3.3-6.
Type of fluctuations of level
Secular
Interannual (RMSE, cm)
Seasonal
Seiche
dh/dt, mm/year
RMSE, cm
RMSE, cm
Av. range, cm
Average range, cm
Period, hour
Max. range, cm
Gulf of Finland
+2
17..20
8..11
30..40
30..50
6..39
120

page 170

Type of fluctuations of level

Surging
Tidal
Total variance in the region, cm2
Period, hours
Max. range, cm
Max.
Av.
Max.
Gulf of Finland
12..48
>200
5..10
340
400
Largest fluctuations of level in the Gulf of Finland are associated with high flood caused by passage of
cyclones over Baltic proper and the Gulf of Finland. Predominant cyclone movement from the west to the
east, gradual depth decrease in the eastern part of the gulf and its sharp narrowing to the Neva estuary
makes Neva Bay area, especially St. Petersburg, dangerous in terms of floods, most of which have
complex nature, when long wave, intensified by wind, collides with seiche.
3.3.1.5. Sea water transparency
The highest water transparency is reported in the central areas of the Gulf of Finland. Closer to the
coastlines, shallow areas and river mouths the water transparency decreases. Near the shores the
transparency never exceeds 3 m, even under the most favourable conditions, and after storms it is reduced
to 1-2 m.
Highest level of transparency is reported in winter, with the maximum in open areas up to 18 m. In spring
the transparency ranges between 9 and 14 m. The water is green or grayish. In the spring the transparency
in areas close to mouths decreases to 0.5-1 m.
The lowest transparency is reported in summer period during maximum plankton dynamics with average
of 6-8 m, maximum transparency in summer in open areas is 12 m. Toward autumn the transparency
increases up to 9-11 m, with a maximum in open areas up to 14 m.
Gradual increasing of transparency is reported in the eastern Gulf of Finland along designed Nord Stream
pipeline route from Portovaya Bay (transparency 2.2 - 2.7 m) to Gogland Island and further to the west
(5.5 - 6.5 m). At the stations, in the exposed route area with depths over 30 m, transparency remains at a
considerably high level: 56 m average.
The connection between transparency and turbidity is quite logic. Figure 3.3-7 shows the water
transparency values determined by means of a white disk, and the mean depth turbidity data obtained by
the hydrological measuring probe along the axis of the surveying area. Increasing of the transparency is
accompanied by a decrease in turbidity from the 1st to the 47th station.

page 171

Figure 3.3-7.
Distribution of transparency and the mean depth turbidity data on axial cross
section stations (from Portovaya Bay No1 to the border of Russian territorial sea No47)
In the eastern Gulf of Finland along designed Nord Stream pipeline route from Portovaya Bay to Gogland
Island autumn period is connected with to two or three-layer water structure (depending on the depth of
water area). Homogeneous surface water layer with mean thickness of 15-17 m is slightly lower in
temperature and salinity in comparison with the underlying layer.
Maximum values of salinity and minimum temperature values are found in deep water areas with depths
greater than 50 m, where transformed sea waters underlie.
Optical turbidity and transparency parameters characterize the investigated area east of the Gulf of
Finland as pure enough in terms of suspended mineral and organic particles presence.
3.3.1.6. Ice conditions
Ice regime of the Gulf of Finland is determined by its geographical location, climatic conditions, depth
and seabed topography, freshening influence of runoff, the intensity of heat exchange with the open part
of the Gulf of Finland, and by water circulation. Gulf of Finland is characterized by a more severe ice
conditions than in the Baltic Sea due to more frequent intrusions of cold air masses.
Time variation of the relative area of ice cover of the Gulf of Finland and the central part of the Baltic Sea
is shown on Figure 3.3-8. Here the relative area of ice cover is the ratio of the area covered by ice to the
total area of the basin.

page 172

Figure 3.3-8.
The relative area of ice cover S
Ice conditions are extremely diverse in the Gulf of Finland. The severity of ice conditions increases
dramatically in the eastern part of the gulf due to the increase of climate continentality and gradually
reduces the depth and salinity of waters. The ice appears at the North of the Gulf of Finland in late
November-early December, the central part is covered by ice in early January, and only in late January early February it appears in the coastal areas of the western part of the Gulf. Ice thickness varies largely.
During hard winters the ice thickness in the eastern Gulf of Finland reaches 70-80 cm and in the western
part usually does not exceed 40-50 cm.
The maximum spread of ice, ice pack concentration and the thickness of shore ice belt during the hardest
winter shows the Figure 3.3-9.
Figure 3.3-9.
Ice extent boundaries of ice pack and shore ice belt, and their characteristics in
hardest winters
The map chart of the mean number of days with ice cover is based on ice regimes for certain points on the
Baltic Sea shoreline (Figure 3.3-10).

page 173

Figure 3.3-10.
The map chart of the mean number of days with ice cover along designed pipeline
route
Ice ridging The most important in the pipeline project is the ice conditions in the landfall where the lower
edge of the shore ice and the ridges formed on it may cause damage to pipes.
In hard winters more than 20% of the Gulf of Finland is covered with ridges with sail height of 2-3 m.
Large ice ridges occur in areas of stationary cracks in the shore ice debacle. Maximum height of coastal
ridges may reach 10-12 m [18].
The most significant part in the formation of ridges play wind impacts, water level fluctuations during
surge and negative surge, and water currents. Ridges formation processes reach maximum scale at the
joint impact of surge and strong west winds. Ridges formation is mainly associated with the movement
and compression of ice, and ridges spatial distribution depends on seabed topography, the morphology of
the shorelines, and unevenness in shore ice formation.
Ridges formed in inter-island coastal zone are mainly of autumn and winter background. The zone
includes the Vyborg Bay, coastal areas of the northern coast with numerous islands and banks.
The autumn-winter period of hummocking during the mild winter in the inter-island zone usually occurs
in December and January and in shore ice debacle in February. During the hardest winters in the interisland zone the glaciation takes a few days practically without ridges formation. Ridges moving to the
shoe may ground, forming a chain of grounded ice hummocks with the height of the sail 3 - 5 m.
Ridges in near coastal zone are mainly formed either at the beginning of winter when the border of shore
ice for some time takes a stationary position near the coast, or in spring when the ice cover partially
cleans and its boundary is approximately in line with the coastal isobaths. The most stable position of
shore ice is mainly associated with isobaths 5, 10, and in part with 20 m. Just along these isobaths
hummocking occurs.
Due to the shallow nature of the area the coastal hummocking is commonly widespread. The most
intensive hummocking and ice pileup on the shore and banks are reported in the vicinity of Moshchny
Island, Seskar, Gogland, Bolshoy Berezovy Island, and Stirsudden cape. The piles of ice up to 8 - 10 m
were many times noted in there.

page 174

In exposed areas the hummocking is found in the second part of January. Most often the hummocking
occurs in west quarter winds, at the same time the formation of coastline stops. The forming of ridges in
packed ice resulting from ice floes interaction is another feature of the hummocking in the exposed areas.
In mild winters the hummocking takes place in January-March in the eastern of the exposed part of the
Gulf and the distribution of ridges is local. In hard and moderate winters the hummocking occurs in the
second decade of January. By the end of February the hummocking covers the entire central part of the
Gulf and the increasing of the mean ice thickness at the area is 20 - 25% due to ridges. The hummocking
reaches maximum scale in mid-March.
3.3.2.
Hydrochemical processes and water quality
3.3.2.1. Sea water hydrochemistry

According the results of observations quality assessment of waters of the eastern Gulf of Finland made in
the mid 1990s the values of pH ranging from 7 to 8.5. The highest average pH values are typical for the
summer season, the lowest - for the winter. Seasonal changes of average pH values on the surface of the
Gulf of Finland are outlined in Table 3.3-7.
Table 3.3-7
Seasonal changes of avergae pH values on the surface of the Gulf of Finland
Region
Winter
Spring
Summer
Autumn
Neva Bay
Central part
Western part
ice
Gulf of Finland:
7,82
8,00
8,25
7,80
7,79
8,43
8,01
8,17
7,94
7,94
The upper layer of the Gulf of Finland close to oxygen saturation (in spring and summer due to
photosynthesis up to 110-130%, in autumn and winter 90-96%). The dissolved oxygen content is at least
4 mg/l [220].
Biochemical oxygen consumption (BOC5) in the sea surface layer is 2.330.4 mg2/l; in the near-bottom
layer 1.640.4 mg2/l. The values of BOC show small volumes of decomposable organic matters in
surface and bottom layers in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland.
The average concentration of total nitrogen, total phosphorus and their ratio for the period 1994-1998 is
shown in Table 3.3-8.

page 175

Year
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
Substance
Ntotal
Ptotal
Ntotal/Ptotal
934
718
712
744
752
49
25
40
23
39,5
19,1
28,7
17,8
32,3
19
The concentration of total nitrogen, total phosphorus and their ratio is one of the most informative
indicators of the degree of eutrophication of a basin. For much humified basins ratio N total/P total has
exponent 100 and higher: for oligotrophic - 30-40; mesotrophic - 25-30; eutrophic - 15-25; hypertrophic 12-18. Thus, in the table values show a high degree of pollution by biogenic elements of the eastern Gulf
of Finland [220].
Maximum concentrations of phosphates in the sea surface layer are observed in winter (10-14 g/l),
minimum concentrations in late summer (1-3 g/l). In the deep layer below the layer of sharp density
gradient the volume of phosphates sharply increases in the process of regeneration of organic matters.
The most typical distribution for nitrate is also the concentration increasing in proportion to depth. The
volume of nitrates in euphotic layer in spring and summer is often reduced due to photosynthesis, and in
winter it is raised (up to 10 Ng/ l).
Due to the large river discharge the Gulf of Finland waters have a high concentration of dissolved silica:
in the sea surface layer 300-1100 Si g/ l, in the deep layer 1200-2500 Si g/ l [63].
Hydrochemical description of the investigated areas of the pipeline construction is given on the basis of
engineering and environmental investigations conducted in 2005.
The current data on hydrological and hydrochemical regime in autumn was obtained during the
engineering and environmental investigations at offshore section of Russian sector of Nord Stream
pipeline. The data of distribution and variations of the main hydrochemical indicators
obtained
in
2005 follow the same perennial dynamics of changes in autumn of the main hydrochemical parameters of
water area eastern Gulf of Finland. Methods of laboratory testing of sea water samples, on the basis of
which the hydrochemical characteristics were obtained, are presented in Table 1.4. (Volume 12, Book 1,
Chapter 3, Section 1).
The area of Portovaya Bay is the closest to the land and is located on the northeastern border of the
projected pipeline route. All this gives grounds to conclude about the existence of quite a lot of
sufficiently freshened waters formed under the influence of runoff.
The range of concentrations of chlorides and sulfates are as follows: chlorides -10462092 mg/l, sulphate
- 240.0360 mg/l. The average content of dry residue is 3063 mg/l.

page 176

Variation of electrical conductivity, which is directly dependent on the content of salts, is in the range
0.3314 to 0.4041 cm/m.
Changing the values of oxidation-reduction potential Eh for the surface is from 184 to 242 mV, and at the
bottom from 120 to 218 mV. Mean value of Eh for all the investigated water area during the observation
period is 196 mV.
The values of alkalinity on the surface of the projected pipeline area vary from 0.86 to 1.28 mg-eq/l, and
at the bottom from 0.86 to 1.42 mg-eq/l. The average value of total alkalinity for all the investigated water
area during the observation period is 1.13 mg-eq/l.
In general the area is characterized by a low content of suspended matter. In particular the concentration
of suspended matter in most of the stations is below the limit of detection (less than 3.0 mg/l).
Dissolved oxygen volumes are significantly higher of the lower tolerance limit for the fisheries waters
(6.0 mg/l), indicating a high capacity of water self-purification. There is a natural excess of oxygen in
surface waters (9.88 10.30 mg/l) compared to the bottom layer (9.48 10.20 mg/l). The oxygen content
of surface water on the horizon 1.0 m varies from 10.60 to 9.97 mg/l, and in the near-bottom layer from
10.58 to 4.88 mg/, thereby complying with the limit. The highest content of dissolved oxygen is in the
two horizons of the north-eastern coastal area of the route.
The value of hydrogen index (pH) for the entire water column is stable: 7.22 0.02 , which is close to
a neutral reaction of a background and corresponds to the tolerance range of 6.58.5 .
The most high hydrocarbonate level is in the bottom layer of study area - up to 109.8 mg/l, with the
average value 85.9 mg/l. These concentrations correspond to a neutral reaction of water with a
predominance of hydrocarbonate on carbon dioxide (in the case of acidic waters) and carbonates (for
alkaline waters).
Ranges of concentrations of calcium ions, magnesium ions and the amount of potassium + sodium are
respectively 42.1 52.1 mg/l, 100.9 139.8 mg/l, 575 1460 mg/l. With the exception of calcium the
content does not exceed the tolerance limit for the fisheries fresh waters (180 mg/l), the content of
magnesium and potassium + sodium is in the interval between freshwaters and marine Maximum
Allowed Concentrations (PDKs): for Mg - 40 and 940 mg/l for K + Na -50 +120 mg/l 390+7100 mg/l.
These elements are not detected in the vertical distribution probably due to the intense convective mixing.
Total hardness of water is kept in range 10.5 13.6 mg-eq/l, which corresponds to very lime water (more
than 9.0 mg-eq/l).
Exceeding of limits for the nitrite (PDK = 0.02 mg/l) and nitrate (PDK = 9.0 mg/l) nitrogen was not
detected. The high degree of homogeneity of waters for these forms of nitrogen should be noted: 0.013
0.017 mg/l for nitrite and 0082 0.112 mg/l for nitrate. The range of concentrations of ammonia nitrogen
is significantly greater: from 0.067 mg/l to 0.400 mg/l, with a maximum value in the bottom layer
coincides with the Maximum Allowable Concentration (PDK).

page 177

The average content of total nitrogen in the surface and bottom layers is almost the same: 0.618 and 0.610
mg/l, respectively. The similar by the homogeneity distribution is observed for concentrations of
phosphorus compounds. Thus, the limits of change of mineral phosphorus ranged from 0.011 to 0.020
mg/l, while PDK = 0.2 mg/l and total phosphorus content is everywhere below 0.04 mg/litre.
In the exposed route area with depths 32.2-52.7 m extended from the bank Tatasova in the east to
Sommers Island, more saline waters compared with the water area of the Bay Portovaya define the high
content of chlorides, sulfates, and solid residue. Indeed, the concentrations of these parameters across the
column are higher: chlorides on the surface: 1551 1947 mg/l, chlorides on the bottom: 1839 3101
mg/l; sulfates on the surface: 288 336 mg/l, sulfates on the bottom: 312 432 mg/l. The amount of
solid residue ranges from 3514 (surface) to 6802 mg/l (bottom). Extreme values of electrical conductivity
of water are quite consistent with salt content and are on the surface: 0.4165 cm/m, and at the bottom:
0.6553 cm/m.
Given the greater depth of this section water area, the differences in the content of dissolved oxygen is
more significant on the surface and on the bottom. Thus, the surface level of dissolved oxygen remains
high and homogeneous: from 9.97 to 10.63 mg/l. The variability of concentrations significantly higher in
the bottom layer but mostly within the limit: from 6.05 to 10.14 mg/l.
pH value remains stable across the entire water column: 7.16 7.22 pH, thereby complying with the
limit.
Compared with the coastal route section maximum BOC 5value decreases to 1.47 mg2/l, and the average
level of oxidable organic matters in the water does not exceed 1.15 mg2/l (0.6 PDK).
Basically on the entire study area the surface layer of BOC20 values are higher than 2 mg/l (the mean
value 2.08 mg/l); in the bottom layer BOC 20values are lower than 2 mg/l (the mean value 1.67 mg/l). The
mean value of BOC 20 for the entire investigated water area is 1.81 mg/l.
The most high hydrocarbonate content level is recorded in the bottom layer - 109.8 mg/l, while the mean
value is - 89.3 mg/l that is slightly higher than in Portovaya Bay.
Comparison of levels of calcium, magnesium and sodium + potassium amount in seawater with data from
the Bay Portovaya shows a noteworthy increase of these values to 40.1 70.1 mg/l, 121.6 261.4 mg/l,
875 1743 mg/l respectively. In this case we see the trend of excess of bottom layer concentrations of
magnesium and potassium + sodium over the surface layer concentrations.
Trouble-free state of waters in point of biogenic elements remains unchanged but some differences
compared to coastal waters are seen. The content of nitrite-nitrogen significantly reduces up to an
absence, a slight decrease of the mean values of nitrate nitrogen (84.9 compared with 91.2 mg/l) and
decrease of total nitrogen (607.7 compared with 613.5 mg/l). The mean content of ammonia-nitrogen are
increasing (185.5 compared with 180.5 mg/l), and especially are increasing the mean content of mineral
phosphorus (29.2 compared with 16.6 mg/l).

page 178

Gas pipeline route section between Sommers and Gogland is situated to the west and has big depths
(57.6-63.8 m). The limits of change in the content of chlorides, sulphates and solid residual are a little
shifted to increasing in comparison with water mass laying to the east: 19112741 mg/l for chlorides,
312432 mg/l for sulphates, 45665172 mg/l for solid residual.
In surface waters minimum electrical conductivity of the water raises up to 0.4800 S/m, and maximum
electrical conductivity in near-bottom waters is somewhat less - 0.6484 S/m.
Hydrogen ion exponent values are stable - 7.207.25 pH. Minimum amount of oxygen is recorded in
surface waters of the route area situated to the south of Gogland and near Gogland. The lowest levels of
oxygen in bottom-water column are in deep water central part of planned area where mean saturation
value is 56.1-58.5%.
In comparison to the previous area, decrease of BOC5 maximum value is up to 1.31 mg O2/l. On the
majority of stations BOC5 proves to be below the detection limit, i.e. below 1 mg/l. The lowest values of
BOC 20 are recorded in the area situated west to Gogland - 1.10 and 1.05 mg/l accordingly.
High levels of waters total hardness persist - 16.219.2 mg-equivalent/l due to high concentrations of
calcium - 48.164.1 mg/l and magnesium - 160.5198.2 mg/l.
Maximal content of total potassium+sodium is recorded in near-bottom level (1568 mg/l), minimal - in
surface level (1028 mg/l) with mean value in area - 1278 mg/l.
Of the three defined parts of the route in this area minimum nitrogen and phosphorus compounds content
occurs in surface level, none of them exceeds fishing norms. Mean average concentrations of mineral
phosphorus on the whole investigated area are no more than 2.0 microgram/l. Mean average
concentrations of total nitrogen for the whole investigated area at observation period is equal to 294
microgram/l.
3.3.2.2. Sea water pollution
The considered Nord Stream pipeline route in the Russian sector of the offshore section is the region of
active interaction of land freshwater flow and Baltic Sea water. The main polluted flows of river waters
come from Neva through Neva Bay and from Saima channel via Vyborg Bay.
During engineering and environmental investigations conducted in 2005 - 2007 at Nord Stream in the
Russian sector of the offshore section the modern data of contaminants content level in Gulf of Finland
marine environment.
Sea waters contamination assessment is performed for regions defined by hydrobiological criteria.
Portovaya Bay region
Synthetic surfactants concentrations in the surface layer at certain monitoring stations reach 0.016-0.018
mg/l that is less than allowed concentrations (PDK) (0.1 mg/l). In a number of instances, phenol
concentrations were higher than the Russian fisheries standard (0.001 mg/l); the highest values occurred
in certain cases in the bottom horizon (4 PDK).

page 179

The elevated concentration of petroleum products, above the detection limit, was found in the bottom
layer - 0.05 mg/l (1.0 PDK) and 0.06 mg/l (1.2 PDK). The petroleum hydrocarbons (P.Hc.) in the rest of
the samples were below the detection limit.
The metal concentrations recorded at Portovaya Bay indicate that the water is relatively clean. During the
works performing totally one PDK excess was recorded for iron total - 1.4 PDK, one - for lead - 1.2 PDK
and two excesses for mercury - 2.0 PDK.
Overall the analysed metals have the following concentrations: iron total -0.008-0.072 mg/l, copper - less
0.0006-0.0011 mg/l (0.2 PDK), manganese - 0.0020.006 mg/l (0.1 PDK), zinc - 0.0222-0.0422 mg/l (0.8
PDK), cadmium - less 0.00010.0067 mg/l (0.7 PDK), lead - less 0.0020.012 mg/l (1.2 PDK), mercury less 0.000010.0002 mg/l (2PDK). No chromium, nickel or cobalt was found analytically.
The low concentration of priority organic pollutants supports the conclusion that the Portovaya Bay area
is free of harmful organic impurities. HOP, HCB, BCB, PAH content is everywhere below the limit of
detection by standard analytical methods.
Maximum values of PAH sum in comparison to the other regions were found in Portovaya Bay. The
highest revealing rate and relatively heightened mean values of PAH group on both levels are
characteristic for the part (Portovaya Bay), 110 and 75.8 ng/l accordingly.
In Nord Stream route open region with depths 32.2-52.7 m, is situated from Tatasov bank in the east up
to Sommers Island, more salty waters in comparison to Portovaya Bay area define elevated concentration
of chlorides, sulphates and solid residual.
Synthetic surfactants concentrations remains insignificant, the range is less 0.01 to 0.14 mg/l. Maximal
concentrations of phenols are focused in eastern part of considered area - 0.003-0.004 mg/l or 3-4 PDK.
The most significant variation in this part takes place in terms of petroleum products concentration, and
fishing norm is exceed in all the stations. In comparison to Portovaya Bay waters oil pollution level has
grown on the average more than 16 times, and absolute maximum is registered in surface level - 3.30
mg/l (66.0 PDK).
Metals containment in water does change significantly in comparison to the previous region.
Concentrations varying range for other metals is equal to: copper - less 0.0006-0.0018 mg/l (0.4 PDK),
manganese - less 0.0010.021 mg/l (0.4 PDK), zinc - 0.0121-0.0275 mg/l (0.6 PDK), cadmium - less
0.00010.0004 mg/l (0.04 PDK), lead - less 0.0020.007 mg/l (0.7 PDK). No chromium, nickel or cobalt
was found.

page 180

The same as in Portovaya Bay, situation with contamination of area east to Sommers with organic
toxicant is quite favourable, as no significant contents of HOP, HCB, BCB, PAH were found.
Gas pipeline route section between Sommers and Gogland is situated to the west and has big depths
(57.6-63.8 m). The limits of change in the content of chlorides, sulphates and solid residual are a little
shifted to increasing in comparison with water mass laying to the east: 19112741 mg/l for chlorides,
312432 mg/l for sulphates, 45665172 mg/l for solid residual.
Synthetic surfactant concentrations are less 0.012 mg/l and concentrations of phenols is less 0.002 mg/l.
Concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons remained relatively high throughout the water column - 3.8
PDK (bottom) to 47.4 PDK (surface). Heavy shipping is also considered to be the most likely cause of oil
pollution there.
The most unfavourable situation in chemical rates in the design region is by content of dissolved
petroleum products, mercury and phenols. In open part of the gulf adjacent to navigable pass petroleum
products both at the surface and near bottom exceed norms by decades. In Portovaya Bay coastal region
only several water samples contained petroleum products in PDK level. Range of contamination with
mercury and phenols is much less (2-4 PDK), at that mercury excessive concentrations were recorded on
every part of the area, however phenols were found only east to Sommers.
During engineering and environmental investigations the area estimation by regions defined by
environmental criteria was also performed. The results of these analyses in Gulf of Finland segments not
always compare with the previous ones. This fact may indicate both presence of local short-time
contaminations and located quasistationary parts of area characterizing by contamination by several
ingredients.
The following sections were defined:
section 1 - area including stations from No.1 to No.6 (Portovaya Bay);
section 2 - area including stations from No.7 to No.15;

Borders of defined regions are shown on fig. 3.3-11.

page 181

Figure 3.3-11.
Layout diagram of stations and defined sections of information averaging on the

route of offshore section of Russian sector of Nord Stream pipeline
Intervals and concentrations average values of monitored rates for sea waters by defined sections and also
these rates measured in PDK units are shown in tables 3.3-3 - 3.3-9 (Appendix to section 3.3).
3.3.2.3. Sea water quality assessment
Sea water quality assessment was performed by identified sections of data averaging (fig. 3.3-11). The
averaging areas borders pass through the route turning points. Portovaya Bay is defined as separate
section where except for water quality assessment by fishing norms the assessment according to SanPiN
demands was performed.
Sea water quality assessment by sanitary and chemical rates (in Portovaya Bay)
In terms of water for domestic and recreational purposes quality assessment, 65 of 109 rates investigated
in the water of monitored area are normalized (by individual value or by sum of compounds group
concentrations). These rates PDK values are shown in table 3.3-1 (Appendix to section 3.3).
During survey performing in Portovaya Bay PDK exceeding in water for domestic and recreational
purposes quality assessment was not detected.
Containment of phenol, nitro- and chlorophenols, synthetic surfactants in sea water is below the
sensitivity of accepted methods of analysis and much less than defined PDKs for these substances.
Containment of naphthalene, benz(a)pyrene - hundredth parts of PDK, containment of normalized OCh
(-HCH, sum of DDT, sum of BCB, heptachlor, pentachlorobenzene and hexachlorobenzene) thousandth parts of PDK.

page 182

Of analyzed heavy metals concentrations of iron, nickel, manganese, arsenic and cadmium are equal to
tenth of PDK; zinc, copper, cobalt, chromium and mercury to hundredth parts of PDK. Containment of
total petroleum hydrocarbons, suspended matters and BOC5 is equal to tenth parts of PDK.
Therefore, in terms of sanitary and chemical requirements, water in Portovaya Bay area may be used for
domestic and recreational purposes without damage to public health.
Sea water quality assessment by fishing norms
Sea water quality assessment at gas pipeline construction site in Gulf of Finland area were performed
based on hydrochemical rates values concordance to defined PDKs for fishing basins taking into account
actual requirements of Roskomvod and Rosgidromet documents. List of PDK values is shown in table
3.3-2 (Appendix to section 3.3).
In terms of water for fishing basins, 60 of 109 rates investigated in the water of monitored area are
normalized. In the waters of monitored parts of Gulf of Finland PDK exceeding is identified for dissolved
oxygen level, BOC20, nitrite nitrogen, petroleum hydrocarbons (P.Hc.). Values of remaining 56
normalized rates are below PDK.
Sea water quality assessment of monitored area was performed by rates of complexity, stability and level
(PDK exceeding ratio) of water contamination. Contamination complexity rate is ratio of contaminants
number which containment exceeds PDK to total number of normalized ingredients defined by survey
program.
Sea water quality assessment for the region of monitored area has shown that on the average
contamination complexity rate (CCR) is equal to 6.6%, which indicates small role of anthropogenic
component in formation of chemical composition of sea water in surveyed region. Therefore, in region 6
(west of Gogland) contamination complexity rate has zero values.
Estimation of stability and water contamination level is performed based on calculation of recurrence and
PDK exceeding ratio for the whole water object or its part.
Characteristic of water contamination stability is percentage of quality of samples where PDK
achievement or exceeding is found (recurrence of PDK exceeding cases). Characteristic of stability is
defined using the following estimation scale:
zero contamination (pollutant concentration values do not reach PDK);
singular contamination (contamination is observed in singular samples, recurrence of PDK

exceeding is less than 10%);
instable contamination (recurrence of PDK exceeding is 10% to 30%);
stable contamination (recurrence of PDK exceeding is 30% to 50%);
characteristic contamination (recurrence of PDK exceeding is 50% to 100%);

page 183

Waters contamination level by specific ingredient is characterised by PDK exceeding ratio according to
which the contamination level may be changed according to the following scale: no contamination
(contaminants concentrations values do not reach PDK), low level contamination (norm exceeding ratio is
less than 2), middle level contamination (norm exceeding ratio is 2 to 10), high level contamination (norm
exceeding ratio is 10 to 50), very high level contamination (norm exceeding ratio is 50 to 100). Sea water
contamination stability and level assessment of monitored area is shown in table 3.3-9.
Table 3.3-9
Recurrence and defined PDK exceeding ratio for limiting contaminants on the planne d gas pipeline
section in the Gulf of Finland in autumn 2005.
Sections
BOC20
2
NO2
P.Hc.
numbe rs
Number of PDK exceeding cases, %
1
16,7
8,3
2
11,1
3
5,6
5,6
4
18,8
5
6
Whole region
1
2
3
4
5
6
9,6
up to 1.06
up to 1.69
up to 1.08
-
16,7
11,5
1,9
PDK exceeding ratio
up to 3.9
up to 1.16
up to 1.23
-
5,6
2,1
up to 1.4
1,06
-
whole region
up to 1.69
up to 1.23
up to 3.90
up to 1.4
Number of cases of VZ (more than 30 PDK) and EVZ (more than 50 PDK) achievement
whole region
0
0
0
0
In hydrochemical practice for comparative assessment of water quality of different water objects and their
parts the water contamination index (WCA) calculated by formula (for sea water):
where i - ingredient mean concentration, PDKi - maximum allowed concentration for this ingredient.
WCA calculation was performed using the values of dissolved oxygen level, BOC20, P.Hc. and values of
sum of normalized groups of organochlorine compounds, including sum of pesticides HCH, DDT and
BCB. Criteria of water contamination estimation by WCA and criteria of quality change dynamics
estimation are shown in table 3.3-10.

page 184

Table 3.3-10
Quality class
Sea water quality classification by WCA

Name of quality class
WCA value
I
II
III
IV
V
VI
VII
Very clean
Clean
Moderately contaminated
Contaminated
Dirty
Very dirty
Highly dirty
< 0,25
0,25 - 0,75
0,75 - 1,25
1,25 - 1,75
1,75 - 3,0
3,00 - 5,00
>5,00
Comparative characterisation of water quality, defined sections of hydrochemical information averaging

is shown in table 3.3-11.
Table 3.3-11
WCA value and quality class for defined sections of planned gas pipeline sections in the Gulf of
Finland in 2005.
WCA
Sea water classification
Sections
Stations No.
Water
No.
Minimal
Maximal
Medium
Name
quality class
1
1-6
0,26
0,66
0,49
II
Clean
2
7-15
0,25
0,70
0,39
II
Clean
3
16-24
0,26
0,62
0,37
II
Clean
4
25-32
0,29
0,56
0,42
II
Clean
5
33-41
0,32
0,83
0,53
II
Clean
6
42-48
0,25
0,45
0,36
II
Clean
Medium WCA for the
0,25
0,83
0,42
II
Clean
whole region
Obtained values of WCA index foe defined sections of the gas pipeline route change from 0.25 to 0.83.
Mean WCA value for the whole monitored area for the reviewed period is equal to 0.4, sea water is
characterized as clean (quality class II).
Maximal WCA value in the survey period was recorded in the bottom layer near Gogland (WCA - 0.83).
In surface waters maximal WCA value is recorded near station 15 (WCA - 0.70).
For the whole region water of monitored area may be rated to II class - "clean" (mean WCA value in area
is 0.42).
The least contaminations are recorded in the area west of Gogland (section 6) (p. 16-24) (mean WCA is
0.36). Maximal contamination is characteristic for water of section 5 (p. 33-41) situated east to Gogland.
WCA value in this region is from 0.32 to 0.83 with mean 0.53, which corresponds to II class of water
quality - "clean".

page 185

As was mentioned above, intervals and concentrations average values of monitored rates for sea waters
and also these rates measured in PDK units are shown in tables 3.3-3 - 3.3-9 (Appendix to section 3.3).

page 186

3.4.
Water biota lower trophic levels
3.4.1.
Bacterial plankton (in coastal landfall areas)
Microbiologically Baltic Sea may be characterised as weakly flowing water area with low salinity and
high level of development of aerobic and anaerobic microbial processes subject to strong anthropogenic
influence [97].
In Baltic Sea brackish microorganisms adapted to living at low levels of salinity are widespread [1, 6, 7,
23, 24, 25].
In Gulf of Finland of Baltic sea generally high level of microbal populations development is observed
which is most likely connected both with high activity of phytoplankton here and with increased water
trophism in this area [56, 75].
The main part of Gulf of Finland area is subject to strong impact of Neva and several small rivers
freshwater runoff. Here favourable conditions for microorganisms development due to entering of great
amount of allochthonic mineral and organic substances being substrates for microbal vital activity.
Microbiological situation on coastal sections in eastern part of Gulf of Finland is different from Baltic sea
sections. This region relatively localised from another part of the sea is subject to much greater influence
of coastal runoff, and in Portovaya Bay region - and anthropogenic influence too. Most likely it explains
maximal in all of investigated regions mean values of bacteria numbers and biomass observed in
Portovaya Bay [102], in both near-bottom and surface levels at that (table 3.4-1) [230].
Table 3.4-1
Mean values of total numbe r (million cells/million) and biomass (mg S/m3) of bacteria for areas in
east part of Gulf of Finland.
Region
Level
Number
Biomass
Eastern part of Gulf of
Finland
Portovaya Bay
3.4.2.
surface.
benthic
surface.
benthic
2,870
2,644
4,367
4,257
22,6
19,4
44,6
40,2
Phytoplankton
According to literary data for Gulf of Finland more than 300 species and forms of algae are recorded, the
most varied of them are green (141 species), diatoms (73 species) and cyanobacteria (48 species).
Presently most species are oligosaprobes - 88.7%, share of meso- and polysaprobes is 11.3% [40, 50, 65,
66, 69].
Seasonal outgrowth of phytoplankton both in Gulf of Finland and in the whole Baltic sea is determined
by temperature regime, illuminance and input of nutrients, firstly with river flow [108]. Therefore,
maximum of phytoplankton outgrowth takes place in spring-summer time. Spring outburst of
phytoplankton takes place in April-May, with relatively low temperatures, this time in its compositions 35 algae species dominate [19, 23, 114]. At first stage of outgrowth diatoms dominate making up to 98%
of total biomass. In the end of May - beginning of June dinoflagellates grow intensive, their significance
is especially high in deep-water region where they may form up to 85-95% of total algae biomass. In
deep-water zone the spring mass is formed by arctic brackish Achnanthes sp. and Gonyaulax catenata and
to a lesser extent -D. econgatum.

page 187

In summer time especially in shallow regions in phytoplankton share of cyanobacteria of Ascillatoria

genus and of also several chlorococcus grows. These species in June-July shape more than 90% of
number and up to 80-90% of biomass. In deep-water region in summer time leading role belongs also to
cyanobacteria making up more than 70% of phytoplankton total biomass [203, 198, 205].
Common dominance of cyanobacteria and green algae is characteristic for structure of summer and
autumn phytoplankton in Vyborg Bay and other regions of Gulf of Finland east part [92, 93]. In recent
years cyanobacteria are predominant of two these groups. It is their mass development is connected with
water bloom processes. Green algae by significance of role that they play in plankton gradually
obnubilate, the more so because in autumn their diversity reduces fast while cyanobacteria go on
vegetating [163, 393].
According to the data achieved during engineering and environmental investigations in spring season
phytoplankton abundance in eastern part of the Gulf of Finland along the planned pipeline route varied
within 1.3-7.6 million cells/l, biomass - 0.2-2.2 g/m. High figures were reported in Portovaya Bay and on
the adjacent waters of Gulf of Finland, the least quantification were recorded after Gogland [162, 163].
By abundance on the most part of the area in this period green algae dominated with subdomination of
cyanobacteria, in some cases - of diatom, shares of the groups listed varied in the limits 25-80 %, 10-70
% 1-30 % accordingly.
The main species dominating by abundance all over the area were: small monocelled form of
chlorococcus of green - Monoraphidium contortum (share is 2575%) and representatives of small-celled
colonial chroococcus cyanobacteria -Gloeocapsa minima, G.limnetica (8-37%). In Portovaya Bay in
adjacent area apart with designated species the single-cell diatomaceous Synedra acus, S.ulna (up to 15%)
and colonial form of green -Dictyosphaerium pulchellum (up to 15%) reached essential development. In
addition, in the area of the bay and in its outlet noticeable share in phytoplankton total population has the
diatom Diatoma elongatum (share 7-14%).
The main groups dominating by biomass were dinophites (16-80%), green (7-74%) and diatoms (8-38%).
On the most part of the area the dinophites dominated. By biomass among dinophites Goniaulax catenata
and Peridinium aciculiferum, prevailed everywhere, their maximal abundance was recorded in the northwest part of Portovaya Bay.

page 188

In summer season phytoplankton abundance varies within 2.8-77.6 million cells/l, biomass - 0.2-2.2 g/m3
(2.41, 2.42). High figures (23-40 million cells/l, 0.7-1.2 g/m3) are reported in the most part of Portovaya
Bay area and on the adjacent area of Gulf of Finland. The least quantification was recorded after Gogland
(fig.3.4-1, 3.4-2).
Figure 3.4-1.
Phytoplankton abundance distribution in the eastern Gulf of Finland on Nord
Stream sea part area in July (left column) and August (right column) in 2006.

page 189

Figure. 3.4-2. Phytoplankton biomass distribution in the eastern Gulf of Finland on Nord Stream
sea part area in July (left column) and August (right column) in 2006.
The absolute dominants of phytoplankton by abundance were cyanobacteria, their share is 87-99%. The
main species dominating all over the area were small-celled filamentous oscillator forms: Planktothrix
agardhii, Limnothrix planctonica, Aphanizomenon gracile. On the most part of the area alongside with
the dominants noticeable contribution to total population made: cyanobacterial filamentous form
Planktolyngbya subtilis (up to 20%) and Aphanizomenon flos-aquae (up to 8%), and near Gogland and
after it - cyanobacterial filamentous form Nodularia spumigena (6-10%).

page 190

By abundance on the most part of the area the cyanobacteria dominated. The main species dominating by
biomass all over the area were small-celled filamentous oscillator forms, generally Planktothrix agardhii
(up to the half of total biomass of phytoplankton) and Limnothrix planctonica (up to 27%). On the most
part of the area as subdominants were Aphanizomenon gracile (up to 20%) and Aphanizomenon flosaquae (up to 10%), and near Gogland and further along the route - Nodularia spumigena (up to 20%).
Significant contribution in total biomass of phytoplankton on open sea area of Gulf of Finland made
dinophites (representatives of Gymnodinium genus, generally -G.rhomboides); near Gogland they were
dominating group (40%).
In autumn period, for phytoplankton spacial distribution the phytoplankton functions (concentrations of
active chlorophyll, pheopigments and primary production amount) decrease was characteristic further
offshore to the open part of the gulf. High levels of phytoplankton activity are recorded near the shores of
Portovaya Bay, Gogland and Maly Fiskar islands. Here higher primary production amount and
concentrations of both chlorophyll , as well as its active part are recorded.
In autumn phytoplankton occurring in large numbers fresh water eurybiont forms are included. The
brackish species are several ones usual for Gulf of Finland: Nodularia spumigena of cyanobacteria,
Carteria marina of green algae, Chaetoceros wighamii, Cmiellery of diatom.
For autumn phytoplankton of Portovaya Bay dominance of cyanobacteria (up to 80%, abundance more
than 10 million cells/l) is characteristic, on shallow water - dominance of filamentous algae Planktothrix
agardhii.
For shallow water near Gogland dominance of small-celled chroococcus colonial form Gomphosphaeria
lacustris and minimal abundance of cyanobacteria on open deep water (1 million cells/l nearby) are
characteristic.
So, phytoplankton of area of sea part route of North European gas pipeline during engineering and
environmental investigations was presented by species usual for this area and seasons.
In the phytoplankton occurring in large numbers fresh water eurybiont forms are included. Only several
species were brackish or sea ones usual for Gulf of Finland: Nodularia spumigena (cyanobacteria),
Gonyaulax catenata, Dinophysis acuminata, Protoperidinium bipes, P.brevipes (dinophites), Carteria
marina (), Chaetoceros wighamii (diatoms).
The phytoplankton outgrowth quantification is characterized by considerable spatial and temporal
heterogeneity. The considerable impact on phytoplankton outgrowth has its provision with biogenic
elements, water temperature, light conditions in the water body as well as force and character of
prevailing currents (defining distribution of characteristic very important for phytoplankton - salinity
gradient).

page 191

The eastern Gulf of Finland on Nord Stream sea part area may be classified as mesotrophic.
Over the recent years in the Gulf of Finland phytoplankton community structural change in favour of
eutrophic species takes place. Growth of role of oscillator-chroococcus complex algae indicates
increasing of anthropogenic impact on the system and organic content accumulation in ground and water
[163].
3.4.3.
Zooplankton (invertebrates)
In Gulf of Finland zooplankton infusoria (over 36 species), rotifers, cladocerans and copepods prevail.
The main biomass is presented by brackish complex. The constant species are Eurytemora hirundoides
and Bosmina obtusirostris maritima. Other representatives of the complex preferring higher salinity
optimum are Limnocalanus grimaldii, Acartia bifilisa, A. tonsa, Synchaeta baltica, S. monopus, Keratella
quadrata, Brachionus calyciflorus [3, 7, 35, 248].
Salinity mode has drastic effect on season changes in zooplankton species composition and biomass. In
spring season (May - beginning of June) brackish and euryhaline-freshwater forms prevail over the whole
area 135, 396, 188]. In the years of strong desalting in the epilimnion nauplia and copepodits Eurytemore
spp., and also euryhaline-freshwater rotifers Notholca caudata, . quadrata, S. grandis are the most
important. Summer biomass quantities in the investigations area must be anticipated about 0.030.35 g/m.
In the summer salt water positive setup from the west occurs, and role of marine euryhaline forms Podon
polyphemoides, P. intermedius, E. nordmanni in zooplankton composition increases. The zooplankton
biomass may reach 2.1-3.1 g/m3 in the summer.
In the autumn the zooplankton abundance decreases over the whole area of eastern Gulf of Finland.
Cladocerans crustaceans and rotifers virtually disappear from the plankton. The main biomass (up to 9899%) makes copepods crustaceans. In the shallow water zooplankton biomass decreases up to 0.001-0.10
g/m, and in the deeper zones up to 0.1-0.4 g/m3.
Winter plankton is poor by quantity and quality. In its compositions copepods prevail which are presented
in Gulf of Finland by brackish species Limnocaslanus, Eurytemora Acartia bifilosa.
According to the data achieved during engineering and environmental investigations in Gulf of Finland
along the planned pipeline route in spring season zooplankton biomass varied along the whole route
within 1.71-135.05 mg/m3, its minimum was recorded in the open part of the Gulf, and maximum - in
Portovaya Bay. The zooplankton abundance varied within 1.35-18.04 thousand specimens/m3, its
minimum was recorded in the open part of the Gulf, and maximum - in Portovaya Bay.

page 192

In summer period the zooplankton abundance varied within 7.48-39.92 thousand specimens/m3, its
minimum was also recorded in the open part of the Gulf, and maximum - in Portovaya Bay. Abundance
figures close to maximum (34.01-34.76 thousand specimens/m3) were also recorded in deep water
stations near Gogland (fig. 3.4-3 and 3.4-4). The zooplankton biomass varied within 73.91-1007.46
mg/m3, its minimum was recorded in the part of the area adjacent to Portovaya Bay, and maximum - near
Gogland in maximum depths zone (over 900 mg/m3).
Figure 3.4-3.
Zooplankton abundance (thousand specimens/m3) in the eastern Gulf of Finland
on Nord Stream sea part area in June (left column) and August (right column) in 2006.

page 193

Figure 3.4-4.
Zooplankton biomass (mg/m3) in the eastern Gulf of Finland on Nord Stream sea
part area in June (left column) and August (right column) in 2006.
The zooplankton species composition during investigations was typical for brackish and deep sea region
in the eastern Gulf of Finland. In the samples 40 species were found, in June 26 of them were met, and in
August - 35 species.
In the zooplankton composition three environmental complexes representative presented: freshwater,
brackish, and marine ones.
The freshwater complex of zooplankton was presented by Keratella quadrata, Keratella cochlearis,
Asplanchna priodonta, Euchlanis dilatata, Synchaeta stylata, Notholca caudata, Conochilus unicornis
(rotifers), Diaphanosoma brachyurum, Bosmina obtusirostris, B.longirosrtis, B.crassicornis, Daphnia
cucullata, D. cristata, Chydorus sphaericus, Leptodora kindtii (cladocerans), Mesocyclops leuckarti,
M.(T.) oithonoides, species of Acanthocyclops genus (copepods). In the largest number freshwater species
are presented in Portovaya Bay, some of them (B.obtusirostris, species of Mesocyclops genus) are also
largely recorded outside of this bay.

page 194

To brackish species related Synchaeta baltica, S.monopus (rotifers), Podon polyphemoides (cladocerans),
Limnocalanus grimaldii, Eurytemora hirundoides, Acartia clausi, A. bifilosa (copepods). The last ones,
especially E.hirundoides, defined abundance and biomass of the community on the most part of the
region of gas pipeline route sea part. In copepods population the young (nauplia and copepodits)
prevailed. The large cladoceran - Caspian polyphemide Cercopagis pengoi belongs to this complex too.
This specie appeared in plankton fauna relatively recently. In spring 2006 (June) the crustacean was
recorded singularly; in summer (August) it appeared nearly everywhere, but in small amount. However,
because of its large dimensions the crustacean made sometimes essential part of cladoceran biomass.
The marine complex of zooplankton was presented by small number of species: Podon leuckarti, Evadne
nordmanni (cladocerans), Centropages hamatus, Aetideopsis rostrata, as well as nectobenthic
Microsetella norvegica, Ydyaea furcata (copepod). Of the listed marine species only cladocerans played
significant role on formation of the community common plenty; they appeared virtually everywhere in
some quantity and make essential part of the zooplankton biomass in summer. The copepods appeared in
little amount on the majority of the stations (M. norvegica) or (Y. furcata, C. hamatus, A. rostrata).
It should be noted that Gulf of Finland zooplankton is characterized by extraordinary variability in both
space and time. The zooplankton distribution irregularity by the area is firstly connected with the water
temperature changes. Relatively shallow area of Portovaya Bay heats up well in summer. It sets
conditions for the zooplankton high productivity and consequently high numbers of its plenty with which
the community meets the winter. For deep-water poorly heated area of open region of the gulf all over the
vegetation period lower numbers of zooplankton abundance and biomass rather than in shallow parts
were characteristic.
In recent years nonpredatory zooplankton production corresponded to 30-40% of phytoplankton
production, whereas for clear natural water this proportion averages about 8%. Eastern Gulf of Finland is
heavily loaded by allochthonic organic substance of anthropogenic origin, and its input to the gulf area
during the vegetation period 5-6 times exceeds the input of autochthonous organics. However, the
meaning of food phytoplankton eatable for nonpredatory zooplankton is not large and makes 22 to 60%
of the whole biomass of real food. It explains appearance of such species-indicators of eutrophication as
A. tonsa and . affinis able to consume detritus in amounts comparable to algae. Growth of the role of A.
bifilosa may be also thought as indicator of eastern part of the Gulf of Finland eutrophication. In shallow
region the eutrophic waters indicators are Bosmina coregoni thersites and . coregoni gibbera increased
in large numbers in the summer at favourable temperature conditions.

page 195

Generally, i case of anthropogenic impact growth on Gulf of Finland area the nonpredatory zooplankton
abundance and its change to crustaceans predators should be inspected. However, despite of
discontinuity of spatio-temporal distribution of zooplankton abundance and biomass on examined sea
region, its species composition, presented by key species for this region remains virtually invariable.
3.4.4.
Benthic communities
3.4.4.1. Benthic macrophytes

The benthic flora of the Baltic Sea is a combination of seawater and freshwater species. 313 species of
aquatic flora are known in Baltic Sea: 106 species of green algae, 86 species of brown algae, 106 species
of red algae and 15 species of flowering plants [50, 65, 66]. Their distribution and quantitative
development depends, first of all, on the salinity, soil conditions and water transparency. Low salinity
hinders many marine species from spreading into the Baltic Sea - the diversity of the algal flora drops to
the east from Dart sill, which is the east border for spreading more than 20 species of red and brown
algae. In general the species richness sinks from west to north and north-east. 45 species of benthic
macrophytes are known in Gulf of Finland [139].
The vertical distribution of the algae depends on soil conditions and water transparency. The lower limit
of the macrophyte zone goes usually on the depth of about 20 metres, below 40 m there is no macrophyte
benthos at all.
Benthic algal flora communities are wide spread on sandy or slightly silty banks in the bays if the east
part of the Gulf of Finland (i.e. in Portovaya bay). Algae often cover the whole surface of the bank
bottom forming uninterrupted carpet, with inclusions of the higher aquatic vegetation meadows (Fennel
pondweed, filiform pondweed, clasping-leaved pondweed, small pondweed, horned pondweed,
batrachium aquatile and some others). Distribution pattern of the algae reaches up to the 2 meter deep.
Composition of the phytobenthos is dominated by the green filamental algae (Fig. 3.4-5), sometimes with
significant admixture of stonewort [26, 280].
The higher aquatic flora is spread in the coastal waters of the entire eastern part of the Gulf of Finland and
is represented by the communities of aquatic and coastal-aquatic plants [112].
In particular in Portovaya Bay the aquatic flora is concentrated mostly on the top of the Gulf in the
shallow section within 200 m zone off the coastline along the pipeline route (Fig. 3.4-6).
In the composition of the Portovaya Bay 45 higher plants species are identified, that belong to 22
different families of 9 algal species of 8 families. In the general list of flora both aquatic and terrestrial
species were entered, that are encountered in the community of coastal-aquatic plants in the Portovaya
Bay. Among the rare species not entered in the compiled flora lists of the Gulf of Finland Myriophyllum
alterniflorum is worth mentioning DC [125, 126].

page 196

Figure 3.4-5.
Algal community
The aquatic and coastal-aquatic flora in Portovaya Bay covers total area of approximately 12 ha, 5 of
them are covered with aquatic flora, 7 of them are covered with aero-aquatic flora.
Figure 3.4-6.
Distribution of the main phytocenoses of aquatic and aero-aquatic flora in

Portovaya Bay

page 197

The maximum depth where the higher aquatic plants - cenoses of fennel pondweed (Potamogeton
pectinatus L.) - are recorded is 2.5 m (water transparency according to Secchi disc 2,5 m) (fig. 3.4-7).
Meadows of fennel pondweed cenoses covers 30% of the investigated shallow waters area, comprising at
about 4 hectares. Total projective coverage varies from 30% to 60%. On the maximum depth they are
encountered without accompanying species. In the shallow waters (10-20 cm) in their beds filiform
pondweed (Potamogeton filiformis Pers.) clasping-leaved pondweed (Potamogeton perfoliatus L) are
recorded, among the lower plants in this group blanket weed (Cladophora glomerata (L.) Kutz),
vaucheria (Vaucheria sp.) and nostoc (Nostoc pruniforme Ag) are recorded. Approaching the coastline
this flora group is followed by the small spots of (by 4-10 m2) clasping-leaved pondweed with the
accompanying species: gramineous pondweed, small pondweed (Potamogeton pusillus L.), batrachium
marinum (Batrachium marinum Fr), horned pondweed (Zannichellia palustris L) and stonewort.
Figure 3.4-7.
Fennel pondweed communities at depth of 2,5 m.
The aero-aquatic flora is represented by the beds of the common reed (Phragmites australis (Cav.) Trin.
ex Steud.), softstem bulrush (Scirpus tabernaemontani C.C. Gmel.), sea clubroot (Bolboschoenus
maritimus (L.) Palla), and mace reed (Typha latifolia L.).

page 198

Figure 3.4-8.
Softstem bulrush communities
Along the coastline in the shallow waters at the depth of 0-15 the softstem bulrush curtains are found
covering from 10 to 100 m2, which is 10% of the total bed area (fig. 3.4-8.). Total projective cover degree
in the curtains varies between 50 and 80%. The beds are mostly monodominant, the accompanying
species if recorded at all are plants from the surrounding groups: clasping-leaved pondweed, sea clubroot,
common spike rush (Eleocharis palustris (L.) Roem. & Schult.), water-starwort (Callitriche
hermaphroditica L.) alternate-flowered Water-milfoil (Myriophyllum alterniflorum DC.). Reed curtains
near to the shore are followed by the sea clubroot beds; they spread along the coastline on the top of the
bay and cover 20% of the total bed area. Total projective cover varies between 30% and 100%.
Accompanying species are: Needle spike rush (Eleocharis acicularis (L.) Roem. & Schult.), common
mare's-tail (Hippuris vulgaris L.), water-starwort and alternate-flowered water-milfoil. Reed beds cover
usually 40% of the total area of aero-aquatic flora. Share of the reed in the curtains is over 90% by the
total coverage 100%. Plants are 2.3 m high. Most of the reed beds are on the shore, so the accompanying
plants are represented generally by land species. In the water meadows of the reed the accompanying
species are very rare. These are creeping bent grass and marsh woundwort.
In the north-western part of the bay top the curtain of the mace reed is recorded with total area of 100m2.
The whole projective cover is 100%. The mace reed individuals are rather big, up to 2 m high; they are
dominant in the curtains. The accompanying species are very rare.

page 199

3.4.4.2. Meio- and macrozoobenthos

In the Gulf of Finland in general (except of Neva Bay populated by the freshwater fauna) only 180
species of benthic invertebrates are recorded. The marine and freshwater taxa are almost equal in number.
making 39 and 40% from the total amount respectively. The characteristic feature of the zoobenthos
composition of the Gulf of Finland is drastic reduction of the most marine and brackish water species
within the Gulf in the direction from west to east because of salinity getting lower and the climate
becoming more continental.
Meiobenthos. Under meiobenthos, considered the microscopic pluricellulars with the size less than 1
mm. The number of specific features characterizes this benthic group.
First, almost all the representatives of meiobenthos have no pelagic (plankton) larvae. Thus, the dwellers
of any area of the bottom are descendants of the species inhabiting this area within many generations.
Compensation of the impact resulting in death of some species is hindered and will be much more time
consumptive than by the organisms having dispersal stages. The results of such impacts (impoverishment
of the species composition, extinction of some species) will be observed within the long periods.
On the other hand, the shorter in comparison with macrobenthos lifecycles (comprising several weeks or
months) allow tracking structural changes in the communities of the meiobenthic organisms within the
shorter periods.
Yet until now, the meiobenthos of the Baltic Sea is being studied less thoroughly than its macrobenthos.
The composition of the meiobenthos is dominated by nematodes, harpacticides, and ostracods. The
structure of the meiobenthical communities is getting simpler from west to east, the quantitative
distribution of the meiobenthos the clear vertical gradient is observable - communities of meiobenthos
reach their maximum development in the coastal parts, the abundance and the diversity of the
meiobenthos drops proportionally the depth reaching minimum values in the deep water basins, where the
meiobenthical organisms are often the only pluricellulars.
Occurrence of the meiobenthical groups in the Gulf of Finland
On the offshore section of the Nord Stream construction representatives of 10 groups of invertebrates in
the composition of the benthic meio-fauna are recorded: Nematoda, Harpacticoida, Ostracoda,
Oligochaeta, Chironomidae, Cladocera, Cyclopoida, Turbellaria, Acari, Tardigrada. The occurrence of the
meiobenthic groups in the Gulf of Finland is shown in the Table 3.4-2.
Table 3.4-2
Occurrence of the meiobenthical groups in the Gulf of Finland
Meiobenthic groups
Occurrence, %
Nematoda
Harpacticoida
Ostracoda
Oligochaeta
Chironomidae
100
63
53
42
5

page 200

Meiobenthic groups
Cladocera
Cyclopoida
Turbellaria
Acari
Tardigrada
Occurrence, %
5
47
26
26
16
The total composition of the meio-fauna in the marine area comprises 33 groups and species of
invertebrates. The harpacticides display the richest diversity of species (10). The composition of the
benthic meio-fauna is also represented by 8 ostracoda species, 7 oligochaeta groups and species, 2
cyclopoida species and one species of Chironomidae and Cladocera respectively.
The benthic communities in the coastal area display the maximal richness in species diversity whereas the
communities in the open areas are less diverse.
The figures of population and biomass vary significantly both for the meiobenthos in general and for
individual groups and species. Total population fluctuates between 400 and 386,400 individuals per
square meter, and biomass varies between 0.2 and 5154.5 mg per square meter (Figure 3.4-9).
In general, the meiobenthos of the Gulf of Finland is characterized by rather high species richness and
diversity. Yet the distribution of the benthic meiofauna species and groups is extremely heterogeneous
and depends on the concrete physical chemical conditions of the concrete biotopes.
The rates of quantitative development of the benthic meiofauna in particular aquatic areas may rum to
high values. In such local habitats, meiobenthos plays a significant role in the functionality of benthic
communities; in particular, it may be a foraging resource for benthic macro-invertebrates and fish,
especially for young fish.
Figure 3.4-9.
Meiobenthos population (N, individuals per square meter) and biomass (B, mg per
square meter) changes in the Gulf of Finland according to depth (based on the data of engineering
and environmental investigations in 2005)

page 201

Macrozoobenthos. Species diversity of macrobenthos reaches its maximum in the South Baltic, by now
400 species are recorded. In an easterly direction the number of species notably decreases - in the Central
Baltic 170 species of macrobenthos are registered, in the Gulf of Riga - 158, in the Gulf of Finland
(except of Neva Bay, populated with freshwater fauna) - 180 species of benthic invertebrates. [386, 387,
389, 136]
In terms of abundance and distribution of macrozoobenthos along the route of planned pipeline, 2 regions
are distinguished: Portovaya Bay - relatively shallow coastal zone and Nord Stream route section from
Portovaya Bay to Gogland Island.
Portovaya Bay In the species composition of the community, representatives of 5 benthic groups are
recorded: oligochaetes (2 species), chironomid larvae (2 species), molluscs (1 species), crustaceans (2
species) and nematods. The population of zoobenthos varies significantly between 0.1 and 0.76 thousand
individuals per square metre; biomass varies even more - between 0.02 and 37.59 g per square meter (Fig.
3.4-10 A).
In general, in terms of population and biomass oligochaetes are the leading group in the composition of
Portovaya Bay.
Average population of macrozoobenthos including molluscs on that section of the marine area is 0.34
thousand individuals per square meter, average biomass is 7.8 g per square meter. The maximal biomass
of the food benthos (without molluscs) in this marine area is 1 g per square meter.
Section of the Nord Stream route from Portovaya Bay to Gogland Island.
Macrozoobenthos is poor on this section. On some areas with silty sands, no macrobenthos is recorded. In
the rest area of the bottom, macrobenthos is uniform and is represented by oligochaetes (2 species),
chironomid larvae (1 species) and crustaceans (2 species). The population of zoobenthos varies between
0.04 and 0.58 thousand individuals per square meter, biomass varies between 0.09 and 13.14 g per square
meter (Fig. 3.4-10 B).

page 202

Figure 3.4-10. Macrozoobenthos population (1 - thousand individuals per square meter) and
biomass (2 - g per square meter) in the open area (A) and Portovaya Bay (B) along the planne d
route of Nord Stream

page 203

3.4.4.3. Typology and spatial pattern of benthic communities

In terms of abundance and biomass, in the main part of water area prevail crustaceans (Monoporea
affinis).
Average abundance of macrozoobenthos amounts to 0.11 K species/m, total average biomass - 1.46 g/m2.
16 biocoenoses of zoobenthos have been identified in the Gulf of Finland and at its mouth. Due to
complex and steep seabed, the nature of their distribution in the Gulf of Finland is more irregular than in
the Gulf of Riga and Central Baltic [165].
Only 5 biocoenoses are widespread in the Gulf of Finland [386, 387]. Polytopic marine boreal
biocoenosis m baltica inhabits the main part of sublittoral and significant areas of littoral in the
Gulf of Finland. It is common at the depth of 3-77 m, where salinity amounts to 3.4-10%. Its biomass in
the Gulf of Finland is higher than in other parts of the Baltic Sea: 75 g/m2 on average, with population
density 3,900 species/m2. Euryedaphic brackish epibiotic arctic biocoenosis sidoth entomon is
widespread in the elittoral of the northern and eastern parts of the Gulf. It is observed at the depth of 2770 m where salinity amounts to 3.8-8.8 %. Average biomass and population density of this biocoenosis
are relatively low: 15 g/m2 and 1,000 species/m2. Euryedaphic brackish epibiotic arctic biocoenosis
Pontoporeia affinis occupies large areas of the elittoral in the eastern part of the Gulf. It is common at the
depth of 28-79 m where salinity amounts to 5.1-10.6 %; average biomass of this biocoenosis is 11 g/m2,
average population density is 4,800 species/m2. Marine epibiotic arctic biocoenosis Pontoporeia femorata
is widespread in the lower horizon of elittoral in the central part of the Gulf. It is found at the depth of 5975 m where salinity amounts to 6.7-9.4 %. Average biomass of this biocoenosis is 7 g/m2, average
population density is 200 species/m2. Lithophilous marine biocoenosis Mytilus edulis is widespread in
sublittoral at the mouth and in western part of the Gulf. It is found at the depth of up to 27 m where
salinity amounts to 5-8.6 %, and has a high biomass of 165 g/m2 on average, and up to 3,580 g/m2 in
some places; average population density of this biocoenosis is 5,600 species/m2. Other 11 biocoenoses are
scarcely found in the Gulf.
On the whole, zoobenthos of the Gulf of Finland is characterised by the low biomass amounting
approximately to 20 g/m2 on average. Average zoobenthos biomass amounting to 57 g/m2 indicated for
the Gulf of Finland by L.A. Zenkevitch and A.S. Zernov, is obviously exaggerated. Low biomass of
zoobenthos in the Gulf of Finland is mainly caused by the following two matters: 1) over the area of
5,500 km2 of the Gulf (with water depth more than 70-80 m) zoobenthos is currently absent due to
unfavourable gas conditions; 2) almost half of the Gulf area inhabited by zoobenthos is occupied by
epibiotic arctic biocoenoses of crustaceans with typically low biomass.
Zoobenthos distribution in the Gulf is highly spotted: along with large deep-water areas where
zoobenthos is highly scarce (<10 g/m2) or does not occur at all, there are certain areas near coastline
where biomass of zoobenthos is very high (>100 g/m2, and up to 1,500-3,580 g/m2 in some places).
Average population density of zoobenthos in the Gulf of Finland is moderate - approximately 1,800
species/m2.

Page 204

The major part of the route runs through seabed areas with no macrobenthos, or through the areas
inhabited by relatively poor and homogeneous communities. Shallow-water communities of the nearcoast area are characterized by the highest biomass and demonstrate mosaic spatial distribution. They
play the main role in providing both fish and birds with foraging resources.

Page 205

3.5. Ichthyofauna
3.5.1.
Biology of key fish species
Ichthyofauna of the Gulf of Finland had been forming during postglacial period when the present
appearance of the Baltic Sea was also formed. Therefore, this area inhabits species belonging to the
warm-freshwater Danube association (e.g., many Cyprinidae species) and to the arctic marine epibiotics
(four-horned goby) [48, 282].
The ichthyofauna of the Gulf of Finland includes species belonging to two fauna associations - marine
and freshwater, - which is determined by relatively low salinity or sweetness of water in the eastern part
of the Gulf of Finland.
Salinity is one of the main factors of water, and its spatial distribution impacts spatial distribution of fish
population in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland.
In addition to salinity, water temperature should be mentioned as it also plays its role in distribution of the
ichthyofauna in the Gulf.
The fish of the freshwater fauna association mainly dwell in the Neva estuary as well as in estuaries of
other rivers, such as Luga, Sestra, Narova; in Vyborg Bay and in near-coast shallow-water area around
the periphery of almost entire Gulf.
The species of the marine fauna association mainly dwell in the areas of Gogland, Bolshoy and Maly
Tyuters, Moshchny, and other islands of the Russian Federation west of the Luga Bay. The marine fish sea snail, four-horned goby, eelpout, Baltic sprat - frequently occur in these areas. The sprat is widespread
throughout the Gulf of Finland, only avoiding areas with water salinity less than 2% in lower-salinity and
estuary parts of Vyborg Bay, Neva and Luga Bays. The distribution of smelt during the summer periods is
closely associated with the distribution of foraging organisms, and depends on water salinity and
temperature.
According to data provided by various authors, the catches in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland
included more than 60 fish species as well as lampreys [144, 183].
The main target species in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland are traditionally the following: Baltic
herring (Clupea harengus L.), sprat (Sprattus sprattus L.), smelt (Osmerus eperlanus L.), pike-perch
(Stizostedion lucioperca), perch (Perca fluviatilis), bream (Abramis brama); certain importance for
fishing industry also have whitefish (Coregonus lavaretus), roach (Rutilus rutilus (L.), and pope
(Gymnocephalus cernua (L.).
Baltic herring (Clupea harengus membras L.). A local population of the spring-spawning Baltic herring
dwells in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland. The Baltic herring of the eastern part vary from western
species by its size and age structure, with prevailing younger age groups and accelerated breeding rate.
Baltic herring is classified as an early-maturing fish with an age limit of 6-7 years. The main part of
Baltic herring population reaches maturity at the age of 2 years, and the next year almost every species is
ready to spawn.

Page 206

Baltic sprat (Sprattus sprattus baltica) is more thermophilic than Baltic herring, and therefore dwells in
the west part of the Gulf of Finland where water temperature in winter does not fall below 2.5 and
salinity is ranging from 6.5 at the surface to 9-11% at near-bottom horizons, which is an integral
spawning condition for sprat. Sprat is a species with a short life cycle. Typically, maturity is reached
when the fish is 12 cm, less frequently - 8-9 cm long. Baltic sprat is a plankton feeder competing for food
with Baltic herring.
The most abundant migratory fish is smelt (Osmerus eperlanus L.). Typically, smelt reaches maturity at
the age of two-four years, partly at the age of one year, the male species maturing earlier than the female.
Fertility rate of sprat, as of other species, depends on its age and size and increases with the growing of
species. It varies from 2 to 70 thousand species (approximately 15 thousand species on average). To the
spawning areas come spawners with the body length from 7 to 25 cm weighting from 12 to 130 g. The
prevailing species are three to four years old (up to 60%), mature one-year-old fish constitute 5-7%, older
fish accounts for no more than 25-30%. Older fish are represented mainly by female species. Age series is
significantly wide (within 1012 classes) [252].
Bream (-bramis brama (L.) - abundant commercially important fish. Widely spread in the near-coast
area it dwells at the depths not exceeding 20 m with water salinity up to 3%. It can be found in Luga,
Koporye, Neva, Vyborg and Narva Bays, as well as around Sestroretsk, Zelenogorsk, Vysotsk and at
Gangut, Manola and other banks. In winter periods bream concentrates around the Kotlin Island. Male
species reach maturity at the age of 6-7 years, while the females mature a year later.
Despite the fact that bream is a typical benthos feeder, until the age of three-four years it feeds mainly on
maxillopods which are making up to 90% of its gut contents. Later the dominant component are
chironomid larvae which are making up to 60% of mass of a six-seven-years-old bream. Additionally, at
this age the rate of detritus in feeding of bream increases (from 25 to 50%). In diet of middle- and old age
fish, shellfish play a significant role sometimes making up to 30% of consumed food mass. On the whole,
bream shows relative diversity in terms of foraging. The maximum foraging intensity is typical for
summer months (mainly July-August), while in spring and autumn food consuming is less intensive. In
winter bream virtually does not feed [316].
Pike-perch (Stizostedion lucioperca (L.) - commercially important fish. Occurs mainly along the
southern and eastern coast and in the area of Vyborg Bay. In the western area and in the open Gulf is not
numerous.
Average maturity age is 5 years. Male species typically mature a year earlier.
Pike-perch is classified as a facultative predator. Its main foraging object is smelt - an easily digested
dominant. As is known, average size of foraging organisms (prey-fish) for pike-perch is 9-10 cm which is
equivalent to immature one-year-old and mature two-year-old species. Total level of the condition and
fatness of predators depends on yield of prey-species generations [317, 318].

Page 207

Whitefish (Coregonus lavaretus lavaretus (L.) does not belong to the main commercial species,
however it is of certain commercial importance. According to the latest surveys, whitefish was regularly
caught in areas near Sestroretsk, Zelenogorsk, the Bierkesund Channel, Grekov Bank, and around
Gogland. In the southern part of the Gulf (Luga, Koporye Bays) whitefish is rarely found, while in the
Neva Bay it occurs mainly in spring (immediately after melting) and in autumn [323].
The ratio between male and female species aged from 4 to 5 years is close 1:1.3. In older age groups
number of female species gradually increases to 2.8:1. Spawning begins at the age of 4 years with the
dominant group consisting of 5-6-years-old fish. The maximum detected age is 9 years. (Singular event of
catching a whitefish weighing 6.2. kg with body length 81 cm, is a unique case that does not mirror the
general state of population in terms of its age and size.) The size of spawners in the spawning population
varies from 22 to 43 cm, the main part of the population consisting of species 28-35 cm long weighing
340-430 g. The share of small male and female species (weighing 230-280 g, 25-30 cm long) is
considerable (up to 40%) Young species are found continuously amounting to no more than 3-5% of total
catches. The examined part of the population is characterised by low age diversity. The spawning
population comprises only 6 age groups.
Roach (Rutilus rutilus (L.) - one of the dominant species of the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland. It is
mainly occurs in the near-coast areas along the 10-metres isobathe around the periphery of almost entire
Gulf. However, maximum densities are detected in Vyborg Bay, Luga and Koporye Bay, as well as in
Neva estuary.
Mass maturity of roach occurs at the age of two. The main spawning species are 4-6-years-old fish with
body length from 14 to 22 cm, weighing from 40 to 150 g. The difference in size of male and female
species is insignificant. Their ratio in spawning grounds is close to 1:1. Age series of the spawning
population consists of 13 classes; the fish older than ten years is represented mainly by females. The
speed of linear growth for roach is relatively stable throughout its lifecycle (2-3 cm per year, on average).
Most significant weight increments show the fish older than 5 years. Maximum sizes (33-36 cm, while
weighing 1-1.25 kg) were detected among female species aged from 11 to 13. The dominant commercial
group for roach consists of 4-6-years old fish (up to 75 %) [323].
Perch (Perca fluviatilis (L.) - one of the most common fish of the Gulf of Finland. It is represented by
two ecological forms: small stunted species maturing at the age of 2-4 years, and large predatory species
maturing at the age of 5-7 years. Abundance of the large perch is significantly smaller than abundance of
small species, not exceeding several percents of the total population. Age series of the spawning
population consists of 13 classes. The dominant species are 4-7-years-old fish (up to 70%) with average
length from 12 to 38 cm and body mass from 22 to 1.4 kg [324].

Page 208

Growth rate of perch which is relatively low during the first years of life significantly increases after
switch to predaceous feeding; maximum increments are observed at the age of 4-6 years (up to 3-5 cm
and 30-50 g per year). The dominant commercial groups are the fish of these age classes (up to 75%).
There is no difference between growth rate of male and female species, however in certain age series
female species are somewhat larger than the male.
Pope (Gymnocephalus cernua (L.) does not belong to the main commercial species of the Gulf of
Finland, however it forms a significantly large population. Its main habitats are situated in the southern
and eastern parts of the Gulf. Growth ratio of pope is relatively high - the dominant age series (3-4-yearold fish) reaches the mass of 20-30 g. Maturity occurs at the age of 2-3 years. Pope eats considerable
quantities of other fish eggs, especially smelt eggs. The pope itself is a foraging object for the majority of
predators in the near-coast part of the Gulf, mostly for pike perch and perch, to the lesser extent - for pike
[320].
Ichthyological surveys along the pipeline route allowed evaluation of the state of the fish community
during autumn in various ecological zones of the Gulf, from the near-coast, almost fresh-water biotopes to
the deeper brackish-water biotopes.
The net and trawl surveys have registered 20 fish species belonging to 9 families and one round-mouthed
species (Tab. 3.5-1) [48, 282].
Table 3.5-1
Species composition of the fish population in the pipeline construction zone
Fam. Cyprinidae
Fam. Carps
Rutilus rutilus (L.)
Alburnus alburnus (L.)
Blicca bjorkna (L.)
Abramis brama (L.)
Leuciscus idus (L.)
Vimba vimba (L.)
Fam. Percidae
Perca fluviatilis (L.)
Stizostedion lucioperca (L.)
Gymnocephalus cernua (L.)
Fam. Gasterosteidae
Gasterosteus aculeatus (L.)
Pungitius pungitius (L.)
Fam. Clupeidae
Clupea harengus membras L.
Sprattus sprattus baltica (Schneider)
Fam. Coregonidae
Coregonus albula (L.)
Coregonus lavaretus lavaretus (L.)
Fam. Osmeridae
Osmerus eperlanus (L.)
Fam. Cottidae
Myoxocephalus quadricornis (L.)
Fam. Cyclopteridae
Liparis liparis L.
roach
bleak
white bream
bream
orfe
vimba
Fam. Perches
perch
pike perch
pope/ruffe
Fam. Sticklebacks
three-spined stickleback
nine-spined stickleback
Fam. Herrings Baltic herring Baltic sprat
Fam. Whitefishes
Vendace
Whitefish
Fam. Smelts sparling
Fam. Gobies sculpin
Fam. snailfish

Page 209

Fam. Zoarcidae
Zoarces viviparus (L.)
Fam. Petromyzonidae
Lampetra fluviatilis (L.)
Fam. Eelpouts eelpout

Fam. Round-mouthed river lamprey
Modifications in the species composition are clearly connected with the distance from the shore and water
salinity.
The main fish community group of the near-coast biotope (fish species with occurrences value more then
50%) predominantly consists of species belonging to the fresh-water association (perch, pope, pike perch,
roach, white bream). The main fish community group of the offshore area is formed by marine species
(Baltic herring, sprat, eelpout, goby) with some migratory and indifferent species, such as smelt, lamprey,
stickleback.
3.5.2.
Numbers, biomass and productivity of key species
During the last decade species composition of major commercial fish has slightly changed. However,
their quantity has changed significantly (Tab. 4.6-4). The decrease in catches is concerned mainly with
the marine association species (Baltic herring - more than five times, sprat - more than ten times).
It is known that variation in abundance and population of Baltic herring has direct connection with the
long-term and year to year variations of climate as well as with biotic conditions. The last decades
featured predominance of subnormal temperature resulting in the significant decline in stock abundance
of Baltic herring. For example, average annual yield of generations in 1974-1985 in the eastern part of the
Gulf of Finland amounted to 690 million species versus 1005 million species over a period of 1960-1973.
At present, abundance of Baltic herring continues to decrease. During the last two years the catches have
stabilised at a critical low level (around 1,100 tons) [201].
Capture level of sprat has been changing drastically from year to year due to instable fishery resources.
During the period from 1982 to 1995 sprat was not present in commercial catches (Table 3.5-2). After
that, for several years it was the second, after Baltic herring, target species in the Gulf. Until 2005 the
catches of sprat have varied from 600 to 2,000 tons. Last year the capture level came down to 80 tons.
[296]. In the near future the probable tendency for reduction of its stock will remain.
Table 3.5-2
Fish
species
Baltic
herring
Sprat
Salmons
Whitefish
Vendace
Smelt
Pike-perch
Perch
Pope
Pike
Fish catches (in tonnes) in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland, 1996 - 2005
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005*
6774
7400
6900
6350
7010
6700
6200
4300
1110
1168
831
4
3
0,3
782
51
98
222
2,7
999
0,4
0,2
2,3
718
53
82
214
3,8
1141
0,2
0,4
5,7
691
38
79
206
1,7
1216
0,3
0,3
5,5
429
49
54
263
4,7
1975
0,2
0,7
8,6
683
42
82
302
5,9
1760
0,2
0,5
6,9
729
36
89
322
3
1426
0,2
0,4
6
388
31
116
359
3,7
678
2,2
0,5
8,2
245
48
157
254
4,1
642
0,1
0,5
9,5
195
60
155
302
3,8
80,5
0,08
0,6
7,7
74
30
61
205
0,8

Page 210

Fish
species
Carp bream
Roach
Vimba
Orfe
White
bream
Ziege
Bleak
Burbot
Stickleback
Lamprey
Total
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005*
177
121
2,1
0
2,4
131
112
1,5
0,1
11,8
166
88
2,6
0,3
8,6
171
79
0,9
0,1
5
179
118
0,8
0,9
21,1
172
116
0,4
0,1
10,5
183
119
0,4
0,1
13
192
150
0,4
0,1
11,7
126
140
1,9
0,1
10,6
81
49
1,91
0,08
8,58
4,7
9,7
2
88,5
2,4
9177,8
4,4
11,6
0,1
203
8,3
9956,5
1
11,2
0,1
121
15
9476,8
5,1
8,7
0,1
187
21
8849,7
1,4
6,1
0,1
41,4
15,5
10493,7
0,3
17,3
1,7
207,5
27,7
10200,1
0,3
7,1
0,5
328
21,1
9202,8
0,3
5,5
1,2
127
14,5
6199,7
2
10
0,9
191
31
2991,4
1,44
8,1
0,88
170
28,2
1976,87
*- data exclusive of amateur fishery

Smelt ranks third in terms of catches level on the long-term scale, after Baltic herring and sprat. During
the last five years the catches of smelt have been decreasing sensibly and in 2005 it was ten times less
than in mid 90-s. Reserves and catches of smelt vary from year to year, as well as on a long-term scale.
The main factors responsible for abundance of sprat populations are abundance of parental stock and
water temperature during early postembryonic development of the young stock. During the last years the
fishery deals mainly with 3-year-old smelt. Moreover, the possibility for the future increase of the stock
and catches is not obvious [296].
Despite the fact that in recent years the catches of species belonging to fresh-water association have been
declining, they still have remained on the level of normal biological values. Furthermore, pope accounts
almost for half of the catch belonging to this association. Capture rate of bream is also consistently high.
Its catching is regular and active. The main fishing areas are Vyborg Bay accounting for 50-90% of the
total capture of bream, and Neva Bay with adjacent waters along the northern coast. Capture rate of pike
perch in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland is lower than that of bream. The catches level of this
species is characterised by secular changes. During the last decade it has declined more then twice settling
down at 30-60 tons.
The capture level of lamprey shows permanent growth with the catches increasing by tens during the
recent years. The catches of commercially important fish such as salmon, whitefish, vendace, have
remained at traditionally low levels. Usually, total catches of these species (by year) do not exceed ten
tons.
One of the main commercial species is three-spined stickleback. Its reserves in the Gulf are sufficiently
high. In certain years the catches level of this species reached significant values (3,783 tons in 1983). In
recent years the catches have been changing sensibly (from 41 tons in 2000 to 328 tons in 2002). Such
variations seem to result both from biological features (significant abundance variations are common to
short-cycle species) and from changing fishing intensity.

Page 211

3.5.3.
Fish migration routes, spawning and nursery areas
Marine pelagic spawning fish (plaice, flounder, turbot, dab, cod, silver rockling) spawn only in deepwater areas of the open sea with high salinity levels (more than 10.5%). Plaice, dab and turbot requiring
high salinity levels (no less than 13-14%) during spawning seasons spawn in salty south-west areas of the
Baltic Sea (to the west of Bornholm). Cod, flounder and silver rockling are less demanding to water
salinity (at least 10.5-11.0%), and their eggs are found in seabed layers over a larger area, including
Saaremaa and Hijumaa. Sprat, due to its euryhalinity (5-20%) has a wide spawning range. Marine fish
(Baltic herring, sand eel, garfish, snailfish, lumpfish, gobies) laying demersal eggs have occupied nearcoast areas and bays of lower salinity including the Gulf of Finland [317, 318, 319].
Baltic herring spawns in sand-and gravel soil covered with red and brown algae. The main spawning
substrate are benthic macrophytes Furcellaria lumbricalis, Ceramium rubrum, Polysiphonia nigrescens
and Pilayella littoralis, as well as stones, mollusc shells and Balanuses. Usually, spawning season starts in
the second part of May. The peak of spawning season is detected in June at a water temperature 8-13 C
and water salinity 2.6% and more (lower salinity level results in the eggs demise). The majority of springspawning Baltic herring spawns at the depth of 3 to 17 m, depending on presence of suitable substrate and
favourable temperature and gas (sufficient amount of oxygen) conditions in the area. Fertility rate of
Baltic herring varies from 512 thousand eggs. The ratio between male and female species of Baltic
herring at spawning grounds comes close to 1:1.
There are five reproductive areas of Baltic herring in the Gulf of Finland: 1 - Western (near-coast area
adjacent to Tallinn), 2 - The Narva Bay, 3 - Eastern (Luga and Koporye Bays), 4 - Island (Moshchny,
Maly, Seskar, Gogland islands), 5 - Northeastern (near-coast area stretching from the state border with
Finland to Cape Peschany, including the Berezovye Islands), e.g. the share of Baltic herring spawning
grounds in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland amounts to 4/5 from the total reproductive area of the
Gulf of Finland.
Reserves of sprat in the Gulf depend on its abundance in the sea and on its feeding migrations in the
eastern direction. During the spawning season it moves from the shores and lays pelagic eggs above the
depth of 50-100 m at water salinity from 4-5 to 17-18% and water temperature 16-17 C. Feeding
migration of sprat to the Gulf is observed in the second half of the year, when it is widespread in the areas
adjacent to Estonia, around the islands Bolshoy and Maly Tyuters and Gogland. In certain years sprat
pervades the entire water area of the Gulf. The highest concentrations of sprat in this area were detected
in October.
Spawning and development of eggs and larvae of smelt takes place in a low-salinity area of the Gulf,
mainly within the Neva river, Neva Bay and the rivers falling into Vyborg Bay. In high-water years this
fish entries the rivers Luga, Sista Kovash and spawns there. The duration of smelt spawning run to the
Neva river continues for 20-45 days (20 days on average), sometimes for 10-12 days. Some part of it
spawns in the Gulf proper. The spawning grounds are mainly located on the hard sand or sand-and-gravel
soil at the depth of 1.5-3 metres. The spawning season usually starts in the end of April when water
temperature reaches 5 C, and finishes in the end of May at water temperature 12 C and higher. There are
several bursts of activity during the smelt spawning run which could be explained by the biological
diversity of spawners. The first to come at the spawning grounds are male species, at the height of the run
the differences between sexes are levelled out, and in the end again the mail species prevail over the
female, but no more than twice.

Page 212

After switching to exogenous feeding, the smelt eggs use plankton community in the open offshore zone.
After switching to mainly benthos feeding smelt expands over the eastern part of the Gulf.
The main concentrations of bream during the spawning season also occur in the Neva Bay, Vyborg Bay
and shallow-water near-coast areas in between. The Neva Bay accounts for 38% of bream stock. The
main concentration of bream eggs is detected in the Neva Bay, around Sestroretsk and Zelenogorsk and in
Vyborg Bay.
The spawning season of bream usually starts in May at water temperature from 13 to 28 C (the spawning
peak is observed at 16-17 C). Bream lays its eggs in aquatic vegetation of the near-coast areas and bays
protected from rough sea conditions. According to surveys, the bream spawners make 2-3 runs: the larger
species start the spawning season, followed by middle-sized and at last, by smaller, just matured species.
The female species spawn simultaneously. Their fertility differs from 40 to 300 thousand eggs. The ratio
between male and female species that spawn for the first time comes close to 1:1, later the typical
proportion is 2:1. The spawning stock consists mainly of fish aged 6-8 years (up to 90%).
The spawning season of pike perch typically starts in May-July at water temperature 14-16 C, and
continues from 10 to 30 days, depending on water temperature. During the spawning season pike-perch
comes close to the coast concentrating around the spawning grounds. The high concentrations of pikeperch is detected along the northern and southern coasts in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland,
including the stony banks to the south of the Vysotsky islands, around the area of Bolshoy and Maly
Berezovy islands - the island Igrivy - the island Vikhrevoy located in Vyborg Bay. The large spawning
grounds of pike-perch are located along the coast of Vyborg Bay, from Vyborg to Vysotsk, and further to
the east of the Vysotsky islands. During the last twenty years the pike-perch spawning area has decreased
due to human activities (such as detonation and dredging).
Pike-perch lays its eggs in shallow near-coast areas, in the sand, sand-and-pebble and gravel soil, as well
as in soil covered with the aquatic vegetation roots. The typical depth of the spawning grounds is 3-8
metres. The first to come and the last to leave the spawning grounds are male species. Usually pike-perch
creates spawning nests, in which the eggs are also protected by male species. The rate of female species
in the spawning grounds ranges at 1:2, 1:3. Average fertility of the female species amounts to 200-250
thousand eggs with fluctuations between 80 and 1200 thousand eggs. Linear size of pike-perch spawning
for the first time amounts to 30-35 cm with body mass from 400 to 700 g. The spawning stock is
dominated by the species 5-7 years old [55, 106].
Usually, feeding migration of pike-perch occurs after the movement of Baltic herring and smelt stalks. In
the near-coast areas pike-perch remains only during the first years of its life as it prefers the offshore
areas with clear water. In summer 2-3-year old immature species typically stay in littoral areas, while the
older species dwell in offshore lake areas, often around the banks. In winter significant amounts of pikeperch are found around the banks Diomid, Grekov, Agamemnon, and around the islands Berezovy and
Rondo.

Page 213

Whitefish gathers in pre-spawning stalks along the eastern and north-eastern coasts of the Gulf mainly
during September-October. Typically, they prefer to stay in the drop-off area and in seabed layers of
water. Before spawning they move to more shallow-water areas. There are no pre-spawning
concentrations of whitefish in the rivers estuaries (except the Neva estuary). The significant part of
whitefish population supposedly spawns directly in the Gulf. The spawning grounds have been positively
detected at the banks Uvarov's, Kiri, Diomid, as well as at the stony shallow-water areas to the west and
south-west of the islands Berezovye. During its pre-spawning period whitefish is also regularly caught in
the Neva Bay.
The spawning grounds are typically located on pebble-and-gravel soil, rarely - on sand-and-pebble soil.
Generally whitefish spawns at a depth not exceeding 10 metres. The spawning season usually begins at
water temperature 5-6 C and continues at least 710 days, depending on weather conditions. Fertility rate
of spawning female species varies in the range of 8-30 thousand eggs [320, 321, 322].
Roach is a typical phytophil choosing for spawning shallow-water areas covered with soft vegetation,
with water depth usually not exceeding 1 m. Pre-spawning stalks of roach form already under ice. After
melting, when water temperature reaches 8-12 C roach concentrates at the spawning grounds laying its
eggs into aquatic vegetation, dumped bushes, snags. Its fertility varies from 5.5 to -112 thousand eggs
(approximately 30 thousand eggs on average). Usually, the rate is higher with the older fish.
The smaller species of perch feed in the near-coast areas virtually over the entire Gulf intensely
consuming zooplankton, partly - benthos and young fish. The larger species prefer more open deep-water
areas of littoral where they deal as active predators. During winter both types of perch stay in relatively
deep-water areas, around the drop-offs, on the holes, sometimes gathering in large stalks. The main
concentrations of perch occur in the Neva Bay, Vyborg Bay, Luga and Koporye Bays.
Both types of perch migrate for spawning in the aquatic vegetation of the near-coast area at spring,
immediately after melting. The larger species spawn a little later than the small, laying its eggs not only in
vegetation, but also on stones. More than 80% of species reach their maturity at the second age of life.
Juvenile species account for no more than 2% of the three-year-old perch stalk, while the female species
account for 20% and male species - for more than 75%. Later the share of male and female species of
perch in spawning stalk levels out coming close to the proportion of 1:1. Fertility of perch varies in the
range of 7-160 thousand eggs (45-50 thousand eggs on average). With advancing age and increase in size
and weight, fertility of perch rises as well.
Spawning of pope takes place in late May-June. Fertility of pope amounts to 7-12 thousand eggs. Female
species lay their eggs several times. Species with body length 6-10 cm lay from 4 to 6 thousand eggs,
while species 15-18 cm long lay up to 100 thousand eggs.

Page 214

3.6. Avifauna
One of the key principles of The Nord Stream AG is its effort for preserving the wild life objects and their
habitats. According to this, a large-scale field research was carried out in the proposed construction area
which allowed to collect abundant data on the present state of avifauna. The results of this research and a
careful study of of archival data allowed to make a precise assessment of impact upon birds which
indicates almost full absence of impact on this animal group and and allows to assess the consequences of
indirect impact.
The details on species composition and abundance, biotopic location, migrations, wintering and breeding
are based on summarized literature data and the materials of ecological-engineering research 2006. The
research was carried out over a vast area. This section describes the area of the proposed pipeline with the
neighbouring islands Maly Fiskar (0.94 km from the proposed Nord Stream route), Bolshoy Fiskar (2.90
km) and Gogland (2.70 km). The other islands the bird fauna of which is described in the EES Volume,
are located at a distance of more than 4 km from the construction area (see Chapter 2 of this Volume).
The bird fauna of this area is relatively diverse: it is represented by local species of boreal complex
enriched by a great number of arctic migrating species. It includes representative from 15 orders [45, 105,
168].
The hunting objects are represented by various species of Anseriformes and several species of sandpipers.
Although there are several hunting seats in the near-coast areas, at present they play no significant role as
the hunting grounds of Leningrad region.
The Russian part of the Gulf of Finland includes the Important Bird Areas (IBAs) and Wetlands of
international importance (the Berezovye islands, the Kurgalski Peninsula, Lebyazhye are the sites of
Important Bird Areas) which play the significant part in supporting biodiversity of the region and are
places of high priority for migrating bird species [117]. These territories are mostly located at
considerable distances from the proposed pipeline route and will not suffer any significant impact from
the pipeline construction. The closest territory to the route is "The Berezovye islands" the detailed
description of which is given below (see Section 3.6.2).
3.6.1.
Numbers and biotopical confinement of birds
The area plays an important role in supporting biodiversity of the marine, water and semi-aquatic bird
species during their migrating seasons, breeding and moulting periods. The abundance of various bird
species in the construction area during breeding and migration is different [43, ,44, 54, 214]. Data on the
average abundance during these seasons is summarized in Table (3.6-1).

Page 215

Table 3.6-1
Abundance of birds in the impact area of the pipeline construction during various periods of
annual cycle (from the research data, 2007)
Abundance
Periods of
Species
(species) in the
annual cycle
impact area
Black-throated diver
Breeding
4
1.
Gavia arctica*
2.
Red-/black-throated diver
Gavia stellata*
3.
Little grebe
Podiceps ruficollis*
4.
Slavonian grebe
Podiceps auritus*
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
Red-necked grebe
Podiceps griseigena*
Great crested grebe
Podiceps cristatus
Great cormorant
Phalacrocorax carbo
Mute swan
Cygnus olor
Whooper swan
Cygnus cygnus*
Berwick's swan
Cygnus bewickii*, **
Greylag goose
Anser anser*
Bean goose
Anser fabalis
White- fronted goose
Anser albifrons
14.
Lesser White- fronted Goose

Anser erythropus*, **
15.
Barnacle goose
Branta leucopsis*, **
16.
Brent goose
Branta bernicla*
17.
Mallard
Anas platyrhynchos
18.
Green-winged teal
Anas crecca
19.
Gadwall
Anas strepera*
Migrations.
4000
Breeding
Migrations.
500
Breeding
Migrations.
Breeding
Migrations
20
Breeding
Migrations
200
Breeding
80
Migrations
1000
Breeding
6000
Migrations
15000
Breeding
40
Migrations
300
Breeding
Migrations
4000
Breeding
Migrations
2500
Breeding
20
Migrations
300
Breeding
Migrations
7000
Breeding
Migrations
7000
Breeding
Migrations
100
Breeding
60
Migrations
6000
Breeding
Migrations
10000
Breeding
400
Migrations
12500
Breeding
400
Migrations
3000
Breeding
Migrations
UNOFFICIAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION FOR COURTESY
ONLY100
Page 216

20.
21.
22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
Wigeon
Anas penelope
Northern pintail
A. acuta*
Garganey teal
Anas querquedula
Northern shoveler
Anas clypeata
Siberian eider
Polysticta stellery *
Common eider
Somateria mollissima*
Tufted duck
Aythya fuligula
Greater scaup
Aythya marila
Velvet scoter
Melanitta fusca
Breeding
20
Migrations
8000
Breeding
20
Migrations
1000
Breeding
Migrations
1000
Breeding
20
Migrations
1000
Breeding
Migrations
500
Breeding
160
Migrations
1700
Breeding
1000
Migrations
10000
Breeding
Migrations
4000
Breeding
40
Migrations
20000

Page 217

29.
Species
Black scoter
Melanitta nigra
30.
Long-tailed duck
Clangula hyemalis
31.
Goldeneye
Bucephala clangula
32.
Red-breasted merganser
Mergus serrator
33.
Goosander
Mergus merganser
34.
35.
36.
37.
38.
39.
40.
41.
42.
Magpie diver
Mergus albellus *
Coot
Fulica atra
Ringed plover
Charadrius hiaticula*
Little ringed plover
Charadrius dubius
Black-bellied plover
Sqatarola sqatarola
Golden plover
Pluvialis apricaria*
Lapwing
Vanellus vanellus
Oystercatcher
Haematopus ostralegus*
Green sandpiper
Tringa ochropus
43.
Wood sandpiper
Tringa gl areola
44.
Greenshank
Tringa nebularia
45.
Redshank
Tringa totanus *
46.
Common sandpiper
Actitis hypoleucos
47.
Turnstone
Arenaria interpres
48.
Ruff
Philomachus pugnax*
49.
Little stint
Periods of
annual cycle
Abundance
(species) in the
impact area
Breeding
Migrations
20000
Breeding
Migrations
30000
Breeding
40
Migrations
7000
Breeding
100
Migrations
10000
Breeding
40
Migrations
6000
Breeding
Migrations.
200
Breeding
Migrations
300
Breeding
24
Migrations
100
Breeding
200
Migrations
700
Breeding
Migrations
200
Breeding
Migrations
250
Breeding
Migrations
1000
Breeding
40
Migrations
400
Breeding
40
Migrations
1000
Breeding
Migrations
500
Breeding
Migrations
2000
Breeding
40
Migrations
1000
Breeding
200
Migrations
2000
Breeding
20
Migrations
900
Breeding
Migrations
5000
Breeding
Page 218

Calidris minutus
Migrations
100
50.
Temminck's stint
C. temminckii
Breeding
Migrations
300
51.
Dunlin
C.alpina*
Breeding
Migrations
2000
Breeding
Migrations
500
Breeding
Migrations
100
Breeding
Migrations
20
Breeding
Migrations
1200
Breeding
Migrations
800
Breeding
Migrations
200
Breeding
52.
Curlew sandpiper
C. ferruginea
53.
Robin sandpiper
Calidris canutus
54.
Sanderling
Calidris alba
55.
Curlew
Numenius arquata*
56.
Whimbrel
Numenius fhaeopus *
57.
Black-tailed godwit
Limosa limosa *
58.
Bar-tailed godwit
Limosa lapponica
59.
Common gull
Migrations
600
Breeding
2000

Page 219

Species
Larus canus
60.
61.
62.
63.
Herring gull
Larus argentatus
Lesser black-backed Gull
Larus fuscus*
Cob
Larus marinus
Black- headed gull
Larus ridibundus
64.
Common tern
Sterna hirundo
65.
Arctic tern
Sterna paradisaea*
66.
Little tern Sterna albifrons Pall.

Sterna albifrons*
67.
Caspian tern
Hydroprogne caspia*
68.
Razorbill
Alca torda*
69.
Guillemot
Cepphus grille*
Periods of
annual cycle
Abundance
(species) in the
impact area
Migrations
100000
Breeding
5000
Migrations
50000
Breeding
500
Migrations
1000
Breeding
50
Migrations
200
Breeding
300
Migrations
100000
Breeding
500
Migrations
45000
Breeding
80
Migrations
3000
Breeding
40
Migrations
1000
Breeding
60
Migrations
300
Breeding
80
Migrations
350
Breeding
30
Migrations
550
Note: * - species listed in the Red Book of the Russian Federation;

** - species listed in the Red Book of the Leningrad region
Winter season
Feeding gulls (black-headed gull and herring gull) as well as mallard, wigeon and tufted duck are
registered in the Portovaya Bay. The composition of bird species around the islands Maly Fiskar and
Gogland is virtually similar. The most important area is Bolshoy Fiskar Archipelago. Species
composition of winter fauna is summarized in Table 3.6-1.
Table 3.6-2.
Species composition and abundance (in pairs) of typical winter bird fauna (based on materials of
engineering and ecological research performe d in the Portovaya Bay ad along the Nord Stream
route, 2006)

Page 220

Species
Maly
Fiskar
Bolshoy
Fiskar
Gogland
40
Gaviidae
Black-throated diver -Gavia arctica
Podicipediformes
2
Great crested grebe Podiceps cristatus
Copepoda
3
Great cormorantPhalacrocorax carbo
Anseriformes
4
Mallard -Anas platyrhynchos
14
16
13
Wigeon-Anas penelope
12
18
Greater scaup-Aythia fuligula
125
Common eider - Somateria mollissima
35
Greater scaup-Aythya marila
12
Velvet scoter- Melanitta fusca
120
10
Black scoter -Melanitta nigra
300
11
Long-tailed duck -Clangula hyemalis
600
12
Goosander -Mergus merganser
Charadriiformes

Page 221

13
14
15
16
17
18
Maly Fiskar
Species
Mew gull -Larus canus
Herring gull - L.argentatus
Black-headed gull- Larus ridibundus
Coomon tern -Sterna hirundo
Guillemot - Cepphus grylle
Razorbill - Alca torda
Gogland
12
3
11
0
0
0
Bolshoy
Fiskar
45
12
40
1
75
60
23
1
0
0
0
2
11
4
8
0
0
0
Passeriformes
19
20
Fieldfare -Turdus pilaris

Corbie crow-Corvus corax
Summer season (breeding and moulting)

The basis of the breeding population of the area consists of gulls with the addition of various species of
Anseriformes (mainly sea-ducks, swans and dabbling); in some colonies also breed cormorants The most
important for reproducing of the marine, water and semi-aquatic birds is Bolshoy Fiskar, a little less
important are the islands Maly Fiskar, Sommers and Gogland [215, 43, 44, 352].
Table 3.6-3.
Abundance (in pairs) of breeding population of the marine and se mi-aquatic birds on Bolshoy
Fiskar Archipelago (based on materials of engineering and ecological research performed in the
Portovaya Bay ad along the Nord Stream route, 2006)
Species
Bolshoy Fiskar
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
17.
18.
19.
20.
21.
Great cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo)

Mute swan (Cygnus olor)
Greylag goose (Anser anser)
Shellduck (Tadorna tadorna)
Mallard (Anas plathyrhynchos)
Gadwall (Anas strepera)
Wigeon (Anas penelope)
Northern pintail (Anas acuta)
Garganey teal (Anas querqedula)
Northern shoveler (Anas clypeata)
Green-winged teal (Anas crecca)
Common eider (Somateria mollissima)
Greater scaup (Aythya fuligula)
Velvet scoter (Melanitta fusca)
Red-breasted merganser (Mergus serrator)
Goosander (Mergus merganser)
White-tailed eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla)
Common buzzard (Buteo buteo)
Hobby (Falco subbuteo)
Corncrake (Crex crex)
Purple sandpiper (Oharadrius dubius)
2300
2
2-3
0
0
0
0
0
5
0
0
5-10
20-30
2-3
5
3-5
0
0
0
0
1-3
Page 222

22.
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
Oystercatcher (Haematopus ostralegus)

Redshank (Tringa totanus)
Turnstone (Arenaria interpres)
Mew gull (Larus canus)
Herring gull (Larus argentatus)
Lesser black-backed gull (Larus fuscus)
Great black-backed gull (Larus marinus)
Black-headed gull (Larus ridibundus)
1-3
2-3
0
10
1700
250
10-15
0

Page 223

30
31.
32.
33.
34.
Species
Common tern (Sterna hirundo)
Arctic tern (Sterna paradisaea)
Guillemot (Cepphus grylle)
Razorbill (Alca torda)
Coot (Fulica atra)
Bolshoy Fiskar
5
10
25-30
140
0
Bolshoy Fiskar Archipelago. The breeding colonies are formed mainly by gulls. On these islands are
located the most abundant in the Russian part of the Gulf of Finland colonies of guillemots, razorbills,
Caspian terns (the population of the latter has increased from 27 pairs in 1995 to 46 pairs in 2005), and
great cormorants (population development from 800-1,100 pairs in 1995 to 2,300 pairs in 2005). The total
amount of breeding birds in 2005 numbered 44.5 thousand pairs.
The Maly Fiskar island. The breeding population consists mainly of herring gulls and black-backed gulls
(300 and 100 pairs respectively), also there are 20 pairs of razorbill, 10 pairs of guillemot, 4-5 pairs of
common eider, 1 pair of barnacle goose, 3-6 pairs of red-breasted merganser and goosander, and several
pairs of greater scaup.
The Sommers island. The colonies of herring gulls and black-backed gulls number 400 species (80 pairs
of which are black-backed gulls). Also it is a breeding area for common eider (3-4 pairs), scoter (3-5),
red-breasted merganser and goosander (3-4) and the wintering grounds for inconsiderable numbers of
eiders and guillemots and - rarely - kittiwake.
Therefore the key important site for reproducing of marine and semi-aquatic populations in the direct area
of the proposed route is the Bolshoy Fiskar Archipelago, while the rich in terms of fauna Seskar
Archipelago (31.6 km away from the proposed route) and The Berezovye islands (15 km) are located at a
considerable distance.
The first species to come to breeding grounds are gulls which begin to occupy the breeding islands as
early as in March and start to lay eggs in the end of April or in May. Early in April eiders come to the
breeding grounds leaving the islands with their brood in July. Later begins the breeding season for other
sea- and diving ducks (mergansers, scaups): they breed in May-June, and July-August the broods could be
still found. The last (from June to August) to breed are scoters and guillemots. From the end of June till
August continues the moulting season of water birds, during which they lose their ability to fly becoming
more sensitive to the impact of various negative anthropogenous factors.
3.6.2.
Migration routes, focal points on nesting, wintering and stops during flights
Most birds fly over Gulf of Finland without stopping. Waterfowl flight begins in second half of
September. The bulk of migrating sea birds have been observed to leave Vyborg gulf up to the middle of
October (Appendix to section 3.6, fig. 2) [9, 54, 190].

Page 224

The researches have shown that in Portovaya Bay sea area in migration time separate birds or small flocks
feeding on the water or flying in the air are recorded. Most concentrations of birds are seen near Bolshoy
Fiskar Archipelago. In addition, near Berezovy Islands one of the main in North-West Russia waterfowl
staging sites in their spring flight is situated. Near Maly Fiskar and Gogland islands big concentrations of
birds are not seen. Several groups (generally long-tailed duck, black scoter, velvet scoter and tufted duck)
by tens of thousands stops to feed in Bolshoy Fiskar Archipelago sea area. During season flights bird
fauna diversity increases greatly due to arctic migrants. Every year more than 10 million birds fly through
the Russian section of the Gulf of Finland. In the autumn after breeding even greater amount of birds fly
in opposite direction. Sea shallow waters of the gulf are playing a key role as place of migrants stop for
feeding in spring and autumn.
In comparison to the birds flights along the south coast of the Gulf of Finland, their movement along the
north coast has predominantly transit nature. Big depths, and most importantly, skerry type of seashore
prevent migrants from formation of long feeding stopovers. But only in several bays and around some
islands flocks of hundreds and in apex part of Vyborg gulf - of thousand migrating birds arise.
Winter period. Wintering of sea birds and waterfowl on Gulf of Finland area depend on time of ice cover
and ice conditions forming, so wintering has random character, and number of gathering birds and their
distribution are very variable. According to Nature conservation atlas of the Russian section of the Gulf of
Finland the main regions of waterfowl wintering (in mild winters) lay mainly in southern part of Gulf of
Finland and are situated on the islands (Moshchny , Seskar, Bolshoy Tyuters, Maly Tyuters, Gogland)
and several segments of the seashore (west coast of Kurgalski peninsula, Luzhskaya bay, Koporskaya
bay, near estuary of Narva river).
Spring period. Timeframes and course of spring migrations especially for species having stops on the sea
area depends mainly on ice conditions of particular season and general course of spring on the flight
route.
Divers (Gavia spp.). Red-throated and black-throated divers are mass migrants. The both species form
mass pre-starting stopovers before overcoming Vyborg gulf and Karelian Isthmus. Such stopovers are
either focused in base of Vyborg gulf or distributed dispersedly (by 10-200 individuals) on large space
from Berezovye Islands to Seskar and Kozliny islands). For clarification of this issue the additional field
surveys are required. In spring totally 15 to 25 thousand divers (taking into account fluctuations between
years) fly over this region. Mass migration starts as sea area becomes ice free and continues during May
(fig. 3.6-1).

Page 225

Figure 3.6-1.
Divers spring migration dynamics
Grebes (Podiceps spp.). Starting from second decade of April and up to the middle of May grebes (first of
all - crested grebe) may form mass stopovers, up to 500 individuals, but distributed dispersedly within 10
m isobath, on the flight routes along the north coast of the gulf. As spring runs, birds accumulation take
place near eastern ice edge.
Swans (Cygnus spp.) on north coast are not mass migrants, as mail quantity of birds fly along the south
coast, and only group flying on south-eastern Finland, comes to the Gulf of Finland. Within Russian
waters (fig. 3.6-2).
Figure 3.6-2.
Swans spring migration dynamics
Gees (Anser spp.). Gees spring migration over considered area is not considerable. Totally in second-third
decades of May 1.5 thousand individuals fly over north islands.
Brants (Branta spp.). Are in spring the most large scale group of migrants after sea ducks. The flight goes
on from the middle of May up to beginning of June, by waves. During spring from 275 to 110-120
thousand individuals (by different assessments) of barnacle geese and brent geese pass through the corner
of Vyborg Bay. Migrations character for these two species is different (fig.3.6-3). They may make shortterm stopovers on all of external line islands free from forest. As a rule, stopover aggregations number
tens individuals.

Page 226

Figure 3.6-3.
Brants spring migration dynamics
Sea ducks. In this group (and also among all water birds) black scoter and long-tailed duck make
overwhelming majority of migrants. During spring (with peak in first half of May) 1.4 to 3 million longtailed ducks and 0.5-1.5 million black scoters fly over Vyborg Bay.
Figure 3.6-4.
Sea ducks spring migration dynamics.
River(Anas spp.) and sea (Aythya spp.) ducks. By its quantitative terms duck flight of these group is very
weak, predominantly transit with insignificant stopovers. During spring no more 1-2 thousand river ducks
and 1-3 thousand sea ducks fly with stopovers. The nearest regions of this group of birds mass
concentration is Seskar archipelago.
Gulls (Larus spp.). During spring about 2-5 thousand herring gulls, up to 150-200 black-backed gulls of
barnacle of White Sea population and also several thousand lake gulls and little gulls pass through the
corner of Vyborg gulf . Herring gulls fly already in March-April, black-backed gulls migrate in May. The
migration has forward character with formation of short-living accumulations of hundreds individuals on
external zone islands.

Page 227

Arctic terns (Sterna spp.) and skua gulls (Stercorarius spp.) fly in small amounts and in transit,
distributed dispersedly on the sea area.
Berezovy Islands important bird area description is shown below (Appendix to section 3.6, fig.1).
Shallow straits between these islands are overgrown with reeds and are important place of nesting and
stopovers during waterfowl spring and autumn migration as well as mass moulting area of river ducks.
During the migrations in this area grebes (Podiceps cristatus and Podiceps grisegena) are recorded, their
number reaches 1,000-2,000 individuals, brent geese and barnacle geese (Branta leucopsis Branta
bernicla) in amount of 50,000-70,000 individuals, 28 species of sandpipers with total amount about
100,000 individuals, gulls (Larus argentatus, Larus fuscus, Larus canus, Larus ridibundus) about 500,000
individuals in spring and about 1-1.5 million individuals in autumn, arctic terns (Sterna hirundo and
Sterna paradisea) - 300-500 individuals, and also 11 species of sea ducks are recorded. Gees (Anser spp.).
- 4 species do not stop in this area, they fly in transit. At that this area amounts 33,600 ha including
21,600 ha of water area. The area fully coincides with wetlands "Berezovy Islands of Gulf of Finland"
having international importance, in addition, in this area for a long time (from 1975) Berezovye Islands
nature reserve ('zakaznik') exists. The considered area is situated on the distance 15 km from the planned
pipeline route, so insignificant impact from the pipeline construction to this area may be expected.
Autumn period
In autumn period most birds fly over Vyborg Bay without stopping. The main part of birds in the
investigated region flies over Gulf of Finland in transit. Only several groups (generally long-tailed duck,
black scoter, velvet scoter and tufted duck) by tens of thousands stops to feed in Bolshoy Fiskar
Archipelago sea area. Gulls migrate in October-November predominantly over open sea regions.
Common gulls move generally in a westerly direction and fly wide-front. The diffusive groups of
common gulls move slowly and continuously during all the solar time. At that they interchange feeding
(gather food from water surface, hundreds of birds gather near fishing ships), flight and rest. Indistinct
migration behaviour of gulls hampers their calculation. On Bolshoy Fiskar Archipelago there are
traditional resting spots of gulls (common and black-headed) where tens of thousands of birds stop. The
certain species of waterfowl flight characteristic is cited below on the base of literary materials (fig.3.65).

Page 228

Figure 3.6-5.
Waterfowl autumn migration dynamics in the North Gulf of Finland
Divers (Gavia spp.). In October-November predominantly black-throated divers migrate over considered
area of Gulf of Finland (fig.3.6-6). Red-throated diver are recorded in smaller amounts. Migration of sole
white-billed divers (the species is included in the Red Book of Russia) is recorded. Over Bolshoy Fiskar
in autumn 12-20 thousand of divers fly and then only over Maly Fiskar island 1.5-2 thousand of divers.
The movement is generally nonstop with forming of short-time dispersed over large area accumulations
of tens of birds.
Figure 3.6-6.
Divers autumn migration dynamics
Brants (Branta spp.). Autumn migration of brants in the region is not so marked as spring one as the birds
predominantly fly along the south coast of the gulf and even to the south, over the land. In autumn
barnacle geese make short-time stops everywhere on water meadows near shore and in the islands
(including Fiskars, Ryabinnik, Malaya Otmel, Kamennaya Zemla, Tyuterses, Moshchny and others), at
that the accumulations are rarely over 100 individuals, but usually - several tens.

Page 229

3.6.3.
Rare and specially protected bird species
Bittern (Botaurus stellaris). Included in Red Books of Baltic region, Eastern Fennoskandia and Leningrad
Region. In recent years the species abundance decreased, that is connected with immediate shooting of
bittern by hunters as well as with reduction of large reed tangle which are necessary for this species
habitation.
Mute swan (Cignus olor). Mass nesting places of mute swan are situated west of Leningrad Region, in
particular, in Finland and Baltic countries. The greatest population growth is recorded in Estonia where
nesting sites situated in coastal bays and Baltic sea islands are very characteristic. It is evident that from
here starts swans penetration into more western part of Gulf of Finland; within Leningrad Region mute
swan nesting is lately known in the region of Kurgalski reef and also on the island in Gulf of Finland:
Moshchny , Bolshoy Tyuters and Maly.
Shelduck (Tadorna tadorna). Included in Red Books of Baltic region, Eastern Fennoskandia and
Leningrad Region. Until recently in Leningrad Region only autumn meetings with individual birds of
passage were known. The last decade is characteristic with the species settling further on to the west. The
birds are more frequently seen in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland.
Gadwall (Anas strepera) Included in Red Books of Baltic region, Eastern Fennoskandia and Leningrad
Region. The last decade the species is actively settling to the west. Gadwall nesting was found on Seskar
island as well as on sandbars near the southern coast of Gulf of Finland. Meanwhile, gadwall nests
regularly on small islands in western Estonia.
Common eider (Somateria mollisima). Included in Red Book of Leningrad Region. Common eider
nesting is seen on Gogland, Moshchny, Bolshoy Tyuters, Tuman and Oritsaari near the north coast of the
Gulf of Finland. In recent years nests of this species are found in the islands of Kurgalski reef.
Black scoter (Melanitta nigra). In the area of Leningrad region black scoter regular nesting is known at
present at the islands of Kurgalski reef, at Berezovye Islands and in the north of Ladoga. It is more
common in the western Gulf of Finland: in Estonia and especially in Finland.
It is the nesting species rare in Leningrad region. It is quite regularly registered during summer migrations
in the Gulf of Finland area, at Berezovye Islands and at the forts of Kotlin Island.
Little tern (Sterna albifrons). Included in Red Books of Baltic region, Eastern Fennoskandia and
Leningrad Region. It is the rare nesting species. Nests regularly at Kronstadt spit.

Page 230

It should be noted one of the most threatened and potentially affected for the planned activities bird
species - fronted goose (Anser erythropus) (subarctic species met on the flight, protective status: IUCN
(VU), Red book of Russian Federation (2), Red book of Leningrad region (1CR), Red book of Eastern
Fennoskandia (+), SPEC 1, BD I, Bonn I, Bern II), its sole individuals may be met in flocks of migrating
geese, and white-billed diver (arctic species met on the flight, protective status: Red book of Russian
Federation (3), Bonn II, Bern III), migrating through the region in the autumn in small amounts. The
species included in Red book of Russian Federation mostly exposed to the risk of negative impact at the
project implementation is Bewicks swan (protective status: Red book of Russian Federation (2), Red
book of Leningrad region (3VU), BD I, Bonn I, Bern II). Through the Gulf of Finland virtually the whole
Atlantic (western) passaging population of the species using East Atlantic route (from the White Sea to
the Baltic Sea) flies. Its abundance is assessed in 25-30 thousand individuals. In the examined region
traditional mass migration stopovers comprising tens of individuals are situated. The most mass of them
were traditionally concentrated in the region of Berezovye Islands. However, lately, because of irrupted
anthropogenic pressing in the region of Vyborg Bay and Primorsk the stopovers began to move to the
bays of northern coast of the Gulf. Several species of predator birds and great snipe also having priority
protective states are weekly exposed to potential negative consequences because of their bionomy. Nests
of white-tailed eagle (IUCN (NT), Red book of Russian Federation (3), Red book of Leningrad region
(3VU), Red book of Baltic Region (2), Red book of Eastern Fennoskandia (+), CITES I, SPEC 1, BD I,
Bonn I, Bern II) on Kokor and Bolshoy Pogranichny islands should be mentioned.
In terms of biodiversity of bird fauna of the Russian section of the Gulf of Finland support nesting on the
islands and summering in coastal waters of the gulf south-east of eider ducks, great cormorants,
razorbills, black guillemots, greylag geese and shelducks is important.
Analysis of waterfowl distribution in Gulf of Finland area in season migration and nesting periods allows
to mark out the species to which the pipeline construction and operation may have considerable impact.
They must include the mass species and also rare ones, environmentally connected with marine and
coastal habitats, present within NEGP zone of influence, namely: black-throated diver, red-throated diver,
cormorant, mute swan, whooper swan, Bewicks swan, greylag goose, barnacle goose, brent goose,
European wigeon, common eider, Steller's eider, velvet scoter, black scoter, long-tailed duck, goosander,
red-breasted merganser, magpie diver, ringed plover, oystercatcher, redshank, common sandpiper, ruddy
turnstone, curlew, whimbrel, black-tailed godwit, bar-tailed godwit, herring gull, lesser black-backed gull,
great black-backed gull, arctic tern, little tern, Caspian tern, razorbill, guillemot.
Special role in Gulf of Finland islands ecosystems belongs to great cormorant and herring gull, because in
their colonies the conditions for nesting of many rare species are created.
Therefore, on the base of literary materials and the data achieved during engineering and environmental
investigations the conclusion is:
active autumn migration of several waterfowl and near-water birds species in the
region of proposed Nord Stream pipeline route takes place starting from second half
of September and finishes in the middle of October.

Page 231

the absolute dominant of bird migrating at day time is long-tailed duck: abundance of
this bird species exceeds total abundance of all other bird species;
the main direction of autumn migrations is south-west.

Page 232

3.7. Marine Mammals

Pinnipeds (Pinnipedia)
Earlier (slightly more than 100 years ago) 3 species of seal were found in Baltic Sea. grey seal
(Halichoerus grypus), harbour seal (Phoca vitulina) and ringed seal (Pusa hispida). At the edge of XIX
and XX centuries populations of these mammals were much more than nowadays - at least 200,000
ringed seals, 100,000 grey seals, and 5,000 harbour seals. Populations of all these species of animals has
dramatically decreased in the result of hunting, and in 1950th and 1960th. their populations undermined
as it is were seriously damaged in the result of serious reproductive, metabolic and immunological
changes caused by accumulation of hazardous substances in the environment, especially of
polychlorinated biphenyl which accumulates in tissues of sea mammals and leads to adult females
sterilization [333].
Presently Gulf of Finland is inhabited by only two species of seals - ringed seal and grey seal. Their
population currently increases due to restriction of hunting and fall of dangerous substances
concentrations in the water, however, reproductive abnormalities still negatively impact on these species
population development [8, 367]. Disturbance having anthropogenic origin and danger of meshing in
fishing nets also pose permanently treat to Baltic seals (HELCOM 2003, Report No. 87).
Grey seal (Halichoerus grypus). Grey seals are coastal animals, they form rookeries on isolated beaches
and rocky marine terraces of Russia offshore islands. Observations of marked pups show that pups move
freely within the Baltic Sea. Season changes in seals population lead to the conclusion about probable
large-scale migration of seals from Baltic Proper to Gulf of Bothnia (see also map in Appendix to chapter
2 of this volume).
Figure 3.7-1.
Grey seal (Halichoerus grypus)
In Baltic sea grey seal breeds in the end of winter, from February to March, on fast shore ice. Grey seals
move away on long distances from the rookeries in periods between breeding seasons, however, they
commune together again during moulting. In winter they usually live alone or by small groups. They feed
along the coast with various fish and invertebrates [332, 335].

Page 233

Based on the investigations of these pinnipeds species held beforehand it should be noted that grey seal in
Russian sea area of Gulf of Finland in winter period is rarely found and generally gets here together with
drifting ice from the west of the gulf. During air calculation only single meetings of this species of seal
are met [367].
In summer grey seals appears mainly near the southern coast of the Gulf. In the north only sole
individuals are met and, as a rule, in the water, however there is a plenty of rookeries here. They are
islands and reefs of Bolshoy Fiskar and Maly Fiskar archipelagos, rocky exits near Kopytin and
Smolistye islands, sloping rocky islet Hally and finally Hallikarti reefs. It should be noted that the region
of listed islands is rich with fish, so there are not only rocks usual for rookeries, but also plenty of food
for seals. However, number of meeting of seals in these places is insignificant at present.
In southern part of the Gulf the grey seal rookeries are found on Maly Tyuters, on reefs near Vigand
island and on Hitamatala island including in Kurgalski reef. On Maly Tyuters in May-July seals appear in
the evening and spend night on single projected rocks near north and south-west ends of the island.
Numerous rookery near Vigand island is noted on two rocky ridges. The animals form two tight group
here, where maximal amount of seals may be seen in windless weather (up to 150 individuals
simultaneously). Similar situation was observed on Hitamatala pebble bank in Kurgalski reef and to
north-west on the reef. Up to 200-250 grey seals gather here.
Analysing the results of grey seal calculations (by the data of Biological research institute) in Gulf of
Finland (table 3.7-1) held last years stabilization of this animal population with tendency to its growth
may be stated. In 2002 and 2003 calculation of seals has been held a month later than optimum term, the
achieved results are not matched with real population of this seal species in the Gulf. At present, grey seal
population in Gulf of Finland may be evaluated as 550-600 individuals.
It should be noted that in Baltic, in territorial waters of USSR grey seal hunting was stopped in 1975. This
species is included in Red Book of Russia and International Union for Conservation of Nature and
Natural Resources as threatened animal with index EN (endangered species).
Table 3.7-1
Results of grey seal calculations in Russian sea area of Gulf of Finland (by the data of Biological
research institute of St. Petersburg state university)
Year
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
Population (individuals)
445
89
183
547
545

Page 234

It should be noted that in Baltic, in territorial waters of USSR grey seal hunting was stopped in 1975. This
species is included in Red Book of Russia and International Union for Conservation of Nature and
Natural Resources as endangered animal with index EN (extincting species).
Baltic ringed seal (Phoca hispida botnica)

Baltic ringed seal (Phoca hispida botnica) occurs in Gulf of Finland all over the year, for it seasonal
change of habitats is characteristic. Baltic ringed seal area of distribution is controlled by pack and ground
ice and also sections with seasonal glaciation. In the period when sea surface is free from ice, ringed seals
generally stay south to Berezovy Islands and north to Kurgalski peninsula; north-west to Berezovy
Islands ringed seals are not numerous.
Figure 3.7-3.
Contrary to two other populations of Baltic ringed seal that occur in the Gulf of Riga and in the Bothnian
Sea, in the Gulf of Finland Baltic ringed seal makes rookeries. The seals get out to rocky ridges and are
situated in the vicinity of each other. The larges rookeries were found near Vigand island and Hitamatala
island, here ringed seal comes to the land together with grey seal. In this case mixed groups are formed, at
that grey seals are situated in the middle of group of rookery, and ringed seals - on the periphery. In MayJune and September-November ringed seal forms rookeries, reached several tens of individuals near
Remisaar island and in Kiskolsky reef. Small groups of ringed seals by 5-15 individuals are usual on
Maly Tyuters islands, and sole individuals get out to the rocks along the shore of Kurgalski peninsula and
on Bolshoy Tyuters, Moshchny and Seskar islands. It should be noted that with the water warming up
ringed seals come from the continental shore and in summer rest on the rocks only near small islands or in
the reefs in the sea [279, 332].

Page 235

Ringed seals pupping takes place on ice to the south and south-west of Berezovy Islands, single burrows
with pups are also met near Kurgalski peninsula shores. Ringed seals spring migration (in May) takes
place in the direction from south-west to north-east, and autumn-winter migration runs contrariwise (see
map in Appendix to chapter 2 of this volume). However, in the middle of summer ringed seals leaves
from the shores to the deep sections of the Gulf of Finland.
Ringed seals population was estimated predominantly by air calculations in moulting periods, when n
windless weather the main part of the animals was situated on ice. In 1993 - 2002 the air calculations
results were rather stable, number of calculated on ice made 150 - 170 annually. The fullest calculation
succeeded to be performed in 1997, when sunny windless weather lasted long time, and after longcontinued westerly wind all the icy field proved to be in west part of the Gulf and in area permitted for
flights, therefore, accessible for calculations. According to the data of 1997, up to 280 ringed seals were
on ice. So, ringed seals population in Gulf of Finland by the end of XX century was about 800
individuals. Breeding success of ringed seal is considerably influenced by winter thaws, leading to
breakup and pups death.
On the ground of last researches we can state that at present in Baltic Sea three independent populations
of ringed seal are formed. Ringed seal declines in numbers in Gulf of Finland may lead to its full
disappearance from the region.
It should be noted that in Baltic, in territorial waters of USSR grey seal hunting was stopped in 1979.
Baltic ringed seal is counted as vulnerable species (VU) in Red Book of International Union for
Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources and in Red Book of Russia.
Taking into account the information on pinnipeds distribution in Russian sea area of Gulf of Finland
(Nature conservation atlas of the Russian part of the Gulf of Finland, researches data) we can say that in
western part of the area the range of seals is predominantly along the south shore up to the western part of
Koporskaya bay and also in northern part of the gulf - near Berezovye islands, in addition, in summer
time ringed seals are not numerous in the entry to Vyborg Bay.

Page 236

Harbour Seal (Phoca vitulina)

There appear two distinct populations of harbour seals in the Baltic Sea. They present local specific race
(sub-population) having sufficient value for preservation taking into account that genetically it is different
from other north European populations of harbour seal. Non-migratory harbour seals are generally met in
the coastal waters. For rookeries and breeding harbour seal uses beaches, gently sloping rocks and ice. In
the see they are met singly or by small groups. Breeding takes place in April and June. After breeding
harbour seals are sedentary. They feed on various fish, cephalopod molluscs and crustaceans. In 1996
very small harbour seal population in Baltic sea was recorded, in Russian waters only sole individuals
were seen. During engineering and environmental investigations performed by specialist of Biological
research institute this species of seal was not recorded in the region of planned gas pipeline route.
Harbour seal is not included in fauna of sea mammals in Nature conservation atlas of the Russian part of
the Gulf of Finland edited in 2006 and drawn up on the base of summarized data of last decade
researches.
Figure 9.1-24.
Harbour Seal (Phoca vitulina)
Harbour Seal included in Red Book of Russia but not included in Red Book of International Union for
Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources by the case of not enough information on its population
number.
Cetacean order (Cetacea)

In Baltic sea fauna there are nominally 14 species of cetaceans. However for 10 of them stay in Baltic sea
is characterized as "occasional", the most frequently in Baltic sea 4 species of dolphins are met: the
smallest representative of toothed whales - harbour porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), and also common
dolphin (Delphinus delphis), whitebeaked dolphins (Lagenorhynchus albirostris) and bottle-nosed
dolphin (Tursiops truncates). At that rather more than 100 years ago the composition of sea mammals
species in Gulf of Finland was a great deal more than nowadays, and their population was well over.
However, strengthening of anthropogenic pressing on marine natural complexes in the Gulf expressed in
environment pollution and strengthening of disturbance factor led to reduction of species range and
population of sea mammals.

Page 237

Figure 3.7-4.
Common dolphin, Delphinus
delphis
Figure 3.7-5.
Whitebeaked dolphin,
Lagenorhynchus albirostris
Figure 3.7-6.
Bottle-nosed dolphin,
Tursiops truncates
Harbour porpoise (Phoecoena phocoena). Harbour porpoise is usually met on shallow waters, often
near shore, by groups up to 8 animals, but sometimes they gather in stocks of 50 to 100 individuals for
feeding and migration. This species is timid and do not approach to ships. Harbour porpoise population in
Baltic sea do not exceed 599 individuals according to the calculation of 1995. In Russian waters sole
individuals are met. They feed on various fish and cephalopod molluscs. During the investigations
performed by specialist of Biological research institute this species was not recorded in the region of
planned construction. In addition, in Nature conservation atlas of the Russian part of the Gulf of Finland
edited in 2006 and drawn up on the base of summarized data of last decade researches facts of harbour
porpoise residence (as well as other species of cetacean) in Russian part of the Gulf of Finland are not
described.
Figure 3.7-7.
Harbour porpoise, Phoecoena phocoena
This species is threatened with extinction in the Baltic proper. Population of harbour porpoise was
sharply diminished as a result of hunting, periodic disastrous mortality connected with severe ice
conditions in winter time, contamination, disturbance by noise and deaths connected with fishing.

Page 238

Harbour porpoise is counted as vulnerable species (VU) in both Red Book of Russia and in Red Book of
International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources .
Common dolphin (Delphinus delphis) - preferably lives in moderate and warm zones, in European
waters of Atlantic it is common to the north up to the latitude of North Norway, but penetrates in Baltic
sea rarely. It eats predominantly small schooling fish in pelagic conditions.
Whitebeaked dolphin (Lagenorhynchus albirostris) - lives in waters of moderate and subarctic zones of
north Atlantic, it is rare in Baltic sea. Remains predominantly close to the coasts, commonly in pairs or
flocks of various dimension. Eats fish, including bottom-dwelling fish (cod, whiting, herring, navaga,
capelin).
Bottle-nosed dolphin (Tursiops truncates) - is common in Atlantic from north regions of Scandinavia to
South Africa. In Baltic sea is rare. Bottle-nosed dolphin eats mainly bottom-dwelling fish.
Generally, populations of listed above three dolphin species are the most numerous in more southern seas
(Black sea) where these animals have more favourable living conditions. Dolphin inhabiting Baltic sea
enter to the Gulf of Finland but virtually do not make stable population in Russian waters.
Critical periods
Data on marine mammals critical periods based on the information on these animals general ecology are
listed below in Table 3.7-2. During these periods the mammals are especially sensitive to violation of
habitual mode of life.
Table 3.7-2
Critical periods for marine mammals living in Baltic sea
Marine mammal
Breeding period
Moulting (seals)
Grey seal
Harbour seal
Baltic ringed seal
Harbour porpoise
February - March
April June
February - March
May - July
May - June
August - September
April - May
-
HELCOM Recommendations 9/147/2

Member states are recommended to prohibit grey seal, Baltic ringed seal and harbour seal hunting in
Baltic sea using the national lawgiving means. To provide survival of these species the prohibition must
be in force up to the time of scientific statement of normal level of individuals health and normal
reproductive volume. Moreover, representative countries must take measures for creation of seals nature
reserves and, if necessary organize the programs of seals breeding for the purpose of, conservation of
genetic individuality of Baltic seals decreasing population.

Page 239

3.8. Socioeconomic conditions

3.8.1.
Summary of socio-economic conditions Political and administrative borders
Nord Stream pipeline route in the Russian sector of the offshore section lays within the Russian territorial
sea from Portovaya Bay in Vyborg district, Leningrad region to the borders of exclusive economic
zone.of Finland avoided exclusive economic zone and territorial sea of adjacent Estonia. According to the
Constitution of the Russian Federation, territorial sea is under jurisdiction of federal authorities of the
Russian Federation. The coastline intersection area of the gaspipeline and small land section from the
coastline up to Portovaya KP is under jurisdiction of Leningrad region authorities.
The area of Leningrad region includes national border) of Russia with Finland and Estonia, administrative
border with five Subjects of the Russian Federation: Novgorod, Pskov, Vologda regions, Karelia
Republic and St. Petersburg City.
According to the population census of 2002, on the area of Leningrad region resides representatives of
more than 100 ethnic group (Totals of All-Russian population census...). The majority of population is
formed by Russians - 89.58% followed by Ukrainians - 2.51%, Byelorussians - 1.58%, Tatars - 0.57%,
Finns - 0.48%, Armenians - 0.33%, and also Gipsies, Jews, Karelians, Chuvashs, Estonians, Poles,
Azerbaijanians, Uzbeks. Their percentage in population of the region is equal to 4.95%. Besides Russians,
the native population of North-West region of Russia residing in Leningrad region nowadays includes
people of Finno-Ugric language group - Veps, Izhora and Ingermanland Finns.
Industry of Leningrad region has diversified character. The main branches: fuel, oil-refining, timber, pulp
and paper, chemical, engineering. Production and technical product makes over 85% of industrial output.
The base of region industry is composed of about 300 enterprises, majority of them are joint-stock
companies. The essential singularity of the region economy is in its proximity to St. Petersburg. The
region possesses considerable reserves of wood, non-metallic materials, peat, bauxites, slate coal,
phosphorites. The region infrastructure is characterized by developed network of roads and railways, sea
and river ports.
Being separate subject of Russian Federation, the region includes 17 districts. Vyborg district is the
greatest industrial district as part of Leningrad region. The area of the district - 7,350.9 square kilometres.
Vyborg district population size as of January 1st 2006 amounted 188.3 thousand people. The population
size change dynamics as of beginning of 2006 compared with 2001 - 97.4%. On the area of the district
there are 8 urban settlements and 6 rural settlements. In the administrative centre of the district Vyborg
78.6 thousand people resides.

Page 240

Vyborg town is large industrial and cultural centre, it is international port and important rail junction.
Bolshoy Bor settlement nearest to the landfall is situated in 3.5 km from the route. Part of the settlement
population is occupied in forestry. The majority of population arrive to the settlement in summer season.
The areas adjacent to Portovaya Bay coastline are mainly used for recreation.
3.8.2.
Fishery
Sea area of Gulf of Finland is used according to the Fishery rules in the Baltic Sea for trawling of small
herring species at the depths over 20 m (see Appendix 3.8-1).
Gulf of Finland has significant commercial fishing importance, as it concentrates considerable areas of
spawning grounds and nurseries of freshwater (bream, pike-perch, roach, pike) and brackish (Baltic
herring, smelt) fish species [382, 383]. Shallow-water areas of the gulf limited by 10-meter isobath are
both spawning ground for majority of fish and nurseries for their young fattening. So, in bays of Vyborg
gulf up to 80% of bream and 45% of pike-perch of eastern part of the Gulf of Finland are reproduced.
Inshore fishery of freshwater and fluvial anadromous fish in Gulf of Finland shallow water is performed
by passive gear. The main part of catch consists of Baltic herring, smelt, stickleback, bream, pike-perch,
perch, roach, and ruff. Fishing in coastal area is performed predominantly in spring in the period of fish
spawning concentration. The main commercially exploited species is Baltic herring. Its catch varies from
7 to 15 thousand tonnes a year, and in spawning period from 1 to 2 thousand tonnes. In addition, at
inshore fishery from 4 to 9 thousand tonnes of fluvial anadromous and freshwater fish is yearly caught.
Considerable irregularity of Vyborg Bay coastline and numerous islands are favourable to young
fattening of bream, pike-perch, smelt, pike and other fish species. In Portovaya Bay Baltic whitefish,
pike-perch, bream, perch, roach, ide, ruff, smelt are found. In the bay the spawning grounds and feeding
area of young pike-perch, Baltic herring, perch, roach are situated. At small distance of the bay wintering
pits of pike-perch and bream are recorded. Via Vyborg Bay the salmon fishes (Baltic salmon, sea trout species included in Red book of Russian Federation) migration routes pass.
In Vyborg Bay industrial and industrial and amateur fishery is performed [382,383]. According to the
data received as inquiry answer from Authority of veterinary and phitosanitary control of the Leningrad
region, in coastal 5 km area of Vyborg Bay the fishing district of JSV "Primorsky Rybak" vested by
License agreement is situated (fig. 3.8-1 and Appendix 3.8-1).

Page 241

Figure 3.8-1.
Fishing district layout
In Portovaya Bay industrial fishing used to be performed. In catches pike-perch, bream, perch, roach,
pike, ide prevailed. Potential possible catch of Baltic herring in Portovaya bay - 20 tonnes.
3.8.3.
Algae fishery and mariculture
The commercial species of algae in Baltic Sea are: brown algae (Phaeophyta - bladder wrack Fucus
vesiculosus), red algae (Rhodophyta - furcellaria lumbricalisFurcellaria lumbricalis). In the section of the
pipeline route in Gulf of Finland the commercial fields are absent.
Aquaculture in Gulf of Finland is developed insignificantly in consequence of unfavourable negative
natural environment. At present the main object of breeding in Baltic sea is rainbow trout. Within the
Russian sector of the planned pipeline route there is no mariculture enterprises.
3.8.4.
Ship traffic (routes, anchoring areas)
All the vessel passages in Baltic sea area are divided into external and internal. The data on vessel
passages are received from several sources: archival data (special literature, databases, Internet), data of
information services of main ports and terminals of considered region (see figure 3.8-2).

Page 242

The considerable part of maritime traffic are planned traffic lanes (mainly passenger traffic). At
present,the higher intensity of maritime traffic in considered region should be expected. Increasing of
ships and ferries number, establishment of new routes are possible.
Leningrad region has developed transport infrastructure. Volga-Baltic Route passing through Leningrad
region makes it possible to connect the basins of all the inland waterways of Russia with both St.
Petersburg and Baltic sea basin ports. By the Leningrad region waterways more than 40 million tonnes of
different cargoes are transported by NorthWest river shipping company vessels. In the region there are
Podporozhye and Sviritsa river ports equipped with modern technology, two sea ports in Vyborg and
Vysotsk and highly developed production and technical base for ships repair and building. The number of
pipeline route crossings in the considered area by various types of vessels (cargo, bulk carriers /
combined, container carriers, tankers, refrigerator ships, passenger, fishing, exploratory, military, yachts,
boats) - up to 28300 yearly, various cargo vessel are 59% of them, tankers - 15%, passenger - 9%, others
- 17%.

Page 243

Figure 3.8-2.
Gas pipeline route layout in territorial sea of Russia and shipping lanes

Page 244

Gulf of Finland is a shipping hotspot with large amounts of cargo traffic and numerous liners in the
region of gas pipeline route.
Vyborg port specialises in trans-shipment of general cargo, containers and refrigerated cargo. Vysotsk
port specialises in trans-shipment of coal and oil. Data on cargo trans-shipment via Vysotsk port are listed
in table 3.8-4 (NPC Tekhnologia Ltd. "Ship traffic in Baltic sea in the region of section of Russian sector
of Nord Stream pipeline" Project, 2007).
Table 3.8-4
Cargo name
Coal
Oil and oil
products
Total:
Data on cargo trans-shipment via Vysotsk port

Freight
Ship characteristics
turnover in N, m
D,
C,
L, m B, m T, m Crew,
2006,
thousand thousand
people
thousand
tonnes tonnes
tonnes
2500
11
39
24
182 24 10,2
25
16500
14,5
100
60
247 37 14,1
25
Number of
vessels in 2007
(for 10 months)
125
330
19000
3.8.5.
455
Tourism and recreational areas
Tourism development in Baltic sea region significantly accelerated after opening of the borders between
East and West. The main kind of tourism in this region is domestic travel and journeys to adjacent
countries. In the region there are no mass tourism areas, but in the fields of domestic travel the
concentration is high enough, as, i.e. in the coast of Germany. Large amounts of tourists are received by
large cities and capitals of the countries in the region.
Recreational tourism is highly dependent upon the season of the year, greatly improving in vacations and
holidays seasons. The most widespread kinds of recreational tourism are sea cruises, bathing, visiting
historical and archaeological sites etc.
Lately, in the most countries of the region improved water quality along coastlines is recorded. It
stipulates increased number of people visiting beaches and choosing this kind of recreation.
Unlimited recreational abilities of the region ate presently used extremely little. At the same time the
tourist flow to the region increases constantly. Yearly the region having 1,700,000 people population is
visit by up to 1.9 million guests (data of 2007), and to the end of 2008 the tourist flow is expected up to
2.1 million people (Leningrad Region Regional Law "On Tourism and recreation scope in Leningrad
region development for 2006-2008 regional task program dated 13 September 2005). The recreational
demand (first of all from foreign tourists) is mainly connected with cultural and historical heritage
monuments of St. Petersburg and its closest suburbs. With respect to the districts of the region, tourism
development is here is hampered by lack of necessary recreational infrastructure and modern tourist
equipment.

Page 245

The hotel service available for tourists is relatively developed today in Karelian Isthmus (Vyborg,
Vsevolozhsk, Priozersk districts) where tourist bases, campings, hotels, sanatoriums, places of resort,
highways, snack bars, cafes are situated. Here accumulates the main recreational demand of St.
Petersburg people. The main natural-aesthetic value of Karelian isthmus present coast of Gulf of Finland,
lake Ladoga and lake and river system Vuoksa continuing the views and landscapes of adjacent Finland.
However, virtually all the districts of the region have considerable recreational potential both in
excursion-cognitive and sport tourism development.
Vyborg district of Leningrad region is one of more advanced ones in terms of tourism development.
Already there is ever-increasing demand from western tourists for licensed shooting of moose, bear, wild
boar, lynx etc. However, this demand is satisfied in minimal extent. Investments in recreational area
development are extremely prospective, as in the nearest future tourism promises to become one of main
items of regional budget.
3.8.6.
Cultural Heritage Sites
Expert assessment on historical and cultural value of identified submerged objects along Nord Stream
pipeline route within the Russian territorial Sea and exclusive economic zone was prepared by Institute of
Material Culture History of the Russian Academy of Sciences based on a contract No. 51-ES-06 of 24
October 2006 with OOO Petergaz. Prospecting work data review and expert assessment preparation were
performed based on Permit for archaeological excavations and surveys No. 175 for Gulf of Finland area
issued by Institute of archaeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences in name of P.E.Sorokin.
Conducting of protective archaeological surveys in zones of construction (communications laying) is
aimed at fulfilment of the requirements stated in Law on of national historical and cultural heritage
objects of peoples of Russian Federation of 25 June 2002. According to this law al the shipwrecks
sinking more than 40 years ago are potential historical and cultural heritage objects (art.3, art.18).
Expert assessment on historical and cultural value of identified submerged objects along Nord Stream
pipeline route within the Russian territorial Sea and exclusive economic zone includes:
Determination of historical and cultural heritage objects present in the immediate

vicinity of Nord Stream pipeline route on the base of archival data analysis [124, 274277, 304, 342].
Analysis of engineering surveys data (sonar survey, magnetometer) by OOO Petergaz

for determination of historical and cultural heritage objects.

Page 246

Analysis of underwater video (ROV) performed by OOO Petergaz for identification of found objects and
determination of their historical and cultural value.
Development of expert assessment on historical and cultural value of identified of

found objects.
Preparation of report containing expert assessment on historical and cultural value of

identified submerged objects along Nord Stream pipeline route within the Russian
territorial sea and exclusive economic zone.
3.8.6.1. Historical and archive information about cultural heritage sites in pipeline laying
area
On the base of archival and bibliographic researches the information on historical ships sunk in the region
of along proposed Nord Stream gas pipeline route within the Russian territorial Sea and exclusive
economic zone of Russia [124, 274-277, 304, 342].
Proposed route crosses north part of Gulf of Finland in the area between Cape
Portovy peninsula in the north and Gogland in the south in meridional direction. It
crosses historical water communication from West Baltic sea area to the Neva estuary,
Berezovy Islands and Gulf of Vyborg taking place from the Middle Ages. From the
beginning of 18th century across this region one of main ways passed connecting
St.Petersburg to North Europe countries.
From Portovaya Bay west of M. Fiskar Island, south-east of B.Fiskar archipelago

and banks Sitiron, near Sommers island, bank Mordvinova, Gogland shoal, west of
Gogland island the pipeline route crosses areas of numerous wrecks of ships going on
"northern" fairway and regions of wrecks in sea battles. This region in 18th-20th
centuries was included in coverage of two beacons - Sommers and North Gogland.
Portovy peninsula - M. Fiskar - B. Fiskar region. The particular danger in this

region is connected with coastal stones near Portovy peninsula and also
Niemenmatala bank. In addition, this sea area belongs to west part of region of
Vyborg sea battle 1790, where died several tens of Swedish ships (Tyulenev 1996,
Sorokin 1999, SFH 1942). According to statistical data only from 1841 to 1858 2
ships sunk in this region (Russian State Archive of Navy F.402, op.2, dossier 1044).
Region below Sitiron bank, which takes its name from the name of English sailing
vessel died there, is also place of death because of storm at night of 23/24 June 1790
of about 20 Swedish ships taking part in Vyborg sea battle (Tyulenev 1996, Sorokin
1999, SFH 1942).
Region of Somme rs and M.Sommers islands where in different years of 18th and
19th centuries more than 50 commercial and military vessels sunk. Galliot "Strelna"
in 1773 was wrecked at north side of Sommers. The crew managed to survive. Exact
place of the wreck in not known as well as its dimensions. Usual dimensions of
galliots are length 18-30 m, width 4-7.5 m. (Dudscus 1987:123). According to
statistical data only from 1841 to 1858 5 ships sunk and one ship was seriously
damaged in this region (Russian State Archive of Navy F.402, op.2, dossier 1044),
from 1856 to 1866 died 4 and damaged 8 ships here (Russian State Archive of Navy
F.402, op.2, dossier 1314).

Page 247

Gremyashchy steam frigate was sent from Kronstadt to help American ship
Emperor grounding near Maly Sommers island. It left Kronstadt 16 September 1862
and the next day was wrecked on rocky bank near Maly Sommers island. Despite of
refloating with refloating attempts the ship sank on 23 September. (Russian State
Archive of Navy F.402, op. 1. dossier 1251). Gremyashchy steam frigate is the only
extant specimen of first Russian military paddle-steamers.
In bank Mordvinova areain 2003 the unique cultural heritage object was found - 57cannon sail-propeller frigate "Oleg" perished in 1869. By its integrity it is significant
site of universal importance and national heritage of Russia.
Region of Gogland - North Gogland shoal - place of the most mass wrecks of
commercial and military vessels in 18th-20th centuries in East Baltic. Totally about
800 ships belonged virtually to all the countries of Europe perished here. Of special
interest of them are wrecks of two 32-canon frigates: "Gektor" (sank in 1742) and
"Archangel Mikhail" (sank in 1760) and also of 66-canon "Vyacheslav" ship of the
line (sank in 1789) - as rarest monuments of Russian military shipbuilding.
According to statistical data only from 1841 to 1858 14 ships sunk and 4 ships were
seriously damaged in this region (Russian State Archivum of Navy F.402, op.2,
dossier 1044). During the period from 1856 to 1866 12 ships sunk and 14 ships were
damaged (Russian State Archive of Navy. F.402, op.2, dossier 1314).
Most of these ships were private commercial vessels, mainly foreign: English, Dutch,
Norwegian, Finnish, Swedish. There is some in-depth information about death here
she ships as: Galliot "Enge-Tobias" in 1771, transport yacht "Feodosia" in 1814,
transport "America" in 1856 (Marine col. XXVI No.14 p. 32-35). Dimensions of
wrecks in this region of the area may be witnessed by the fact that only in 1856 here
sank: Swedish schooner "Victor", English vessels: ship "Alexander", brig "Young
Dickson", steamer "Jackal" (Russian State Archive of Navy. F.402, op.2, dossier 403):
In 1860 died here: Finnish schooner "Ida", English commercial vessels "Fany" and
"Homesval", and Dutch vessel "Triton" (Russian State Archive of Navy. F.402, op.2,
dossier 1086). These data may be considered as average annual.
Medieval vessels. From viking age (8th-9th centuries) up to the later Middle Ages
(17th century) the way along north coast of Gulf of Finland was the main way of
Europeans' navigation to Russia. During this period the main fairway for entry to
Neva marked on Swedish maps of 17th century as old way to Nien, went through
Bolshaya Nevka.

Page 248

From foundation of Vyborg in 1293 through this region went communications

connected this town with Sweden. Taking into account that existing fairways for
shipment appear at Middle Age, discovery here wrecks of Middle Age ships not
mentioned in historical documents may be predicted.
Ships of the Great Patriotic War period. In design zone there is a significant
number of ships sunk during the Great Patriotic War. In this area ships died during
passage from Tallinn (28-30 August 1941) and garrison evacuation from Hanko
peninsula (26 October - 2 December 1941) as well as during the campaign near
Sommers island in August 1942 (MA. V.3. 1966, Berezhnoy 1988).
3.8.6.2 Interpretation of the results from the geophysical surveys (SSS, ROV2005-2007)
along the pipeline route
Taking into account a large number of known and potential cultural heritage objects in the Eastern Gulf
of Finland, OOO Petergaz performed in 2006-2007 detailed investigation of the whole planned
construction corridor using side-scan sonar SSS) and video investigations of found objects from
underwater apparatus (ROV) (table 3.8-1). Later these materials were submitted to Institute of Material
Culture History of the Russian Academy of Sciences for identification of the discovered objects, their
description, evaluation and preparation of the appropriate experts opinion.
Table 3.8-1
No.
1
2
Numbers and coordinates of objects having the properties of cultural heritage objects
Block Code ROV Code SSS
X
Y
Latitude (N) Longitude (E)
G_07_185
G_07_214
G_07_218
G_07_306
G_07_308
5
6
7
2
2
2_181
2-M-26
2153
2146
03-S-90
2153+
2159+
2188+
540269,1
537706,8
537698,0
527545,3
526657,0
526619,3
526626,0
526639,9
5 37706
537702
537694
6675575,6
6673273,4
6673269,6
6667568,7
6667321,7
6667318,1
6667307,7
6667302,2
66 73 281
66 73 275
66 73 268;
60 12' 53.95"
60 11' 40.42"
60 11' 40.30"
60 08' 38.95"
60 08' 31.18"
60 08' 31.07"
60 08' 30.73"
60 08' 30.55"
6011.6778'
N;
6011.6744'
N;
6011.6778'
27 43' 36.07"
27 40' 48.09"
27 40' 47.51"
27 29' 45.61"
27 28' 47.91"
27 28' 45.47"
27 28' 45.90"
27 28' 46.80"
2740.8009' E
2740.7964' E
2740.8009' E

Page 249

No.
Block Code ROV Code SSS

2208+
8
12
Latitude (N)
Longitude (E)
535531
495992
66 72 031;
6665344
N;
6011.0160'
N;
60 07' 30.31"
2738.4345' E
26 55' 40.35"
G_07_e173
The geophysical surveys using underwater video (ROV) include some information about submerged
objects near Sommers island. Wrecks and their parts identified in this region are situated in depths about
50-60 m, so they are rather well preserved.
Object No.1. (ROV - G_07_185, SSS code 2_181). Ship general characteristic. Wooden hull, dimensions
about 17 x 6 x 1.2 m (here and later length x width x height over ground) is rather well preserved. The
double shell is carvel-built. The siding is not large, connected with frame with metal nails. In upper side
board the dale is seen, it was intended for water drain from the deck of the ship. The bulwark remains
here and there.
The deck of the ship is wooden and preserved partly. There is siding on its surface, probably, it is the
fallen bulwark. The deck is fallen in here and there, and in the hold the hull and rigging structures. The
stem or stern post (probably the stem post) is made of bent beam. In its central part the rope is hitched
through the hole. Its upper end is intended for connection to an absent piece, maybe for head figure
fixation.
In the nose upper pulpit siding is preserved, over which wooden studding of bulwark are risen (on about
0.5 m), and to them the siding is fixed.
The fallen mast lays on the shipboard and later on the ground outside it. Near the shipboard the sight rail
or cat davit - bar stuck out over the shipboard and intended for work with anchor is preserved. Near it
there are capstan studding and the (small) capstan, probably, also intended for work with anchor.
Under the forward end of the ship disintegration of wooden constructions is seen, amongst them there are
boards with oval holes and figured processed boards and also the rope, probably the anchor rope.
As judged by the design features of sunk vessel, it has small dimensions and was used for cargoes
transportation. The bricks fixed on the deck near the stem of the ship, they have clear rectangular
configuration indicative of perfect technology of their fabrication method. It enables to assess its date of
not earlier than the end of 19th century. In the design of the ship the brick can be used only in the stove of
the galley. It releases suggests that this vessel transported bricks, probably the fire-proof ones. The
traditional supplier of fire-proof bricks in St.Petersburg in the end if 19th and beginning of 20th century
was Finland. However, in Vyborg Bay the sunk vessel with cargo of fire-proof bricks from Denmark is
known..
Object No.2. (ROV - G_07_214, G_07_218). In this region considerable amount of wooden part is seen,
they probably are the wreck. The ship design is not traced by available material. The place has total
length about 12 m, width 2.5-4 m, height over ground 1-1.5 m. Judging by recorded on video steel barrel
(big can) within the object, it may be dated to 20th century. To adjust the conclusion by the object the
additional information is required.

Page 250

Object No.3. (ROV - G_07_306) The iron admiralty anchor with ear, eye, wooden stock, fixed by two
pairs of iron lugs. Judging by its shape and design features, it is probably of Russian origin. Estimated
date - middle of 18th - middle of 19th century.
Object No.4. (ROV - G_07_308) - Dimensions: 25 m 6-7 m, height over ground about 4-6 m. The hull
remained on the full height. The depth from the ground to the bulwark varies from 63.6 to 59.3 m. The
underbody is sheeted by nonferrous metal. In the central part of the side the rubbing pieces are seen, in its
upper part, - the pulpit siding and bulwark. In upper end of the side the dale holes are seen. In the
photographed part the portholes absent, that releases suggests that was a cargo ship. However this part is
photographed by narrow strip, so the military purpose of the ship cannot be excluded.
On the ground around the ship at the distance up to 30 m there are parts of rigging: masts up to 10 m long,
yards, ropes. On the hulls there are fragments of fishing nets - traces of catches. By the design features
the ship may be preliminarily dated to 19th century.
Object No..5. (SSS No. 2153+) Length: 15.0 m, Width: 4.5 m
Object No.6.(SSS No. 2159+) Length: 15.0 m, Width: 4.5 m, Height 1.5 m
Object No.7. (SSS No. 2188+) Length: 14.4 m, Width: 3.7 m, Height: 1.5 m
Objects No.5-7 by its shape and dimensions look like torpedo boats. According to the archival
documents, in the years of the Great Patriotic war near Sommers island the considerable quantity of
Soviet vessels died. 20 September 1941 by the enemy aviation the torpedo boats No.21 and No.91 sank,
and 28 September 1941 - small submarine chaser MO 305 (Central State Archive of Navy, dossier 109,
p.207). On 8-10 July 1942 during landing and food delivery operation to Sommers island at the warfare
with enemy gunboat several Soviet torpedo boats died: Nos. 31, 121, 71, 113, 22, 83, 123, and also Maly
Okhotnik (small submarine chaser) MO 306 (Central State Archive of Navy, dossier 5340).
Small submarine chasers MO-4 belonged to project 174. They had Gross Register Tonnage 56 tonnes,
length 26.9 m. width 4.02 m, draught 1.48 m, 3 engines GAM-34-BS with total power 2025 h.p.,
Maximum speed 22-24 knots. The crew consisted of 22 people. Armament: 2-45-mm 21 K, 2-12.7 mm
DSK, depth charges B-1 - 8 pcs, M-1 - 20 pcs, Could take on the deck up to 4 mines. (Shirokorad 2002:
152).
The torpedo boats TKA Nos. 21, 71, 91, 113, 121 are of G5 type. They were built in 1930s and had Gross
Register Tonnage 14.9-17.8 tonnes, length 19.1 m, width 3.4 m, draught 1.24 m, two engines with power
1,700-2,000 h.p., speed up to 50 knots. The boars crew consisted of 8 people. Armament: two torpedo
tubes by 2 torpedoes in each, two DSK machine guns, armed additionally with mines and depth charges.
(Shirokorad 2002: 113-114).

Page 251

The torpedo boat TKA No.83 was of Sh-4 type. This type of boats had Gross Register Tonnage 10
tonnes, length 18.07 m, width 3.33 m, draught 1.0 m, two engines with power 1050 h.p., speed up to 44
knots. The crew consisted of 6 people. Armament: two torpedo tubes by 2 torpedoes in each, 1 DSK
machine gun, armed additionally with mines and depth charges. (Shirokorad 2002: 113-114).
Object No.8.(SSS No. 2159+) Length: 15.0 m, Width: 4.5 m, Height 0.36 m. By its dimensions and
shape it resembles small wooden vessel, extant, probably not at full length.
Object No.9. (ROV G_07_500) (coordinates are unknown). Two iron wheels fixed on the stand supposedly steering gear of the vessel - tiller with rope or chain drive, end of 19th or 20th century.
Object No.10. (ROV G_07_201) - accumulation of cobble-stones up to 2 m high was interpreted by
operators as "wreck". However, any parts of vessel design are not traced on the submitted materials.
Various dimensions of cobble-stones and boulders shown on the video prevent from their association
with ship ballast.
Object No.11. (ROV G_07_153) - log about 7 m long, diameter about 25 cm with regular grooves on the
ends and in the central part. It surely is a part of the hull.
Separate processed wooden parts, and especially their accumulations recorded on video materials many
times may be evidence of wrecks found nearby.
Object No.12. (ROV G_07_e173). Wooden ship with approximate dimensions 25 x 6 x 4 m. Mast,
wooden rudder, iron anchor are traced. It is probably a commercial (cargo) vessel loaded with wheels of
carriages. The stern is fully destroyed. By the design features the ship may be preliminarily dated to 18th
- 19th century.
Object No.13. (ROV G_07_402op2) (coordinates are unknown) - Hall's anchor variation with tiltable
flukes. Date - middle of 19th - 20th century.
Object No.14. (ROV G_07_424) (coordinates are unknown). The iron admiralty anchor with ear, eye,
wooden stock with two pairs of iron lugs. The approximate dimensions of flukes 50x40 cm, of stock 2.5
m x 30 cm. Near the anchor the iron chain and other metal parts are traced. Estimated date - 19th century.
Object No.15. (ROV G_07_400 (coordinates are unknown). Heavy iron anchor chain with separating
link bars. The chains of such design appear about 1840.
The identified objects layout relative to the pipeline trace is shown on figure 3.8-3.

Page 252


Page 253

Figure 3.8-2.
Sites of cultural heritage objects (, , detailed segments of identified objects layout relative to the pipeline route). The identified objects are
market by dots with indices, the circles designate 100-m neighbourhood of the objects.

Page 254


Page 255

3.8.6.3. Expert assessment on historical and cultural value of identified submerged objects
along Nord Stream pipeline route within the Russian territorial Sea and exclusive
economic zone
During the prospecting work performed by OOO Petergaz in 2005-2007 along the Nord Stream pipeline
route within the Russian territorial Sea and exclusive economic zone several objects having the properties
of cultural heritage objects were found: wrecks and their parts. Objects No.1. (ROV - G_07_185), No.2
(ROV - G_07_214, G_07_218) No.4 (ROV -G_07_308),No.12 (ROV G_07_e173) are wrecks of wooden
vessels of 18th - beginning of 20th centuries. Objects 5-7 (SSS 2153+, 2159+, 2188+, 2208+) are
probably sank torpedo boats of the Great Patriotic War period. All of them are historical monuments of
shipbuilding and shipping of that time, and military ships are also monuments of military history.
During construction works it is necessary to provide retention of all the found vessels on the place of
finding. To provide their retention the planned route should be located not closer than 100 m from
identified objects. In conditions of unfavourable seabed relief near object No.12 (ROV G_07_e173) near
KP90 stake, the pipeline route may be planned at the distance not closer 50 m from the object at the strict
condition of the object retention.
In case of wreck removal their full conservation must be provided. Parts of wrecks (objects 3. 9-11. 1315) found out of objects complexes and found in pipeline laying area: anchors, seaborne machinery and
wooden constructions may be surfaced under supervision of archaeologists upon the condition of their
conservation and subsequent submission to the state museum keeping.
Cultural heritage objects absent on coastline section of the pipeline (from the coastline up to the ground
line valve station place).
Based on the Expert assessment of Institute of Material Culture History of the Russian Academy of
Sciences the approval of gas pipeline route from the Leningrad Region Culture Committee (Department
of State Control of cultural heritage preservation and use), presented in volume 14 "Approvals" was
received (see Appendix 3.8-2).

Page 255

4.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

4.1. Impact on the geologic environment
4.1.1.
Construction period

On the construction stage of offshore section of Russian sector of Nord Stream pipeline impacts on the
geological environment, relief of seabed of the Gulf of Finland and landfall in Portovaya Bay will be
defined by:
dredging works at pre-trenching for 2 sea pipeline strings in near-coast area;
construction of embankments in near-coast and coastal area of Portovaya Bay:
pre-trenching and subsequent reassembly in the laying trench for 1st and 2nd pipeline
strings at the site of coastline transition;
arrangement of winch sites for 1st and 2nd pipeline strings pulling;
works on crossing of active communications (cables) along the pipeline route;
route seabottom levelling at the process of unacceptable free spans correction in deepwater route section.
At that the main source of anthropogenic impact on geological environment and relief conditions will be
work of onshore building equipment and mechanisms in near-coast zone and operation of vessels of
transport, technical and special fleet in the area of Gulf of Finland.
The main types of impact on geological environment and relief conditions during the construction phase
are:
mechanical impact:
during dredging (underwater pre-trenching) in the pipeline route section from coastline of
Portovaya Bay to 14m depth (lengths of the trenches is 1,828m, including 1,470m in the
sea, 358m on the land);
during ground embankments constructed from height mark +0.5mBS to 2.0m depth
during the works of sea-land border transition of pipeline development (two fill
embankments stretching by 500 m long including about 380m offshore, 120m onshore);
during arrangement of bases-foundations for winches for 1st and 2nd pipelines pulling
(two sites at 450 m2);

Page 256

during underwater works on the route bottom levelling at the sections of very billowy
relief at the process of unacceptable free spans correction (totally 328 stone and gravel
bases of different design with total volume 1,391,769 m3on both pipelines);
during the works of cables embedment places of crossing the pipeline with a water jetting
equipment or gravel supports arrangement;
during changes of parameters of sediments flow along the coastline on the section of
underwater pre-trenching in the near-coast area and during construction of embankments;
che mical impact:
occasional and unintentional leakages of technical, cleaning and waste water from vessel
and technical means used in construction in the Gulf of Finland area;
unorganized storm discharges from the region of construction works on the shore of
Portovaya Bay during sea-land border transition of pipeline development.
4.1.1.2. Impact on bottom sediments

The construction works impact on bottom sediments will be stated as changes in local grading and
possible contamination of sediment surface layer.
Changes in local grading of bottom sedime nts. Local derangements in local grading of bottom
sediments surface layer will take place during pre-trenching and backfilling in the pipeline route section
from coastline of Portovaya Bay to 14m depth. Moreover, before the start of the pipelines construction 2
embankments (one embankment along the outer side of each pipeline) are planned to be built in shallow
areas (from coastline to the depth of 2 m) to protect the near-coast section of the prepared trench from the
washing out due to wave impact. These installations will be also used to develop the trench in the
coastline intersection point by means of land based equipment (dredgers) that will allow to significantly
speed up the trench development in the near-coast section (fig. 4.1-1).
Dredger boom outreach from the embankment makes it impossible to develop the whole width of the
trench. So the central part of the trench will be worked further by dredgers from the water craft. So, the
levees arrangement will also lead to changes in local grading of bottom sediments in the near-coast area
of the construction site.

Page 257

Figure 4.1-1.
Protecting embankment in the onshore area of marine transition: a) during the
trenching works b) before dragging of the pipeline in the pre-constructed trench with the help of
winches.
At the depths between 2 and 5 m the trench will be dug with help of dredgers, installed on the pontoon.
Dredged soil will be disposed in the underwater dump site along the trench. On the route section at depth
from 5 to 14 m dredging will be performed with help of scoop dredge. Dredged soil will be also deposit in
the dump site along the trench at the distance of 15 m, and then it will be used for burying the pipeline
after it is laid.
On the coastal section (except of stone riprap in the onshore section with a maximum length of 250 m)
and with a maximum depth 14 incl. bottom sediments from the surface are mostly the sandy fractions
(gross granulated sands with inclusions of gravel up to 15%). Maximum thickness of sand sediments at
the sea depth up to 2.0 - 2.5 m is 5-7 m, decreasing along the route of trench to 1.5 - 2.0 m at the depth of
14 m, where the trench stops. The sands underlie clayed silts, loamy silts and marginally rubbly-pebbly
soils with sabulous filling. In specific sections (in the central and seawards remote parts of the trench) by
the intervention works stirring-up of the clayed soil will take place. But its share in the total volume of the
retrieved soil will be under 10-20%. That will lead to the turbidity plums consisting of the particles of
aleuritic and pelitic size that after being transferred by the currents will be sedimented, forming a layer of
the fine dispersion fresh sediments. The assessment of the sediments for the whole period of dredging
activities have been carried out by the Computational centre of the Russian Academy of Sciences named
after .. Dorodnitsin (foreman B.V.Arkhipov, the calculations have been conducted according to the
certified mathematical model "AKS-EKO Shelf", developed by CC RAS named after .. Dorodnitsin
and Ecological centre of MTEA. Certificate of compliancy issued by State Standardisation authority of
Russia: - RU.05.00055; Ecological certificate of compliance MNR RF: - (351)--11/20.) 2008 They showed that the maximal distance from the trench border to the border of the zone with
the fresh sediments layer thickness 100 mm and more will not exceed 18 m, with 60 m for the layer
thickness over 10 mm, and with 800 m for layer thickness over 1 mm. The bottom areas covered with the
sediment layers with varying thickness, where after construction the alteration of the grain size
distribution will take place are shown in the table 4.1-1 and in the figure 4.1-2.

Page 254

Table 4.1-1
Sea bottom areas, covered with the sedime nt layers of varying thickness resulting from suspension
sedimentation after dredging works for the trench excavation at the depth 0-14 m.
Depth
Sediment layer thickness, mm
sea 0-14 m
Area
Figure 4.1-2.
>100
>50
2
39,841 m
>20
2
50,970 m
>10
2
83,258 m
>5
2
121,474 m
>1
2
172444 m
377,776 m2
Field of the sedime nt layer thickness (mm) resulting from dredging works in the
section of crossing the shore line upon completion of all the works
Such changing of the grain size distribution at the depth up to 14 m in the trench and protective
embankment area will be temporary, since after the first storms resuspension of the fresh fine dispersion
sediments will take place and they will be distributed across the big aquatic area by the storm currents.
Generally impact upon the grain size distribution of the surface sediments during trenching for the pipelaying will be localised in space and will be also a short term one, it will be recorded only during the
construction works and not long after them.
After two pipelines are laid, the trench will be backfilled.
For the backfilling the soil will be used that was extracted by the trenching works and disposed in the
dumping area along the trench on the onshore and offshore sections and on the site of soil deposition, and
also the imported stone and gravel mix and embankments material left after they are liquidated.
From the embankment area on (at level +0.5 m BS) seawards backfilling will be conducted as follows:
Around the laid pipeline the soil from the dumping site will be strewed at the distance of 30 cm from the
pipeline walls. Then the trench will be buried under the remaining soil from the dumping site. Then the
trench will be filled up to the top with a layer of the stone gravel mix roughly 35 cm thick. On the very
top a protective layer 50 cm thick will be put. On this section of the route, which covers approximately
80,000 m2, upon a completion of trench burying, surface of the bottom will be much more coarse-grained
in comparison with background bottom surface material.

Page 255

The local alterations of the grain size distribution of the sediments during construction works will also
occur on the deep water sections of the route with varied relief, where corrections of the non-allowable
free spans will be fulfilled. According to the technical solutions such corrections will be carried out with
the help of stone gravel material in the places where the pipelines may sag or be instable.
Gravel-stone materials will be delivered from the Erkila quarry by Vyborg (Appendix 4.3).
Post-lay trenching will be executed in stages. During the first stage, designated with Number 1, gravel
supports will be constructed to provide static stabilization before the laying of eastern and western
pipelines. During the second stage, designated with Number 2, gravel will be placed to provide static
stabilization after the laying of both pipelines. During the third stage, designated with Number 3, gravel
will be placed to provide dynamic stabilization after the pipelines laying. During the fourth stage,
designated with Number 4, gravel will be placed to reduce the longitudinal bend after the pipelines
laying. In terms of process technology all kinds of post trenching differ only by the volume of the filled
material and by the disposition of the post trenching locations. Figure 4.1-3 post trenching locations are
marked with different colours and designated pursuant the listed numbers 1 - 4.
Figure 4.1-3.
Post-trenching locations on different work stages

Page 256

The first three stages of construction works are characterized by relatively low (about 10,5%) volumes of
the filling material. On the last (fourth) stage the volumes increase significantly (89,5%), and the post
trenching will be located actually along the whole route from - 2+003 to - 119+523.
In general during all construction stages 328 fillings with the total volume 1,391,769 m3 will be carried
out (2,129,407 tonnes of stone and gravel material). Total area of the working surfaces of the supports
(top part of bulk constructions, the immediate base of the pipes to be laid on) will be approximately
134,000 m2 (without areas/volumes necessary to bury the underwater cloughs). Furthermore the
resuspended and sedimented around the construction site soil will be accumulated on the sea bottom.
Altogether 42,588 tonnes of the soil will be suspended and cover 131,000 m2 after sedimentation (by
sedimentation thickness over 1 mm). Upon that prior to pipelines laying about 4,5% from the whole
volume of construction material only will be used up for the so-called "pre-trenching". The main part of
the trenching (post-trenching) will take place already after the pipelines are laid (95.5%).
Summarized data on the volumes of fill-ins during different stages of the work for the east and west
pipelines are presented in the table 4.1-2.
Table 4.1-2
Volumes of fill-ins on different stages of construction works for the east and west Nord Stream
pipelines
From KP
to KP
Number of fill-ins Average volume (m3) Variant number
1 stage - construction of gravel supports for static stabilization before the laying of pipelines
(eastern and western)
15066
39347
8
667,6
1
62632
93972
22
1352,2
2
110088
120327
16
1603,0
3
2 stage - construction of gravel supports for static stabilization after the laying of pipelines (eastern
and western)
9124,5
21466.24
33
439,1
4
31547
43374.41
36
360,7
5
62364
120228.3
61
741,5
6
3 stage - construction of gravel supports for dynamic stabilization after the laying of pipelines
(eastern and western)
4760
9658
4
110,0
7
15443
33968
15
69,7
8
60827
119426
27
392,1
9
4 stage - construction of gravel supports for minimizing of lateral and vertical bend after the laying
of pipelines (eastern and western)
2003
29023
47
15651,0
10
30461
59186
45
9494,3
11
60377
119194
14
12666,1
12

Page 257

Alteration of the grain size distribution by the correction of the free spans is expected actually along the
whole Russian sector of the offshore pipeline. Mathematical modelling of sediment spreading is fulfilled
by RAS Computational Centre named after A.A.Dorodnitsin (foreman B.V.Arkhipov) in 2008. Taking
into account the inequivalence of the fill-in volumes for the work stages 1-3 and stage 4 (proportion is
roughly 1:9) all calculations were divided into 2 groups - for work stages 1, 2 and 3 (computation variants
1-9) and for work stage 4 (variants 10-12). Within the group following has been considered:
functionality of fill-ins (1-6 - for static stabilization of the pipeline, 7-9 - for dynamic
stabilization of the pipeline and 10-12 for the bend risk reducing);
moment of trenching with regard to already laid pipeline (1-3 and 7-9 take place before
laying of pipelines, 4-6 and 10-12 - after laying of the pipelines).
Thus, mathematical models were developed for 12 variants impacts of trenching activities upon the
benthic layers environment of Gulf of Finland, including:
(variants 1-3) - relatively small trenching carried out prior to pipelines laying and
foreseen for improving of its statical stability;
(variants 4-6) - relatively small trenching carried out after pipelines laying and foreseen
for improving of its statical stability;
(variants 7-9) - relatively small trenching carried out after pipelines laying and foreseen
for improving of its dynamical stability;
(variants 1012) - big trenching carried out after pipelines laying and foreseen for reducing
of the pipe bend risk;
The results of calculations for the variants 1-6 are shown in the tables 4.1-3 and 4.1-4.
Since the soil volume used for the first three stages is low, they are characterized by minor size sea
bottom areas, covered with the sediment layers of varying thickness. The layer thickness rarely exceeds
50 mm by that (table 4.1-3) .
Table 4.1-3
Sea bottom areas covered with a sedime nts layer of different thickness resulting from
sedimentation of suspension during the works for pipeline stabilisation
Calculation
variant
>1
>5
>10
>50
>100
>200
1
2,008 m2
2,939 m
759 m2
408 m2
2
1,224 m
765 m
0
2
19 m

Page 258

Calculation
variant
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
>1
3,258 m2
1,631 m2
1,473 m2
2,136 m2
631 m2
389 m2
1,517 m2
>5
1,352 m2
536 m2
440 m2
829 m2
0
0
485 m2

>10
>50
2
861 m
89 m2
210 m2
0
2
128 m
0
2
453 m
0
0
0
0
0
2
166 m
0
>100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
>200
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Distance of suspension distribution is also rather short, its average values don't exceed 95 m from the
turbidity source for the sediment thickness below 1 mm, 55 m for the thickness of benthic sediments
between 1 and 5 mm and 45 m for the thickness between 5 and 10 mm (table 4.1-4).
Table 4.1-4
Characteristic distances (m) of technological sedime ntation around the gravel support
Calculation
variant
>1
>5
>10
>50
1
72,2
42,9
31,6
0
2
89,1
54,1
42,9
14,7
3
95,3
56,4
45,4
15,8
4
63,2
34,7
24,0
0
5
59,6
32,8
20,5
0
6
74,4
43,9
33,9
0
7
38,2
0
0
0
8
31,1
0
0
0
9
60,9
34,9
23,6
0
Halos of suspended particles sedimented on the bottom for different calculations variants are shown on
the figures 4.1-4 4.1-12.

Page 259

Figure 4.1-4.
Sediment layer thickness (mm) (calculation variant No.1)
Figure 4.1-5.

Page 260

Figure 4.1-6.
Figure 4.1-7.

Page 261

Figure 4.1-8.
Figure 4.1-9.

Page 262

Figure 4.1-10.
Sediment layer thickness (mm) (calculation variant No,7)
Figure 4.1-11.

Page 263

Figure 4.1-12.
Gravel trenching for reducing of lateral and vertical bend of the pipeline (calculation variants 10-12)
presupposes usage of essentially higher volumes of construction materials (above 1,2 million m3), the
works will be conducted on the wide areas of sea bottom during rather long time (up to to 8 days per each
support against 0.5 days on the previous stages).
The cloud, generated during the works and contaminated with suspended matter drifts according to
directions and and velocity of the currents. The major results of modelling for the computational variants
10-12 are shown in the tables 4.1-5, 4.1-6 and in the figure 4.1-13.
Table 4.1-5
Sea bottom areas covered with a sedime nts layer of different thickness resulting from
sedimentation of suspension during the works for pipeline stabilisation
Calculation variant
1
5
10
20
50
100
10
42 390
21 721
14 131
6 828
4 661
4 026
11
30 082
14 179
8 522
3 520
2 870
2 483
12
42 552
18 999
11 840
5 090
4 215
3 608

Page 264

Table 4.1-6
Characteristic distances (m) of technological sedime ntation around the gravel support
Calculation variant
1
5
10
20
50
100
10
11
12
Figure 4.1-13.
93
85
117
47
36
35
35
25
27
27
13
15
5,1
4,9
4,5
4,8
4,2
3,8
Field of the sedime nt layer thickness (mm) resulting from dredging works for
reducing lateral and vertical bend of the pipeline
Generally on the stage of the pipeline construction the grain size distribution of the surface sediments on
some sections will be localized in space and short-term (on the section of the route at depth 0-14 m in the
area of Portovaya Bay), or they will last over rather long time (on the rest of the route within the sections
of free span correction) and will not exercise any significant influence upon the geological environment
of the Gulf of Finland.

Page 265

Pollution of seabed sediments. When carrying out pipeline construction works pollution of benthic
sediments is possible because of re-deposition of the contaminated sediments on certain route sections
and because of possible spillage of oil products from the technical means involved in the construction
works in the marine area (pipe-laying vessels, tugs, vessels for dredging works and gravel rock dumping,
supply ships for delivery of pipes).
As it was evident from the chemical contamination assessment of the benthic sediments of the Russian
section of the Nord Stream pipelines, fulfilled in 2005-2006, pursuant the Regional Regulation
"Provisions and criteria for the evaluation of sediment contamination in Saint-Petersburg water bodies"
sandy sediments of Portovaya Bay and Gogland island district can be attributed as clean, and muddy
sediments of the pipeline route between these two points can be attributed as moderately contaminated.
While carrying out the works on correction of intolerable spans in the route section with muddy
sediments stirring-up of benthic sediments is possible, exposing of the pollutants residing in the mass of
benthic sediments, their distribution by the currents, sedimentation and secondary pollution of the surface
layer of sediments on the surrounding seabed. With respect to the scale of existing pollution of benthic
sediments (see section 3.1.5) secondary pollution, associated with the technological distribution of the
benthic sediments will be insignificant.
On the route sections in the Portovaya Bay and Gogland island regions no secondary pollution of the
surface sediments layer is expected.
Generally, probable secondary pollution of the surface sediment layer resulting from re-deposition of
contaminated sediments, residing in the mass of benthic sediments will be a localised one (mostly on the
deep waters in the central part of Russian section of Nord Stream off-shore pipeline), and will not
exercise any significant influence on the environment of the geology conditions of Baltic sea.
During pipelines construction works marine environment pollution by heavy fuel oil, diesel, lubricant oils
and other oil products (FL) is possible by their spillage from the technical equipment used for
construction works on the marine area (pipe-laying vessels, tugs, vessels for dredging works and gravel
rock dumping, supply ships for delivery of pipes, etc.). Besides that, inputs of pollutants into the sea are
possible by the non-organised run-offs from the shore in the areas where the pipeline crossing of the
offshore-onshore border is being prepared.
Emulgated oil contaminations that are highly sticky and adsorptive will be sedimented on the suspended
particles. Sedimentation of the suspended matters on the sea bottom will partly further purification of the
sea water from oil and at the same time - contamination of the benthic sediments with oil.

Page 266

By the rigorous compliance with the existing Russian and international regulations on waste collection
and utilisation on the vessels no contamination of the benthic sediments from that source during pipeline
construction works will take place.
4.1.1.3. Impact on the relief of the seabed

Local relief alterations of the seabed will take place by trenching works for laying of two pipelines on the
route section from coastline in the Portovaya Bay to the areas at the depths of 14 meters and by the
erection of 2 embankments 500 m long each (from the level +0.5 m to the depth 2 m) by preparing of
pipelines crossing the onshore-offshore border. Such alterations of relief will take place on the area of
80,000 2 by trenching works and about 3,500 2 by embankment construction. These alteration will be
short-term, since the bottom relief after pipelines laying and post-trenching and liquidation of bulk
embankments will be similar to the back-ground one (fig. 4.1-14).
Figure 4.1-14.
longitudinal trench profile in the coastal area of Portovaya Bay (a) and the posttrench sche me after completion of construction works (b)
The local alterations of the bottom relief during construction works will also occur on the deep water
sections of the route with varied relief, where corrections of the non-allowable free spans will be fulfilled.
According to the technical solutions such corrections will be carried out with the help of stone gravel
material in the foreseen places where the pipelines may sag or be instable (fig. 4.1- 15).

Page 267

Figure 4.1-15.
Installation of the gravel-stone support using post-trenching
The total bottom area of the Gulf of Finland, which relief will be modified during stone-gravel support
installation comprises about 134,000 2 (based on the report Data Sheet - Gravel Works and Mattresses
(Russia) G EN PIE DAS 102 00070020 B - only working surface (top part) of the support, without area
of the post-trenched underwater cloughs). Average height (depth) of the intolerable spans, that will be
trenched, makes 2.0-2.2 metres (extreme values from 0.3 m to 8.7 m, heights from 0.5 m to 2.5 m
dominate absolutely). Moreover the relief alteration will be associated with the accumulation of the
suspended soil, that was sedimented on the bottom around the working site - totally about 131 thousand
m2 (based on mathematical modelling of sediment spreading fulfilled by RAS Computational Centre
named after .. Dorodnitsin).
Local alterations of the bottom relief along the full length of the pipelines will be marked in case of PLB
use with the anchor positioning system. In that case by the positioning bottom ploughing by the anchors
will take place. Length and depth of the furrows will depend on the soil characteristics and positioning
time in every point.
In whole bottom relief alterations along its route during construction works will be localised in space and
have a short-term character (on the bottom area with the depths of 0 - 14 m by Portovaya Bay), having a
long term character on the rest of the route, where the works on the free span correction will take place).
On the route sections where the works on gravel support installation will be conducted the marks of
bottom height will be higher in comparison with background conditions. Such local and long-term
alterations of the bottom relief will generally have no significant impact on the geological conditions of
Baltic Sea.
4.1.1.4. Impact on lithodynamic processes

On the stage of pipelines construction the impact on the lithodynamic processes during the storms will be
conditioned by the presence of the trench in the bottom for pipelines laying. Part of the flow of sediments
will be intercepted by the trench and accumulated in it.
Calculated values of the trench burial and thickness of the layer of the accumulated sediments along the
trench are shown on the fig. 4.1 - 16, and their integral characteristics are shown in the table 4.1-7.

Page 268

In the upper part of the fig. 4.1-16 volumes of spread sediments are shown, that are accumulated in the
trench within the year period (iceless period). Contributions of the particular wave disturbance points are
shown, as well as the summarized result.
In the middle part of the figure distribution of the local thickness of the sediment layer in the trench is
presented, also bottom profiles in the natural condition and by the presence of the trench are given. Depth
of the latter in regard of bottom level is 3.2 m.
Figure 4.1-16.
Distribution of the trench burial velocities and thickness of the sediment layer
along the bottom profile of the trench
Table 4.1-7
Integral values of the material accumulation in the trench for the most wavy directions
Point of wave disturbance Spread sedime ntation, 103 Average thickness of the sediment layer,
m
m3year-1
E
4,2
0,2
SE
6,1
0,3
S
11,0
0,6
Total
21,3
1,1
According to the calculations (see section 3.1., fig. 3.1-19 of this volume) spread sedimentation in the
trench is possible, mostly in the strip between coastline and 10 meter isobath. Trench takes up 75-80% of
the crossing spread sediments. The most contribution in the spread sedimentation is associated with the
south wave disturbance (11,000 m3year-1). Summarised accumulation in the trench is evaluated to be
21,300 m3year-1. Taken into consideration that the full trench volume up to 14 meter deep is
approximately 60,000-65,000 m3, the spread sedimentation for the iceless period may exceed 1/3 of the
trench volume. Thickness of the sedimented layer equalised to the trench length will be 1.1 m.

Page 269

It should be noted that sediment accumulation peak in the band of the most intense sediments flows (at
the depths of from 2 to 4 m). The thickness of the accumulation layer might exceed 2.5 m in this area of
continental slope.
Therefore, the redistributions of the sedimentation in the coastal area (at the depths of less than 10m) may
result in significant sediment accumulation in the trench and add pipeline installation complexity. It
should be noted that the placement's of the pipeline operation in the near-shore trench is shorter than the
iceless period, and the "open" status duration is counted a few days. As such, the impact can be
significantly lower than the design.
The trench may in principle accumulate sedimentation at the depths more than 10 m also due to currents
of non-wave nature (floating and surge currents etc.). However, material rearranging and accumulating
speeds are at least by an order of magnitude below the coastal area, and are of no risk for the trench.
The trench is expected to cause local disturbances of the wave field and storm currents, which are
expected, in return, to result in local bed movement at the downwind board of the trench. Width of the
movement area is expected to comply the flow renaturation area extend. Given the relatively small width
and depth of the trench, it is considered that, the disturbances will not spread beyond 100 to 200 m
stripes, located on either side of the trench. Board movement is not expected inside the section of the
trench, where protection embankments are designed (preventing such a movements is one of these
constructions' major tasks).
Possibly, presence of the trench on the seabed will make natural tendency of water outflow in sea along
the axis of the bay slightly increase. However, no significant trench impact on the coastal dynamic is
expected, a reasonable time is required for essential coast restructuring due to inertness of sediment
transport. This amount of time is unable due to the short lifetime of the trench.
Analogous conclusions may be drawn about effects of the protection embankments on lithodynamic
processes in Portovaya Bay. Construction and operation of the embankments as a technological facilities
are predicted during the period when no significant oscillatory motion is observed (from May to
September). According to the statistic perennial observing, average duration of weather windows with
wave heights less than 1.5 m supplied with 3% in the area is: 31 days in May, 30 days in June, 31 days in
July, 31 days in August, 25.6 days in September. Rare storms are possible able to cause certain changes
of the coastline in the intake area of the embankments and their partial scour. However, there is no reason
to expect significant trench and embankments impact during their relatively short lifetime on the
lithodynamic processes.

Page 270

4.1.2.
Operational phase

The main source of impacts caused by technology on the geologic environment in this phase is pipelines
installed on the bottom of the Gulf of Finland, and the stone and gravel supports, build for incorrect free
span liquidation.
The main sources of impacts on the geologic environment and relief conditions in operation phase are:
mechanical impact:
changing of the transport bottoms in the deep waters pipeline section;
local bed movement under pipeline;
local alteration of the seabed, possible with accidental pipeline failures;
che mical impacts:
secondary sediments pollution, possible with accidental pipeline failures at sections with
high content of contaminants.
4.1.2.2. Impact on transport bottoms in deep water section

During the pipeline operation, in the areas on the seabed around the stone-gravel support, impacts on
sediment transport's regime and morphodynamic alteration of the seabed will be observed.
The impact targets, which result morphodynamic seabed conditions' changing, are sand movement,
occurring due to waves and currents activity. The pipeline with the stone-gravel support is continuous
impenetrable obstruction for these movements. Sedimentation's consumption decreases during approach
to the windward side of the obstruction, conditions for the deposition of particles of solids occur, resulting
depth decreasing. In the rear of the obstruction, in contrast, area of scouring occurs, sedimentation's
consumption recovers from null to initial amount along the area (fig. 4.1-17).

Page 271

Figure 4.1-17.
Sche me of the pipeline's and the stone-gravel support's interaction with sand
movement, occurring due to waves and currents activity.
The sand movements therefore may occur at the depths of up to 30 m, but seabed deformations become
insignificant at the depth of 25 m.
The most significant deformations are resulted by storms with a return period of once per year, due to
their sufficient total duration. Width of the accumulation layer exceeds of 0.6 m, and scouring depth- of
0.4 m. The key contribution is situations with the presence of the current. The rarer storms' contributions
in various situations are approximately similar.
Table 4.1-8 shows maximal magnitudes of the deformations for for last 50 years at the various depths in
situation with no current (h0) and with current, with speed of 0.1 m s-1 (h0.1) and 0.2 m s-1 (h 0.2)
Accumulating rates are shown in the numerator, and scouring rates are shown in the denominator.
Table 4.1-8
The maximal seabed deformations for for last 50 years at the various depths in the various dynamic
situations
Storm
1/1 year
1/10 years
1/100 years
h=15 m
h0, m
0.41 -0.20
0.33 -0.11
h0.1, m
0.64 -0.42
0.37 -0.15
h 0.2, m
0.66 -0.45
0.38 -0.15
h0, m
h=20 m
0.11 -0.03
h0.1, m
0.21 -0.06
h 0.2, m
0.23 -0.07
0.18
-0.05
0.18
-0.05
0.17
-0.05
0.04
-0.02
0.06
0.02
0.06
-0.02
h=25 m
h0, m
0.01
-0.01

Page 272

Storm
h0.1, m
1/1 year
h0.2, m
1/10 years
1/100 years
0.03
-0.01
0.03
-0.01
Taking into account that pipeline is supposed to bring from the trench to the surface at the depth of 14 m
(at approximately 1.5 km from coastline in the Portovaya Bay), and 25-meter isobath is located at 5.7 km
from the coastline, pipeline stretch length, where sediment transport potentially may impact, is expected
to be 4.2 km. Grain size distribution of seabed sediments on this sector of pipeline route are mostly the
sandy fractions (during the modelling, medium granulated sand's parameters were estimated at: ds =0.5
mm, s = 2.65 103 kg m-3 and porosity =0.4).
The general direction of this sector of the pipeline route is from north southward (fig. 4.1- 18).
Figure 4.1-18.
The sector of the pipeline route, where seabed deformations associated with soil
support's installation are potentially possible
Essential feature of this area of the Baltic Sea should be therefore regarded, namely domination of the
western waves. This means that situations, when sediments move eastward, are the most frequent. Eastern
storms are just not strong enough to impact seabed of the deep water proper and cause any significant
movement in the opposite direction. The seabed deformations close to the pipelines route should be
therefore asymmetric. Accumulation will dominate from the west side of the obstruction, and scouring from the east side.
The most significant deformations are expected at the minimal depths (from -14 m). The waves' and
currents' impact on the seabed will decreases with depth.
The results of modelling are shown on fig. 4.1-19.

Page 273

Figure 4.1-19. The resulting seabed deformations at the various depths after 50 and 100 years
Maximal positive (h + ) and negative (h - ) seabed deformations' magnitudes are shown in table 4.1-9.
Table 4.1-9
Maximal magnitudes of accumulations and scouring after 50 and 100 years
Depths, m
50 years
100 years
+
+
h , m
h , m
h , m
h-, m
15
20
25
1,30
0,42
0,07
-0,99
-0,20
-0,02
1,88
0,58
0,13
-1,49
-0,35
-0,04

Page 274

The data is shown for illustration purposes on fig. 4.1-20, which characterises corridor of the possible
deformation's magnitudes with depth variation.
Figure 4.1-20.
The seabed deformations' limits in the vicinity of the pipelines depending on de pth
It follows from these result that the potential deformations should damp out rapidly in the depth, and
become insignificant when h > 25 m (0.1 m per 50 years). In contrast, closer to the coastlines, pipeline's
impact on the litho- and morphodynamics is rapidly increases. At the depths of 15 m at the windward side
of the construction, sediment layer of almost 1.5 metres width may be accumulated after 50 years of the
pipeline operation.
Certain risk for construction stability may be caused by scouring at its downwind side (up to 1 m per 50
years). The stone-gravel material of the support may gradually moves to the scouring valley, resulting a
sag of whole construction.
Disturbances of the relief locate in close vicinity to the construction, and will not not spread beyond
stripes of about 10 m. Due to the fact, that both pipelines are separated with a much larger distance, their
mutual impacts are negligible. The seabed deformations close to each of the pipelines should be therefore
approximately similar.
The results of the modelling allow drawing the following conclusions:
the stone-gravel support of subsea pipeline at the depths of from 15 to 25 m is an

obstruction that will cause sands accumulations to the west from construction and
scouring to the east from it due to the features of the dynamics in the area.
changes to the seabed, caused by the construction, locate in the intake area of its borders
(width of less than 10 m). The deformations damp out rapidly in the depth, and practically
are not observed deeper than 25 m.

Page 275

maximal deformation's magnitude is expected in the area of pipelines bringing to the

surface of the seabed (at the depth of 15 m). The thickness of the accumulation layer may
reach up to 1.3 m per 50 years. The depth of the eastern scouring may reach up to 1 m per
50 years.
The impact will have a long-term character, but its magnitude will be minimal. According to the accepted
technical solutions, on the route section from 14-metres isobath to 25-metres isobath 10 discrete soil
supports 5m x 3m size are planned on the western pipeline and 4 similar - on the eastern one.
4.1.2.3. Impact on bottom sediments during incidental situations

During the normal (accident-free) operation of the pipeline, there are no impacts on the seabed
sedimentation, due to the absence of any impact sources.
In case of accidental pipeline defect on the route section, where seabed sedimentations are characterised
as polluted, secondary pollution of the surface sediments layer is enable in the area of the accident. Such a
pollution of the surface sediments layer will be localised and have no significant impact on the geological
environment of Baltic Sea.
4.1.2.4. Bed movement under pipeline
During the normal (accident-free) operation of the pipeline, local bed movements under the pipeline on
the route section, where seabed sedimentation deposits are mainly sands. Strong near-bottom currents are
usually situated at these areas. At water flow around the pipeline laying on the seabed the pressure fall
between the windward and the leeward part of the pipe is formed. At strong near-bottom currents due to
these pressure falls the seepage in the sediments under the pipe arises and critical conditions are
encountered they begin to flow leading to local washouts under the pipe.
These washouts are three-dimensional as it is outlined in fig. 4.1-21. The local washout pits expand along
the pipe leading to increase of washout area along it and shortening of parts (balks), where pipe lays on
the seabed. Maximal washout takes place under lower edge of the pipe and increases up to zero at the
distance about 3-5 pipe diameters in the direction across it.

Page 276

Figure 4.1-21. Sche me of local washout under the pipeline laying on the seabed. Section A-A through the washout zone; Section B-B through the balk between local washouts. The arrows show
the direction of washout propagation under the pipeline
At action of current to the pipeline when its speed is above critical value for start of seabed particles
movement maximal the washout depth under its lower edge will be 0.6 its diameters (Summer et al.,
1999; 2001).
Within Russian sector of Nord Stream offshore pipeline there is the only section with increased speed of
seabed currents and sandy composition of sediments situated near Gogland (on fig. 4.1-3 it is marked
with blue ring). At speed of seabed currents above 20-25 m/s exceeding the speeds necessary for start of
seabed particles movement the washouts forming under the pipeline is possible. According to the data of
the grounds characteristics and seabed currents presented in the results of engineering and engineering
and environmental investigations (Engineering and environmental investigations, Part 1, 1 stage, Book 5.
Section 1. Exclusive economical zone and territorial waters of Russia, OOO Petergaz. Document
No.6545-10-0-IEI-0501-1 and the report "Hydrodynamic and probabilistic modelling, formation of a
corpus of hydrometeorological calculation data along route of the North European gas pipeline (Baltic
Sea) and preparation of recommendations future hydrometeorological engineering research, 2005"
informs that only in three small sections of the area with increased speeds conditions for sediments
washout is possible (on sandy grounds once 100 years the speed of seabed currents may reach 29. 36 and
30 cm/s.). Under the stipulation that sandy sediment layer thickness on the seabed is rather big, maximal
dimension of seabed washout under the pipeline may reach up to 0.7 m.

Page 277

The washout zones length along the pipeline may depend on variation of seabed sediment physical and
mechanical properties on local washout area, the speed of the current and its direction relative to the pipe
axis, time of action of the current with the speed above critical value for start of seabed particles
movement etc. At some stage of design work execution the decision was taken about enlarged use of
stone-gravel supports along all the pipeline route. According to the report Data Sheet - Gravel Works
and Mattresses (Russia) G EN PIE DAS 102 00070020 B all of the pipeline sections most crucial in
respect to washout proved to be in the zone of installation of stone-gravel bedding course of all present
variations (fig. 4.1-3). At average dimension of gravel 20-40 mm there will be no washout of bedding at
these speeds.
Thus on the pipeline operation stage the possibility of seabed washout by the pipeline at implementation
of actual project decisions is practically unlikely.
4.1.2.5. Impact on lithodynamic processes of nearshore section
After construction has been completed and the relief will be restored in zone of the trench up to the
conditions close to baseline conditions of relief the the impact caused by technology on the lithodynamic
processes will not be seen.
As the trench will be backfilled with the rock-gravel mixture, no additional seabed deformation in its
limits at existing wave modes will be present.
Relief changes in the region of route sections nearshore area of Portovaya Bay are possible only due to
natural processes out of the trench area. The seabed deformation range will be nearly the same as before
the pipeline construction.
Ice gouge of the seabed and shores near the coastline crossing is dangerous during pipeline operation. The
glaciation in Portovaya Bay forms every year, irrespective of the harshness of the winter. Its width and
power reach the maximal value in February-April. Principally dangerous conditions for coastal area arise
in the beginning of the spring (April) when the glaciation which did not pass thawing stage brakes and
becomes the broken ice. This ice is virtually freshwater at maximal power and strength and able to form
erosion bars on the seabed on the areas of underwater bank vault covered with loose deposits (sands,
silts). In this situation, the ice foot frozen to the seabed plays the protective role: the beach destruction
does not take place as the ice foot "armours" the beach and bank slope from the action of ice. The most
intensive impacts may arise on edge of the shore ice where during long winter period in the result of
repeated compressing and hummocking the "ice dams" forms up to the bottom, at those considerable
seabed deformations are possible.
The area bathymetry analysis along the route allows to choose the areas in terms of the most dangerous
exaration. Figure 4.1-22 shows the fragment of Portovaya Bay bathimetric map with marked pipeline
route and profiles along which exaration calculation was performed.

Page 278

Exaration is possible only at depths less than 12 m, because there is no reasons to estimate ice formations
with greater immersion in this region. As evident from the figure, only in one place the pipeline route
crosses the dangerous sections in the region of the land fall (profiles 1A - 4A).
The calculations results show that maximal rated exaration depth may make 1.36 m (profile 1A) This
exaration corresponds to mass of ice formation 107 tons, wind speed 35 m/s and current speed 1.5 m/s.
These conditions are not possible more frequently than once every 1000 years. Exarations amounts for
conditions possible once a year, 10 and 100 years may be estimated as 0.12, 0.81 and 1.1 m accordingly.
Figure 4.1-22.
4.1.3.
The route section in Portovaya Bay and profiles for calculations for exaration
depth calculations.
Decommissioning phase
Impact on geological environment and relief condition at decommissioning phase (after 50 years of
operation) is similar to the impact at construction stage and will be examined in a separate project taking
into account the legislative requirements and technological abilities that will be available at the time of
starting decommissioning works.

Page 279

Taking into account possible impact of construction works and consequent pipeline operation on the
natural environment conditions the project provides the complex of measures to minimize the negative
impact on geological environment both during the construction works and in the period of the
construction operation. The protective measures are presented in Volume 8. Book 1. Offshore section.
Part 2. EP.

Page 280

4.2.
Impact on atmospheric air
4.2.1.
Construction period

Impact on atmospheric air will take place virtually at all the industrial processes performed during
construction of Russian sector (movement of ships and building machinery, welding works, free spans
addition of ground).
The Russian nearshore section belongs to the ice exaration area, so the pipeline will be laid in the trench
about 1.4 km long.
Time and duration of environmental impact during construction of the pipeline offshore section is defined
by the Construction time schedule (Volume 7 Book 1 Project for building organisation). It should be
noted that impact during construction will have local and short-term character.
The pipeline laying is performed by lay barge and support fleet. The main source of emissions to the
atmosphere during construction will be waterborne vehicles. The approximate list of waterborne vehicles
is presented in Volume 7 Book 1 Project for building organisation.
The calculation of pollutant emitted into the atmosphere amount is performed using:
"Methodological guide for calculation, rate setting and control of air emission into the
atmospheric air" developed by research institute of Atmosphere, St. Petersburg, 2005.
"Method of calculating of harmful emissions into the atmosphere of sea ports" RD

31.06.06 - 86. L., 1986.
"Method of inventory performing of pollutants emissions into the atmosphere for roadbuilding machinery bases (by computational method)" (Moscow, 1988);
Amendments and supplements to the "Method of inventory performing of pollutants

emissions into the atmosphere for road-building machinery bases (by computational
method)" (Moscow, 2001);
Amendments and supplements to the "Method of inventory performing of pollutants

emissions into the atmosphere for motor-car repair enterprises (by computational
method)" (Moscow, 1998);
Amendments to the "Method of inventory performing of pollutants emissions into the

atmosphere for motor-car repair enterprises (by computational method)" (Moscow, 1999);
Methodical directions for determination of emission of contaminants into the atmosphere

from reservoirs, 1997;
Amendments to the "Methodical directions for determination of emission of contaminants

into the atmosphere from reservoirs". St. Petersburg, 1999.

Page 281

Method of calculation of release (emission) of contaminants into the atmosphere at

welding works (by values of specific release)" St. Petersburg, 2000);
as well as taking into account job practices, technical specifications of applying machinery.
The sources of contaminants emission into the ambient air during construction of considered area is
examined in EP Volume.
The main pollutants emitted by the combustion of fuel are: nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide, carbon
monoxide, hydrocarbons, etc.
Welding works produce iron oxides, manganese oxides, dust, and hydrocarbons.
List and characteristics of main contaminants generated during construction of offshore section in Russian
EEZ are presented in Table 4.3-1.
Table 4.3-1
The list of main contaminants
The name of a
The used criteria
Criterion
Class of
substance
value, mg/m3
hazard
Vanadium
PDK, a.d.
0,002
1
Iron oxide
PDK, a.d.
0,04
3
Cadmium
PDK, a.d.
0,0003
1
Manganese compounds PDK max. one-off
0,01
2
Copper
PDK, a.d.
0,002
2
Nickel
PDK, a.d.
0,001
2
Tin
PDK, a.d.
0,02
3
Lead
PDK max. one-off
0,001
1
Chromium
OBUV
0,01
1
Nitrogen dioxide
PDK max. one-off
0,2
2
Nitrogen oxide
PDK max. one-off
0,4
3
Hydrogen chloride
PDK max. one-off
0,2
2
Soot
PDK max. one-off
0,15
3
Sulphur dioxide
PDK max. one-off
0,5
3
Hydrogen sulphide
PDK max. one-off
0,008
2
Carbon monoxide
PDK max. one-off
5
4
Anhydrous hydrogen
PDK max. one-off
0,02
2
fluoride
Petrol
PDK max. one-off
5
4
Kerosene
OBUV
1,2
Hydrocarbons
PDK max. one-off
1
4
Suspended matter
PDK max. one-off
0,5
3
Non-organic dust (70- PDK max. one-off
0,3
3
20%)
Total Substances:
22
Emission of pollutant,
warm period
0,000041
1,4599
0,0000009
0,3616
0,0000023
0,0000009
0,000023
0,000039
0,000031
2212,017
359,446
0,022179
146,612
93,65659
0,0001245
614,7729
0,001413
0,0053
432,85249
0,04433
0,002729
0,08184
3861,337

Page 282

Total emissions from vessels used in the construction of the pipeline are calculated at heaviest operating
conditions. The calculation takes into account the simultaneous operation of all of the equipment
according to the schedule of work presented in Volume 7. Book.1. Construction organisation plan
Calculations of the dispersal of contaminants into the atmosphere are made using PRISMA software
system (version 4.30 edition 02) for the warm period of the year according to the construction schedule.
Calculation of the dispersal were conducted for the following contaminants: vanadium pentoxide (reg.
0110), iron oxide (reg. 0123), cadmium oxide (reg. 0133), manganese compounds (reg. 0143), copper
oxide (reg. 0146), nickel oxide (reg. 0164), tin oxide (reg. 0168), lead compounds (reg. 0184), chromium
trivalent (reg. 0228), nitrogen dioxide (reg. 0301), nitrogen oxide (reg. 0304), hydrogen chloride (reg.
0316), carbon black (reg. 0328), sulphur dioxide (reg. 0330), carbon monoxide (reg. 0337), fluorides (reg.
344), petrol (reg. 2704), kerosene (reg. 2732),
saturated hydrocarbons (reg. 2754), suspended
matter (reg. 2902), non-organic dust (reg. 2908).
Part of emitted into the atmosphere pollutants causes a cumulative impact to atmospheric air (nitrogen
dioxide and sulphur dioxide; vanadium pentoxide and manganese; sulphur dioxide and vanadium
pentoxide; sulphur dioxide and lead; carbon monoxide and non-organic dust).
According to the Hygienic Norms 2.1.6.1124-02 "Maximum Allowed Concentrations (PDKs) of polluting
substances in the ambient air of residential areas" (Supplement number 5 to the HG 2.1.6.695-98) 3 and
4-component mixtures including nitrogen dioxide and/or hydrogen sulfide, and members of the
multicomponent air pollution do not cause the summation effect if the relative weight of concentration of
one of them, expressed in shares of the maximum one-off PDK is:
in 2--component mixture more than 80 %,
in 3-component mixture more than 70 %,
in 4-component mixture more than 60 %,
the proportion of nitrogen dioxide concentrations in the 2-component mixture with sulphur dioxide is
96.4% by preliminary estimates, and so the mixture does not cause the summation effect. Thus, the
following groups of summation were taken into account in calculating : vanadium pentoxide and
manganese; sulphur dioxide and vanadium pentoxide; sulphur dioxide and lead; carbon monoxide and
non-organic dust.
Calculations have been conducted with respect to background presented in Volume 8, Book 1, Chapter 2.
Appendix 3.1
The full description of the sources of contaminants emission into the air see in Volume 8, Book 1,
Chapter 2. EP
When calculating the dispersion of contaminants all sources are associated with the local system of
coordinates. Calculating area is 10,000 m x 10,000 m at 1000 m intervals.
There was accepted for calculations the combination of emission sources actually taking place under
normal operating conditions at which the maximum value of surface concentrations. Thus, several options
of calculations are considered.

Page 283

According to Section 2, paragraph 13 of Methods for calculation, regulation and control of emissions of
pollutants into the air of Research Institute of Atmosphere, 2005. it is recommended not to include the
emissions of nitrogen oxides from power plants of vessels in dispersion calculations until the new
Methods for calculation would be published because these values are unreasonably high. However, these
calculations have been incorporated into the document by request of the experts.
In all variants of the calculation PDK is exceeded only for nitrogen dioxide.
When considering Option 1 - construction equipment operation in the coastal area (300 m), as well as
seabed intervention works (from -2 m to -14 m) - the maximum concentration of nitrogen dioxide is 2.25
PDK. At the Bolshoy Bor area border the concentration is 0.403 PDK. The concentration of 1PDK is in
1.15 km distance from the source.
Option 2 of calculation of the dispersal of contaminants takes into account the pipelaying works at a
landfall area (from -14 m). The maximum concentration of nitrogen dioxide is 2.686 PDK. At the
Bolshoy Bor area border the concentration is 0.895 PDK. The concentration of 1PDK is in 3.1 km
distance from the source. According to the construction schedule (Volume 7, Book 2, Chapter 2) works in
the coastal area takes 1-2 days, as the laying rate is anticipated to be 2.5 km/day. Then the route comes
closer to the sea. Thus, this concentration will be for very short period of time. Other contaminants do not
exceed the PDK.
Option 3 of calculation is made to the case of simultaneous operation of a landfall team (more detailed
information see in Volume 8, Book 2, Chapter 2. Atmospheric air protection) and pipelaying works. Such
a situation is possible for a very short time (maximum 1-2 days). For this option the maximum
concentration of nitrogen dioxide is 2.71 PDK. At the Bolshoy Bor area border the concentration is 0.98
PDK. The concentration of 1PDK is in 3.67 km distance from the source.
Calculations of the dispersal of contaminants are carried out for the warm period of the year at a height of
2 m. The results are shown in Table 4.3-2.
As a result, maps of the dispersal of contaminants were obtained. Calculations and maps of contaminants
dispersion are presented in Volume 8, Book 1. Chapter 2. Appendix 3.2
Table 4.3-2
The planned facility's impact on the ground layer of the atmosphere
Concentration, PDK shares
Code
Contaminants
maximum
301
304
328
330
337
2732
Nitrogen dioxide
Nitrogen oxide
Soot
Sulphur dioxide
Carbon monoxide
Kerosene
Option 1
2,253
0,215
0,463
0,102
0,367
0,174
On the Bolshoy
Bor r.a. border
0,403
0,065
0,015
0,035
0,304
0,008
where the
concentration is 1
PDK
1,15
-

Page 284

Code
Contaminants
110
123
133
143
146
164
168
184
228
301
304
316
328
330
Vanadium
Iron oxide
Cadmium
Manganese compounds
Copper
Nickel
Tin
Lead
Chromium
Nitrogen dioxide
Nitrogen oxide
Hydrogen chloride
Soot
Sulphur dioxide
337
344
2704
2732
2902
2908
6017
6018
6034
6046
Carbon monoxide
Fluorides
Petrol
Kerosene
Suspended matter
Non-organic dust (7020%)
110+143
110+330
184+330
337+2908
110
118
123
133
143
146
164
168
184
203
228
301
304
316
328
Vanadium
Titanium dioxide
Iron oxide
Cadmium
Manganese compounds
Copper
Nickel
Tin
Lead
Chromium hexavalent
Chromium trivalent
Nitrogen dioxide
Nitrogen oxide
Hydrogen chloride
Soot

where the
concentration is 1
On the Bolshoy Bor r.a.
maximum
PDK
border
Option 2
calculation is not feasible (less than 0.01 PDK)
0,280
0,06
2,686
0,895
3,1
0,250
0,105
0,584
0,091
0,1
0,048
0,346
0,312
0,134
0,039
0,340
0,340
0,280
0,006
0,1
0,048
0,1
0,049
0,346
0,314
Option 3
0,280
0,06
2,71
0,986
3,67
0,252
0,112
0,578
0,095
-

Page 285


Code
Contaminants
330
Sulphur dioxide
333
Hydrogen sulphide
337
Carbon monoxide
342
Fluoride gases
maximum
0,1
On the Bolshoy Bor r.a.

border
where the
concentration is 1
PDK
0,05

0,347
0,316
344
Fluorides
703
Benz(a)pyrene
1325
Formaldehyde
2704
Petrol
2732
Kerosene
0,135
0,04
2902
Suspended matter
0,340
0,340
2908
6017
Non-organic dust (7020%)

110+143
6018
110+330
6019
110+203

0,280
0,006
0,1
0,05
6034
184+330
6035
333+1325
0,1
0,051
6039
330+342
0,1
0,052
6043
330+333
0,1
0,051
6046
337+2908
0,347
0,316
During construction of the pipeline the impact on the atmospheric air will not cause significant changes in
the atmosphere which is confirmed by practical experience (analogues objects).
4.2.2.
Operational phase

There is no impact on atmosphere at normal operation of the pipeline.
During the operational phase accidental pipeline ruptures are possible, resulting in natural gas release into
the atmosphere, the fire and explosions (see Chapter 5).
In standard
compliant with the norms and accident-free use of the gas pipeline, there are no gas
release into the environment.
4.2.3.
During removal of the pipeline the impact on the atmospheric air is similar to the impacts during the
construction phase. The removal phase will be considered more directly in a separate project.

Page 286

4.3.
Impact on sea water environment
4.3.1.
Construction period

Sources and types of impact on the marine environment during the construction phase are mainly
determined by design features, technology and the organisation of construction.
The pipeline construction may be characterised primarily by its laying in a trench in the coastal zone. A
major negative impact occur consequently in the coastal area during dredging operations and trenching,
backfilling, and during the construction of embankments.
The main sources of impact on the marine environment during the construction phase are:
dredging work during excavation of trenches and pipeline trenching;
construction of embankments in the coastal area within Portovaya Bay for ground-based
pre-trenching works;
backfilling of pipeline trench in the coastal area by excavated soil and soil brought in;
rectification of long free spans;
laying of pipes onto the seabed;
vessels and construction equipment movement;
hydro-pressure-testing.
The main impact on sea water environment during pipeline construction will be:
physical and chemical transformation of seawater properties mainly as a result of their

polluting by suspended minerals;
changing levels of contaminants;
seawater intake and discharge;
temporary exclusion of water area for pipelaying and embankments construction.
The main source of suspended matter emission into the water environment is the implementation of
dredging in the coastal area, as well as free-span elimination almost along the entire pipeline. The slight
increase in turbidity will occur due to the construction of the embankments.

Page 287

In addition, during the construction phase the contamination of sea water with oil products is possible
from the work of vessels and construction equipment.
Seawater intake will be conducted mainly for pressure-testing and for pipeline flushing. Relatively small
volumes of seawater will be consumed for the domestic and technological needs on vessels.
Time and duration of environmental impact during construction of offshore sections of pipeline is
determined by the work schedule.
Spreading of suspension and sedime nt matter flow
The main impact on sea water environment during pipeline construction will be a temporary local
physical and chemical transformation of seawater properties mainly as a result of their polluting by
suspended minerals.
The increase of suspended matter in water will occur primarily due to dredging operations and trenching,
backfilling, construction of embankments, and work on construction of gravel-rock supports to eliminate
the free-spans.
Modelling of the spread of sediments has been carried for environmental impacts assessment on water
environment of dredging and construction works to eliminate the free-spans in Russian sector of offshore
gas pipeline Nord Stream. Details of possible spread of suspension, the calculations and the detailed
results see in volume "Modelling of suspension and spreading of sediments during pipeline construction.
Russian Sector", Appendix to Chapter 4 (carried out by the Computational centre of the Russian
Academy of Sciences named after .. Dorodnitsin, foreman B.V.Arkhipov).
The area of dredging on sea section of the Russian sector including the embankments is shown in Figure
4.3-1.
The major results of modelling during construction of the embankments, excavation and backfilling of
trenches at the offshore section of the Russian sector of the Nord Stream pipeline are shown in Figure
4.3-2 and in table 4.3-1.
Formed during the work cloud of suspended matter, drifting according the direction and speed of
currents. The range of maximum concentrations for the entire period of work (maximum concentration
achieved) is shown in Figure 4.3-2.
The distances from the edge of the trench to the position of the contour line with a suspension
concentration of 100 mg/l do not exceed 31 m, with a concentration of 50 mg/l - 83 m, with a
concentration of 20 mg/l - 275 m, and with a concentration of 10 mg/l - 765 m.

Page 288

Figure 4.3-1.
Depths () and dredging area (b) at the offshore section of the Russian sector of
offshore gas pipeline Nord Stream
Figure 4.3-2.
The range of maximum admissible concentrations (mg/l) during dredging work in
the area of offshore section of Russian Sector offshore gas pipeline Nord Stream

Page 289

Table 4.3-1
Volumes (thousand m3) and time of existence (min, hours) of water volumes contaminated by
suspension with different concentrations during dredging works
Parameters defined
Concentration of suspension in water, mg/l
1
10
20
50
100
Flowing water volumes
through the area of the
plume of suspension with
the concentration above the
given one, thousand m3
(FW)
The mean time of water flow
through suspension plume
area with the concentrations
exceeds the given , hour
(mean )
Maximum values of
momentary volumes of
plume areas, thousand m3
(V)
Average values of
momentary volumes of
plume areas, thousand m3
(AV)
Time of existence of plumes
with a concentration above
the given one, days (Texistence)
4 835 889
503 012
235 124
81 111
21 514
0,7
0,3
0,1
0,05
7 153
447
140
36
18
1 991
98
33
90,9
77,1
73,5
51,7
27,6
The major results of modelling during non-allowable free spans correction works in the area of offshore
section of Russian Sector offshore gas pipeline Nord Stream are shown in Figure 4.3-4, 4.3-5 and in
tables 4.3-3, 4.3-4, 4.3-5.
Backfilling of free spans will be executed in stages:
during the first stage (No 1, fig. 4.3-3),gravel supports will be constructed to provide
static stabilization before the laying of eastern and western pipelines;
during the second stage (No 2, fig. 4.3-3) gravel will be placed to provide static
stabilization after the laying of both pipelines;
during the third stage (No 3, fig. 4.3-3) gravel will be placed to provide dynamic
stabilization after the pipelines laying;
during the fourth stage (No 4, fig. 4.3-3) gravel will be placed to reduce the longitudinal
bend after the pipelines laying.
In terms of process technology all kinds of post trenching differ only by the volume of the filled material
and by the disposition of the post trenching locations. Post-trenching locations are shown in Figure 4.3-3.

Page 290

Figure 4.3-3.
Post-trenching locations on different work stages
The classification of all activities was conducted for modelling of sediment spreading. The results of this
classification are shown in table 4.3-2.
As can be seen from the table the average volumes of post trenching relatively small on the first three
stages, but the work is carried out both at sites located near the coastline (KP-4760, 0) and at the west end
(KP-120341, 0). At the last stages of post trenching the volumes significantly increase as they are in fact
all along the pipeline from the KP - 2003 to KP - 119523. At all stages will be carried out 328 post
trenching with a total volume of 1,391,769 m3.
Table 4.3-2
Summarized data on the volumes of post-trenchings during different stages of the work for the east
and west pipelines and modelling variant numbers
From KP
to KP
Number of fill-ins Average volume (m3) Variant number
1st stage
15066
39347
8
667,6
1
62632
93972
22
1352,2
2
110088
120327
16
1603,0
3
2nd stage
9124,5
21466.24
33
439,1
4
31547
43374.41
36
360,7
5
62364
120228.3
61
741,5
6

Page 291

From KP
to KP
4760
15443
60827
9658
33968
119426
2003
30461
60377
29023
59186
119194
Number of fill-ins
3d stage
4
15
27
4th stage
47
45
14
Average volume (m3) Variant number

110,0
69,7
392,1
7
8
9
15651,0
9494,3
12666,1
10
11
12
Calculations of volumes of contaminated waters and time of existence of contaminated plumes for the
first 9 options of post-trenching are shown in Table 4.3-3. In these options the volumes of post trenching
are relatively small and work duration for each option is not exceed one day.
Spread of contaminated plumes for the options No 1 9 are listed in Chapter 4 "Water environment
protection" (Volume 8. Book 1. Offshore section. Part 2. EIA)
Table 4.3-3
Volumes (thousand m3) and time of existence (min, hours) of water volumes contaminated by
suspension with different concentrations during static stabilization works before pipeline laying
(options 1-3), static stabilization works after the pipeline laying (options 4-6), dynamic stabilization
works after the pipeline laying (Nos. 7-9)
Parameters defined
10
20
50
100
Flowing water volumes through the area of the
plume of suspension with the concentration
487
326
173
0
above the given one, thousand m3 (FW)
1
Time of existence of plumes with a
concentration above the given one, hours.
8,2
8,0
7,9
0,0
(Texistence)
982
661
370
0
2
16,4
16,2
16,1
0,0
(Texistence)
1 124
744
416
0
3
19,4
19,2
19,1
0,0
(Texistence)
314
204
99
0
4
5,5
5,3
5,2
0,0
(Texistence)

Page 292

Parameters defined
(Texistence)
(Texistence)
(Texistence)
(Texistence)
(Texistence)

10
20
50
100
262
169
93
4,6
4,4
4,3
0,0
541
362
193
9,1
8,9
8,8
0,0
87
53
29
1,6
1,4
1,3
0,0
57
33
17
1,1
0,9
0,8
0,0
294
195
99
5,0
4,8
4,7
0,0
The major results of modelling during free-span correction (options No 10-12) of offshore section of
Russian sector of Nord Stream pipeline are shown in Figure 4.3-4 and in Table 4.3-4.
The cloud, generated during the works and contaminated with suspended matter drifts according to
directions and velocity of the currents. The range of maximum concentrations for the entire period of
work (maximum concentration achieved) is shown in Figure 4.3-4. This figure enable evaluation of the
scales of distribution of suspension.
in option No 10 (Figure 4.3-4, ) the distances from the location of the source of the suspended materials
to the position of the contour line with a suspension concentration of 100 mg/l do not exceed 86 m, with a
concentration of 50 mg/l - 391 m, with a concentration of 20 mg/l - 1,245 m, and with a concentration of
10 mg/l - 2,305 m.
in option No 11 (Figure 4.3-4, b) the distances from the location of the source of the suspended materials
concentration of 50 mg/l - 67 m, with a concentration of 20 mg/l - 228 m, and with a concentration of 10
mg/l - 727 m.
in option No 12 (Figure 4.3-4, c) the distances from the location of the source of the suspended materials
concentration of 50 mg/l - 172 m, with a concentration of 20 mg/l - 869 m, and with a concentration of 10
mg/l - 1,547 m.

Page 293

Figure 4.3-4.
The range of maximum admissible concentrations (mg/l) resulting from dredging

works for reducing lateral and vertical be nd of the pipeline
Table 4.3-4
Volumes (thousand m3) and times of existence (min, hours) of water volumes contaminated by
suspension with different concentrations during dredging works for reducing lateral and vertical
bend of the pipeline
Parameters defined
10
20
50
100
plume of suspension with the concentration above
16 889
6 582
913
77
10 the given one, thousand m3 (FW)
Time of existence of plumes with a concentration
7,8
7,8
7,8
7,8
above the given one, hours. (Texistence)
plume of suspension with the concentration above
6 954
2 806
570
10
11 the given one, thousand m3 (FW)
Time of existence of plumes with a concentration
4,7
4,7
4,7
4,7
above the given one, hours. (Texistence)
12 plume of suspension with the concentration above
9 476
4 429
486
25
the given one, thousand m3 (FW)

Page 294

Parameters defined
Time of existence of plumes
with a concentration above the
given one, hours. (Texistence)

10
20
50
100
6,3
6,3
6,3
6,3
Time of existence of plumes with a concentration above the given one (Texistence) is expected to be
close to the duration of works, i.e. the plumes disappear directly after the excavation is completed.
Therefore, the time is much the same for each type of plumes in this case.
Thus, during post-lay trenching to ensure sustainability of the pipeline will be carried out 328 post
trenching with a total volume of 1,391,769 m3 or 2,129,407 tonnes. 42,588 tonnes of soil during works
will be suspended. The total volume of new water flowing through areas with contamination
concentrations up to 10 mg/l is 37,474,047 m3. (see Table 4.3-5).
In the process of post trenching works the maximum distances of spread of suspended matter will occur
when carrying out large-scale post trenching during the fourth stage. In certain moments the
concentrations of 10 mg/l of added suspension may occur at distances up to 2
km from the location of
the source. The prevailing direction of suspended matter spreading is the direction along the pipeline
route, as it coincides with the predominant direction of currents in this area. Therefore, the the position of
the contour line with a suspension concentration of 10 mg/l does not exceed 300-500 m from the pipeline
across the route. The typical scales of distribution of the suspended matter in the vicinity of the islands
Gogland are shown in Figure 4.3-5. It follows that the waters north of this island will be exposed to
concentrations of up to 5 -10 mg/l.
Table 4.3-5
Flowing water volumes through the area of the plume of suspension with the concentration above
the given one, thousand m3
10
20
50
100
37 474
16 570
3 464
113

Page 295

Figure 4.3-5.
The area of typical concentrations of suspended matter near Gogland ( fine

scale, b large scale)

Page 296

Secondary sea water pollution

The chemistry of marine waters will be impacted only during the pipeline construction works by the input
of substances from the benthic sediments into the water, because part of these sediments will be
suspended in the water during dredging works. This kind of impact will not be significant, which is
proved by the investigations conducted by the Institutes for Water Issues of Russian Academy of
Sciences. Below the main results of the IWI RAS are presented.
During these works (as it was shown above) the clouds of dissolved and suspended pollutants are being
generated especially on the first stage, during the stripping operations. The size of the cloud significantly
depends on the thickness of the muddy sediments layer, that consists of the fine dispersal particles (coarse
fractions settle quickly on the seabed, their part is negligibly small). Further deepening in the underlying
rocks exercises essentially lower impact.
As the observations show, the excess turbidity disappears much earlier in the marine waters, which are
electrolyte because of fine particles aggregating into the coarse ones, that have high sedimentation rates.
The accumulated in the benthic sediments toxic substances by may be partly dissolved by roiling. In case
of heavy metals dissolution of the suspended substances depends on the share of the relatively mobile
forms of the metals by disturbed soil. Only these forms can transit to the water environment and
participate in the mass-transfer processes between seabed and benthic water tables.
For oil hydrocarbons, most of which are hydrophobic compounds, transition from suspended into the
dissolved state is not likely. On the opposite, dissolved organic matters will be adsorbed at the suspended
particles by the increased turbidity and finally will be removed from the water environment after a
sedimentation of the turbidity cloud. Thus pursuant the investigations (RAS Institute of Water Issues)
within 1 hour settlement significant removal of the oil products from the water takes place, and after 18
hours more than 95% of these pollutants disappears from the water.
At calculations of the potential subtraction of the elements from the cloud of suspended substances,
generated during the works with soil, the worst case conditions have been taken: calculations have been
fulfilled per momentary volumes of the plume areas, gross content of the metals in solid state in these
areas were taken by analogy with benthic sediments of the water reservoirs situated in the similar nature
conditions. As mobile forms, only ion-exchange forms, and forms associated with organic matter, are
considered. Metal forms, associated with the hydroxides Fe and Mn are not seen as potentially dangerous,
as by the oxidizing conditions they do not dissolve neither they enter solutions.
Heavy metal content in the Baltic waters and their Maximum Allowed Concentrations (PDKs) in the
marine water are presented in the table 4.3-6.

Page 297

Table 4.3-6
Heavy metal content in the Baltic Sea waters and in the pipe-laying area (g/l)
Elements
Heavy metals
concentrations in
the Baltic Sea
waters
MAC HM in
marine
environme nt
HM concentrations
in Portovaya Bay
area (bottom)
As
Mn
Cd
Pb
Cu
Zn
Cr
Ni
Fe
0,6-1,3
50,0
0,02-0,25
0,04-1,07
0,66-2,3
0,87-8,5
0,05-0,4
0,75-1,4
0,3-4,4
10,0
50,0
10,0
10,0
5,0
50,0
1,0
10,0
50,0
2,0-7,0
22,0-32,0
10,0-70,0
HM
concentrations
in Somme rs
Island area
(bottom)
2,0-4,0
12,0-26,0
5,0-22,0
0,002
0,1
0,01-0,1
0,004-0,2
In the table 4.3-7 the average contents of the elements and organic matter in the sands and silts of benthic
sediments of the area are shown. Benthic sediments of the planned route are mostly silts with high ironmanganese concretions content. In the table the quantitative evaluation of the element mass in the
generated plum of suspended substances is shown as well as that of its part that may transit in the
dissolved state and be subtracted from the plume.
Table 4.3-7
Potential amount of mobile forms of the elements subtracted from the plume of suspended
substances generated during dredging activities
Concentration in DO, Mass in suspensions, g
Mobile forms, %
Subtraction from
mg/kg
the plume, g
As
4,66
86,7
21
18,21
Mn
520,91
9688
32,2
3119,54
Cd
1,25
23,25
32,1
7,46
Pb
41,35
769
4,8
36,9
Cu
36,63
681,245
4,5
30,66
Zn
162,83
3028,3
28,4
860
Cr
41,96
780,37
3,1
24,2
Ni
30,72
571,33
6
34,28
Fe
55009,43
1023065,3
12,2
6711,2
Hg
0,52
9,67
14
1,35
Table 4.3-8 presents conditions forecast of the water masses heavy metal pollution. These volumes are
calculated using the methods of mathematical modelling. The modelling has also estimated volumes of
the lotic waters, running through the plume areas within the time interval from 10.1 to 36.9 minutes.
These volumes of the water running through the plume are decisive for the evaluation of the pollutants
dilution that are subtracted from the suspension.

Page 298

Table 4.3-8
Forecast of the primary pollution levels of the water masses by the transition of heavy metals from
the solid phase to the marine water along Nord Stream route
Heavy metal concentration, g/l in water
Elements
Water volume is
Water volume is 64,626.8
Water volume is
Water volume is
53,100m3
m3
231,649.5 m3
542,368.5m3
Increment Concentration Increment Concentration Increment Concentration Increment Concentration
As
0,343
1,643
0,282
1,582
0,0566
1,357
0,0366

Page 299
1,337

Heavy metal concentration, g/l in water

Elements
Water volume is
Water volume is 64,626.8
Water volume is
Water volume is
53,100m3
m3
231,649.5 m3
542,368.5m3
Increment Concentration Increment Concentration Increment Concentration Increment Concentration
Mn
Cd
Pb
Cu
Zn
Cr
Ni
Fe
Hg
58,75
0,14
0,69
0,58
16,22
0,46
0,68
126,9
0,03
108,75
0,39
7,69
2,88
48,22
0,86
2,08
130,8
0,23
48,27
0,12
0,57
0,47
13,07
0,37
0,53
103,8
0,02
98,27
0,37
7,57
2,77
45,07
0,77
1,93
108,2
0,22
13,47
0,032
0,16
0,132
3,74
0,1
0,15
29,0
0,006
63,47
0,282
7,16
2,432
35,74
0,5
1,55
33,4
0,206
5,71
0,014
0,07
0,006
1,58
0,04
0,06
12,37
0,003
Thus, by the performance of dredging works on the Russian section only insignificant and short-term
local contamination of the waters by Mn, Fe will be observed and only within the volumes beset with the
plume of suspended substances.
As follows from the calculations, by the performance of dredging works on the Russian section only
insignificant and short-term local contamination of the waters by heavy metals will be observed. As the
calculations testify, for the most heavy metals a short-term increasing of concentration in comparison
with back-ground values will not be above 1-6% by the big volumes of diluting marine water. Taking into
consideration the concentrations of the most heavy metals in the marine water in the pipeline laying area,
which are significantly lower than their PDK, small increment of their concentration during the
performance of the works can be regarded as insignificant.
Thus the seabed disturbance associated with laying of the pipeline shall not be seen as likely to arouse
deterioration of the water quality in the area of construction works in Baltic sea practically for all
microelements.
Impacts on the water quality from the working vessels and waterborne vehicles
During operation of the ship power plants (SPP) inevitably the oil containing bilge water and fuel wastage
is generated. Bilge waters are generated because of the oil products being spilled through the valves,
flanged connections and sealings of the oil and fuel system pumps, through the sealing of the heatexchangers. Accumulation of the polluted waters in bilges and wells occurs by cleaning of mud-mats and
devices, by condensate run-off by the sweating of the walls of engine rooms, inside cleaning and
blowdown of vapour generator, etc.
Along the bilge waters by the SPP operation wastage of oil products is generated because of their
filtration, separation, overflow, oil renewal, repair, etc. Used up rags, fuel and oil filter media may also be
sources of oil products inputs.
These pollutants will flow into the aquatic environment mostly with the bilge and cleaning waters from
the vessels.
Pursuant the requirements of Russian and International regulations (International convention on
Preventing of Pollution from Vessels, MARPOL 73/78) during performance of construction works in the
basin of Gulf of Finland binding collection and utilisation of all oil containing waste waters and domestic
waste with the help of special devices is provided. Subsequently there is no marine water pollution by the
oil products during construction.

Page 300
55,71
0,214
7,07
2,306
33,58
0,44
1,46
16,77
0,203

Water consumption and water discharge characteristics

1. Water consumption and water discharge during pressure test
Impact on the aquatic environment will also caused by the sea-water intake by cleaning and carrying out
of the pipeline pressure test.
The whole pipeline is divided into 5 test sections. Test sections are shown in the table 4.3-9.
Table 4.3-9
Section name
Test sections of the pipeline

Design pressure, MPa
Russian onshore section

First offshore section from 0 to 300
Second offshore section from 300 to 675
Third offshore section from 675 to 1200
German onshore section
22
22
20
17
17
Testing pressure, MPa

24,26
24,26
22,05
18,74
18,74
Test of the offshore section will be carried out in several stages.

First stage (2010) Upon completion of the construction activities tests of both onshore sections are being
carried out together with a PIG launch chamber and also the west pipeline of the offshore section. East
pipeline of the offshore section is laid only from the dragging border to KP 5 (seabed depth is 20 m) and
will not be tested on the first stage (see figure 4.3-6).
Figure 4.3-6.
Design of the Nord Stream pipeline division into the test sections (1 stage)
Second stage (2011) Test of the East (second) offshore pipeline is conducted. For the test design of the
East pipeline of Nord Stream on the second stage refer Figure 4.3-7.

Page 301

Figure 4.3-7. Division design of the Nord Stream pipelines into the test sections (2 stage) According to
clause 5 of 202 DNV-OS-F101 the offshore pipeline sections will be tested with the sea water pressure
of 1,051,05 ~, which makes 24.26 MPa for the first offshore section and 22.05 for the second
offshore section.
The third offshore section will be tested from the German shore, therefore it is not described in details in
this section.
Sea water is used for flooding and pressure testing of the offshore section of West and East pipelines.
Pressure test water will be extracted in the vicinity of the Russian sector in Portovaya Bay, Gulf of
Finland. Intake of the water is similar for both considered stages of pressure test. Balance sheet for water
consumption and water discharge is shown in the table 4.3-10. Thus for the first two stages of pressure
test 2,578,400 m3 of seawater is required.
Filtered and chemically treated seawater is used for flooding of offshore section. To prevent oxygen
corrosion in the pipe during the pressure test of the offshore following additives are used:
sodium bisulphite (NaHSO3) for the oxygen absorption,

sodium hydroxide (NaOH) for the required pH value.
Seawater will be taken from 6 m depth approximately 750-1000 m offshore. Intake sea water will be
filtrated and cleaned from the foreign substance bigger than 50 m. Sediment content in water shall not
be above 20 g/m3.
A grid will be used in order to avoid the intake of foreign objects, dirt and small fish.
After pressure test the used water (2,566,400 m 3)will be discharged under control into the surface layers
of the aquatic area in Portovaya Bay of the Gulf of Finland. Calculation of PDS is presented in Appendix
4 (Volume 8. Book 1. Offshore section. Part 2. EP). For the water discharge the pipeline NB 700 is used.
Protecting grid will be removed from the frame. Maximal discharge rate is 2.5 m/s.

Page 302

The remaining volume of cleaning water after two pipeline cleanings is approximately 12,000 m3. All
cleaning water will be collected in the settling basin on the German shore (table 4.3-10). Waste waters at
receiving of the pigs after the pipeline cleaning from salt will be cleaned in the settling basin with the
volume 3000 m3 and discharged into the Portovaya Bay after that.
To prevent pollutants input into the soil the basin bottom is paved with the polyethylene film. After
sedimentation of the pollutants by the end of the first and second stages the water is pumped from the
basin into the Portovaya Bay through the temporary pipeline (1,774 m3 at the end of each stage).
Settled water will be purified up to concentration not exceeding PDK and is relatively clean. Thus, no
pollution of Portovaya Bay marine environment is expected.
After a displacement of the water by the pumps the remaining thickness of the water film on the pipeline
surface is about 0.05 mm. To remove the remaining water film the pipeline will be dried. Thus the
nonrecoverable losses make about 452 m3 (common for both stages).

Page 303

Table 4.3-10
Balance sheet for water consumption and water discharge for the cleaning and pressure test of the offshore sections of the pipeline (2010-2011)
Name
Cleaning of the west
and east pipelines of
the offshore section
Flooding of the first,
second and third
offshore sections
Test of the first and
second
offshore
sections
Cleaning
of the pipelines from
the salt
Total
Water consumption, m3
Fresh water
Sea water
intake on the
intake from
Total water
German shore,
the Gulf of
consumption
m3
Finland, m3
Water discharge, m3
Discharge into
Settling basin Settling basin on
Total
Portovaya
Nonrecoverableon the Russian
the German
discharge of
Bay, Gulf of
losses, m3
shore
shore
waste water
Finland
12 000
12 000
12 000
12000
2 538 000
2 538 000
2 538 000
2 538 000
28 400
28 400
28 400
28400
4 000
4 000
3 548
3 548
452
4 000
2 578 400
2 582 400
3 548
12 000
2 566 400
2 581 948
452

Page 304

2. Water consumption and water discharge on the vessels

Sea water will be also abstracted by the vessels for different purposes. Water on the vessels will be used
mostly for service-utility and process needs.
For the service-utility needs sea water will be abstracted and then desalted on the vessels.
For the estimated costs of water consumption for service-utility needs and wet cleaning of the premises
refer to table 4.3-11. The complete list of the vessels is shown in the volume 7, book 1. "Project for
building organization of offshore section of the pipeline".
Water consumption rates for service-utility needs are approved according to "Sanitary rules floating
drilling units", adopted on 23 December 1985 (#4056-85). According to this regulation water
consumption rate is: 50 l of drinking water per person per day and 100 l of wash water.
Water consumption rate for the wet cleaning of premises are approved according to VSN 199-84
"Projection and construction of the camps for transport builders" (with the self-contained water supply).
Thus for the entire period of construction for service-utility needs and for wet cleaning of the premises on
the vessels 21,101.43 m3 sea water will be abstracted.
Sea water will be also abstracted for the cooling of power plants of the vessels, winches and other
mechanisms on boards of the vessels. Water used for that purposes will circulate in the outer contour of
the cooling systems and will not be in contact with pollution sources.
Discharge rate of waste service and drinking waters is the same as the rate of water consumption
(20,968.35 m3 ). Water discharge rate for wet cleaning of premises is 70% from water consumption rate
(93.16 m3 ). Remaining 30% are the nonrecoverable losses (see table 4.3-11).
Total discharge rate of the water used for service-utility needs for the whole construction period id
14,771.00 m3.
For the collection of the household waste waters vessels are equipped with the collecting tank with
respective capacity and content volume control. Further household waste waters from vessels will be
discharged with the help of fuel vessels and subsequently delivered in the port of arrival.
Sea water used for cooling of power plants of the vessels, winches and other vessel devices will be
discharged pursuant the requirements of MARPOL 73/78. These waters are regarded as nominally clean
and are not considered in the water balance design.

Volume 8. Book 1. Off-shore section. Part 1. EIA
Page 304

Table 4.3-11
Water consumption and water discharge balance on the vessels
Water consumption
Objects
of water consumption
Vessels performing earthwork

in the coastal area
PLV
Vessels involved in the pipeline
laying
Vessels, performing earthworks
for elimination of the free spans
Totally for the service and
drinking needs
Water discharge
Total
Nonrecoverable losses
Need
during the
during the
during the
constructi
constructio
constructio
3
3
3
per day, m
per day, m
per day, m
on period,
n period,
n period,
m3
m3
m3
Service and drinking needs on the vessels
Number of
the working
days
Number
of the
working
weeks
Units
Quantity
Day
rate, l
1 person
42
150
6,30
277,20
6,30
277,20
44
1 person
330
150
49,50
6 286,50
49,50
6 286,50
127
1 person
491
150
73,65
9 353,55
73,65
9 353,55
127
1 person
149
150
22,35
5 051,10
22,35
5 051,10
226
151,80
20 968,35
151,80
20 968,35
524
Wet cleaning of the premises

Vessels performing earthworks
in the coastal area
PLV
Vessels involved in the pipeline
laying
Vessels, performing earthworks
for the free span elimination
Totally for wet cleaning of the
premises
Total
1m
1 680
0,2
0,34
2,04
0,24
1,43
0,10
0,61
1m2
4 000
0,2
0,80
14,40
0,56
10,08
0,24
4,32
18
1m
26 000
0,2
5,20
93,60
3,64
65,52
1,56
28,08
18
1m2
3 600
0,2
0,72
23,04
0,50
16,13
0,22
6,91
32
7,06
133,08
4,94
93,16
2,12
39,92
14 771,00
47,66
6 330,43
158,86
21 101,43
111,20

Page 305
74

4.3.2.
Period of operation

In comparison with a construction period the impact during the operation will not be so significant.
On this stage the pipelines, laid on the seabed of the Gulf of Finland, are the main source of technological
impact on the marine environment.
The main insignificant kind of impact on the marine environment during operation will be the alteration
of the chemical composition of sea water resulting from the substances emission from anodes while using
the system of corrosion protection. This impact will not be significant and will not lead to the irreversible
consequences.
During normal operation of the pipelines following kinds of impact on the chemical composition of the
waters are possible:
during the gas leakage by diffusion or in the form of streaming upwards bubbles, that will
exchange their gas components with the surrounding water;
by the metal corrosion of the pipeline and transition of the metals of anode protection to
dissolved state.
Since the data of the total losses by the normal operation of the pipelines (losses caused by the water
leakage through the welds and pipe-walls) are absent by now, assessments of their impact on the
chemistry of the waters is not possible. As it follows from the motion theory of gas bubbles in the
stratified liquid dissolution of the gas uprising to the surface has no substantial effect upon the water
chemistry.
During operation of the pipelines with the passive system of corrosion protection the impact upon the
water environment resulting from the substances emitted from the anodes will be insignificant.
4.3.3.
The impact upon the marine environment during the decommissioning phase will be similar to that
executed during the construction. Assessment of the impact on the aquatic environment during the
decommissioning phase will be fulfilled in separate project.

Page 306

4.4.
Impact on sea biota of the lower trophic levels and on ichthyofauna
4.4.1.
Construction period
4.4.1.1. Sources and kinds of impact Main sources of the adverse impact on the water biota
in this period will be:
construction of embankments;
divestiture of the seabed area, under the embankments;
development and back-filling of the trench for the pipelines;
dumping into the temporary underwater dumping areas;
dredging of the soil from the temporary underwater dumping area for the filling of the
trench;
water intake during the operation of the pump-dredge (in the pulp) and during
hydrotesting.
The main factors causing the adverse impact on the biota are: divestiture of the marine area (including the
nonrecoverable one), mechanical disruption (by the seabed disturbance) and alteration (by the dumping)
of the structure of the soil underlying the seabed, increasing of the water turbidity by all above-mentioned
kinds of works, acoustical effect (noise impact from the operating mechanisms) and other physical
impacts. water intake as a part of pulp by the operation of technical equipment, alteration of the
environment chemistry (different kinds of pollutions and violence of the chemical quality), as well as
alteration of the social situation (increasing of the human presence and the associated factors, such as
disturbance, poaching etc.).
Marine area divestiture (seabed area and the respective water volume), which is inevitable by the
construction of the objects in the marine area, reduces the inhabited area of the aquatic organisms
including fish and invertebrates that form the food supply for the birds and marine mammals. In the
coastal zone, seized for the hydro-technical objects, spawning areas of some fish species are located (in
this case that of herring). Divestiture of the coastal shallow waters causes also to the reducing of the
grounds where the communities of zooplankton and zoobenthos are developed, which form the food
supply for the young fish.
Thus, the divestiture of the coastal zone of marine area causes reducing of the feeding grounds of young
fish and to the likely reducing of the spawning areas.
Mechanical disruption of the seabed structure during the performance of dredging works, removal and
displacements of the soil causes disruption of the formed biotopes of the benthic organisms and is
accompanied by the complete or partial death of the latter. Impact on the benthic organisms (zoobenthos)
is aggravated by the fact that most of these organisms have a sedentary way of life and as opposed, in
particular, to the adult fish, cannot abandon the zone of adverse impacts caused by the works. In general
the extent of the impact on the coenosis of the benthos depends on the effect duration of the factor and
time necessary for its recovery (in a natural way or with help of special measures) [52].
Yet it should be stressed that by the alteration of the soil structure, underlying the bottom, on the damaged
zone conditions are to be formed that are appropriate for the survival of benthic fauna, i.e. the new
biotope is to be established. Its establishing and inhabiting takes a long time, normally it needs several
years (from 3 to 8).

Page 307

Increasing of the water turbidity is inevitable by the conduction of all above-mentioned hydro-technical
works. This factor is adverse to the life of all hydrobionts [166], including both the fish themselves and
the invertebrates (plankton and benthos), In spite of the fact, that by the performance of the hydrotechnical works the adverse impact of the mineral suspension in the concentrations, lying above the background ones, has mostly temporary character, it causes partial or complete death of the organisms which
are the food supply for fish. That saps food resources for the fish and thus violates the normal conditions
of the fish resources regeneration [52, 120, 372].
For the marine shelf zone that is deeper than 8 m the increasing of the inert natural mineral suspension is
allowed to be not higher than 10.0 mg/l. The indicated norm relates to the underwater rock dumping area.
For the most organisms that are food supply for the fish the food source is the suspended in the water (for
zooplankton) and precipitated in the seabed (for zoobenthos) living (bacterio- and phytoplankton) and
non-living (detritus) organic matter. According to their feeding method these organisms can be
subdivided into the filter-feeding and the sedimentators. By the increased turbidity resulting from the soil
suspension inhospitable conditions for the survival of plankton and benthic invertebrates are provided,
because the vitally important functions of their organisms are disturbed [97, 120, 152-154].
During water intake and as for the pressure test and as a part of pulp the plankton organisms will be
impacted from the hydraulic shock (pressure difference), mechanical disruption of the plankton is also
possible, as well as a thermal impact.
Adverse impact factor upon the hydrobionts will also be the acoustical effects, generated by the pipeline
construction, for they may disturb spawning and trophic migrations of fish.
During construction and operation of the pipelines, emergency situations excluded, no significant inputs
of the pollutants into the water environment is expected (see section 4.3 of this volume). At the same time
increasing of the general antropogenic impact upon the offshore section of the pipeline may result in the
deterioration of the toxicologic situation, first because of the input of the oil products and other pollutants
into the water column, which is caused by the increased water traffic and amount of working
mechanisms, used in the hydro-technical activities.
Impact on the macrophytes in the littoral zone. Besides of direct loss of the macrophytes meadows in
the littoral zone of Portovaya Bay during the construction of the pipelines the adverse impact of the
hydro-technical works on the remaining meadows are expected. In particular the investigations conducted
on the certain sections of the east part of the Gulf of Finland have testify that the higher aquatic plants
species, belonging to the submerge ecotype are very sensitive to the long term effect of the increased
water turbidity [372]. Even plants in the coenosis located on the relatively lesser turbidity that survived
during the season when the hydro-technical works were carried out, did not put out the next year. That is
explained by the fact that the suspension, settling on the leaves, prevented photosynthesis, and the root
system of the plants did not have during the wintering enough amount of nutrients, necessary for the
vegetation begin the next year.

Page 308

Impact on the plankton communities. The photosynthetic component of plankton - planktonic algae
community is exposed during the hydro-technical works complicated and multidirectional impact. On the
one hand the suspension penetrating the water column impacts the optical properties of water, reducing
the size of the euphotic zone and adversely impacts the photosynthetic activity of the planktonic algae. On
the other hand, the hydro-technical activities contribute to the input of the different substances, including
biogenic, from the benthic sediments into the water, which can be stimulating factor for the plankton
algae growth.
Reaction of the phytoplankton on the increased water turbidity at the sections where during the
construction stage the hydro-technical works are performed can exhibit according to several criteria.
Reducing general taxonomic diversity.
Change of the general structure of the plankton algae community. As a rule, the amount
of species having dominated before commencement of works (in the Gulf of Finland,
mostly from the group of cyanobacteria) decreases essentially after the start, population
of benthic species, of diatoms of a bigger size, and besides of that of cryptophyte
flagellates rises, the latter usually indicate the organic pollution.
At the dredging section all indicators of the plankton abundance (population, biomass), as
a rule, drop, in the areas of rock dumping after its disposal these indicators grow.
Apparently in the latter case the "fertilization effect" takes place due to the input of the
biogens from the dumped soil into the water.
In the area of dredging works the "a" chlorophyl concentrations is normally lower, and
the content of auxiliary pigments: "b", "c" as well as carotinoids, on the contrary, is
relatively high. The recorded fact speaks for the decreasing of the physiological activity
of phytoplankton in the dredging area. In the rock-dumping areas high concentrations of
the "a" chlorophyll are recorded, relatively lower concentrations of carotinoids, which
testify high physiological activity of the phyto-plankton and its stimulation by the
biogens, that enter the water together with the dumped soil.
The phytoplankton suppression in the dredging area and its stimulation in the dumping
area is confirmed through the dynamics of the values of day assimilation number (DAN daily specific chlorophyll production), which characterises the photosynthetic activity of
phytoplankton - minimal values are most frequently recorded in the dredging area, the
maximal are in the rock-dumping area.

Page 309

Alteration of the functional characteristics are often tracked also by the assessment of the
plankton primary production - in the zones of the increased turbidity at the dredging
works it drops significantly, in the rock-dumping areas it grows.
In general in the area of hydro-technical works decrease of the functional activity of phytoplankton and
suppression of the photosynthesis process are expected because of the increased water turbidity, and in
the rock dumping area - stimulation of the phytoplankton by the additional biogen batches is expected,
because the biogens enter the water together with the dumped soil. During water intake for different
technical needs complete death of phytoplankton is inevitable.
The most part of plankton organisms (zooplankton) are the filter-feeders. With increased concentration of
mineral suspension in the water they die because of consumption of "heavy" mineral particles, which
eliminates buoyancy of the animals. Mineral suspension blocks gill apparatus, hurts it and the plankton
animals die from asphyxia. Investigations of plankton in the areas of hydro-technical works accompanied
with the increasing of the water turbidity demonstrated that always the abundance of the zooplankton falls
(in spite of masking effect of the horizontal transportation), injured and dead animals are being recorded.
The longer is the period of the works, the more apparent is the impact (Kaygorodov, 1979; Gorbunova,
1986; Susloparova, 2002; Lavrentieva, 2002). As a result the important member of the food web of the
aquatic object drops out, and as a result its fish stocks decline. While filtering organic suspension from
the water zooplankton besides of that plats a crucial role in the processes of self cleaning of the aquatic
object. Suppression of its activity and death drastically lowers the self cleaning capacity of the aquatic
object. Recruitment of the plankton coenosis normally is completed a year after activities cease.
Thus by the construction works on the pipelines number of significant alterations of the structure and
quantitative characteristics is expected.
In the zone of increased turbidity the number of all kinds of taxonomic groups of
zooplankton takes place (up to 45-60% from the base level). The main losses suffer
normally the sedimentators and filter-feeders, maximal losses - armorless rotifer (from the
Synchaeta, Polyarthra, Conochilus groups) a little less - small cladoceras (Bosmina,
Chydorus, Daphnia groups). The most resistant to the increased turbidity impacts of the
water are the copepods. Respectively the "predator" forms increases and the "peaceful"
forms decreases in the communities.
In the plankton composition the benthic forms appear, such as representatives of

Harpacticoida (Canthocamptus sp.) suborder, fam. Chydoridae (species from the Alona,
Rhynchotalona, Pleuroxus genera), fam. Macrothricidae (Ilyocriptus trigonellus).

Page 310

Increasing of the average size of the individual of community, and as a result - more
significant decrease of the population characteristics in relation to biomass characteristics.
In the dredging areas the population and biomass of the zooplankton falls in comparison
with the basic, normally, from 2 to dozens, and in some cases hundred times. The
brightest manifestations of that are recorded in the autumn period against natural
decreasing of quantitative characteristics of the community.
In the dumping zone by the sampling immediately after disposal and directly at its section
nearly 100% death of zooplankton may be recorded. Due to constant horizontal
transportation of the water masses this effect will be temporary. After sedimentation of
the coarse suspension at dumping section higher values of zooplankton population and
biomass in comparison with neighbor sections may be recorded. The reason for that may
be supposedly the outbreak in the phytoplankton growth which causes zooplankton
migration to the food reserves.
Operation of some mechanisms (e.g. suction dredges) presupposes water intake from the
aquatic object. In this case the zooplankton residing in the abstracted water will be
impacted adversely. Zooplankton will die in the water intake system because of
mechanical disruptions and hydraulic shock.
Impact on the zoobenthic communities. In the increased turbidity zone both in the area of dredging
works and in the dumping area the amount of zoobenthic species drops drastically. Molluscs and the
secondary water animals, such as chironomids die first. In some cases at the seabed sections where the
maximal suspended mineral concentrations were recorded as a result of the works, only oligochaeta
survived. In the zones of increased turbidity zoobenthic population as a rule never differs significantly
from the back-ground due to the fact, that mostly the large-sized but inconsiderable in number zoobenthic
organisms die, the biomass drops to 5-15 times by that.
Discussing about the expected reaction of benthic fauna on the increased turbidity of the water along the
route by the pipeline construction first shall be stressed that its species composition in the east part of the
Gulf of Finland is basically rather poor.
Besides of the death of benthic organisms directly at the hydro-technical work site significant part of
them will appear in the increased turbidity zone and the precipitated on the seabed mineral suspension
will bury existing biotope of the animals, which as a rule will be accompanied with complete or partial
death of the latter. Significant part of benthic invertebrates feeds on precipitated from the water column
organic suspension. High concentrations of mineral suspension will aggravates their feeding and
breathing. Impacts mechanisms of the mineral suspension upon the zoobenthic organisms is analogous to
that of zooplankton, the result is similar: benthic biocoenoses are being ruined. In the high water turbidity
zone multiple decrease of the amount of benthic organisms is expected. Consequences of that for the fish
stocks and the ecosystem in general are similar to those by the death of zooplankton. The recruitment of
the benthic coenosis will proceed slowly with losses of some species and decreasing (up to 60% from the
baseline value) of the biomass of benthos. In the North-west region the average time of the zoobenthos
recruitment is 3-5 years.

Page 311

Impact on the ichthyofauna. The planned hydro-technical works and their consequences will impact on
ichthyofauna representatives directly and indirectly. Excavation works (dredging and trenching) and
ground placement on the sea area (trenches back-filling, rock-dumping) cause changes in hydrochemical
and physical properties of water environment (washing the contaminants out of the ground, water gas
performance degradation and turbidity increasing etc. These factors impact fish directly causing low gas
exchange level, being biostatic for fish. The mostly unfavourable it impacts on early stages of their
ontogenesis. In addition, in the area of construction activities foraging organisms productivity decreases,
and in case of sea area irrevocable seizure the spawning and feeding areas decrease [146].
One of the main negative factors is water turbidity increasing. At high concentration of mineral slurry due
to breathing and feeding processes abnormality (availability of food decreases) and also direct traumatic
impact, fish growth rate decreases. In addition, spawning efficiency decreases, unfavourable conditions
for fish eggs and larvae are created increasing their death. Because of high water turbidity for natural
movements and migrations, availability of food decreases. In the regions of conducting of hydro-technical
work the decreased numbers of fish, species composition changes and dimensional structure of their
populations are recorded. Fish eggs and young larvae are the most sensitive to the negative impact [154].
Acoustic impact. The noise of working mechanisms during construction impacts on fish behaviour; it
causes violation of their natural movements (spawning and food migrations, descent of youth etc.)
Study of character and effect of each of factors below separately to ichthyocenosis needs scaled long-term
researches.
Fish habitation conditions describe not only ichthyofauna fullness, its species composition and structure,
but influence on ichthyocenosis consistency level. Essential fluctuation of main parameters of coastal and
shallow-water zones ichthyocenosis are conditioned by significant mixing of coastal waters in surf zone,
small number of shelters and low degree of overgrowing by higher aero-aquatic flora. Only fish
population tied in his life cycle to local biotopes has the consistency level high enough and permits
estimate the consequences of impact of foreign factors, particularly of dredging activities, with high
degree of confidence.
Local changes of fish habitation density upon anthropogenic factor are usually accompanied with changes
in ichthyofauna species composition. It should be noted that as the situation with fish distribution density,
the species structure season changes are more meaningful then differences depending on dredging
activities impact to ichthyofauna.

Page 312

On the other hand, structural parameters analyse of community of fish found both inside the increased
turbidity zone and outside it, permits to find substantial alteration in species composition of
ichthyocenosis taking place under the action of increased concentration of suspended matter. The sense of
the changes is in drastic reduction of number and biomass of family Percidae (perch, pope, pike perch)
with relatively stable condition of bream population. At conduction the works in shallow water, density of
roach and bleak most commonly decreases while dredging at deeper sections are accompanied with
growth of this species biomass number in contamination zone.
It was noted before that the region of planned construction maritime area of offshore gas pipeline Nord
Stream is one of the most productive areas of eastern part of the Gulf of Finland and is an active fishing
zone. In near-shore and deep sections of examined region fishing is performed predominately in spring
and autumn periods. Planned construction including conducting of hydro technical work in the area will
negatively impact on fish stocks in two main fields:
indirect - through decreasing of food supply of fish,
direct - decreasing of effective spawning, interruption of fish natural movements.
4.4.2.
Operational phase

Main sources of impact during the normal (accident-free) operation of the pipeline
takeover of area of the bottom occupied by the pipeline and volume of water displaced by
it as these areas are excluded from aquatic organisms living zone.
local and insufficient change of chemical composition of the water at gas leakage from
the pipeline by means of diffusion or as bubbles at anode protection metals transition into
dissolved form.
There will be virtually no impact on water biota during the normal (accident-free) operation of the
pipeline.

Page 313

4.4.3.

Impact sources at pipeline dismantling will be similar to the impact at construction stage.
Impact on water biota at pipeline dismantling will be comparable to the impact at construction stage both
by space and time. Specific description of the impact and losses calculation will be performed after
pipeline dismantling project decisions development and taking into account environment conditions
changed during the pipeline operation (50 years).

Page 314

4.5.
Impact on avifauna
4.5.1.
Construction period

The key species main list comprises:
physical fields actions (thermic, acoustic, electromagnetic etc.) and animals disturbance
[272];
changes of physical and chemical properties of animals areas (see section 4.3 of this
volume);
changes of biotic components of the area (see section 4.3 of this volume) that acts
indirectly through change in condition and availability of food supply;
change in social situation (human presence increase and associated factors including
The main factor of impact on avifauna within the construction period is disturbance of animals by
working vessels and machinery.
Use of various types of machinery may also be connected with anthropogenic contaminations connected
with substances from fuel combustion emissions.
Actions of all these factors are interconnected and in the end create complex impact which will result in
avoidance by birds of the works area. However it should be noted that the impact by its character will
have temporary and local consequences.
Impact on birds during pipeline laying apart from the construction working mode may be connected with
incidents. During construction the most characteristic are nautical accidents with vessels (grounding,
collision in sea), fires and oil spillage during incidents with vessels (chapter 5 of this volume).
4.5.1.2.Impact assessment
In assessment of construction work impact on avifauna it should be taken into account that the region is a
shipping hotspot (see "Socioeconomic conditions" section). So the birds that inhabited this area are to
some degree adapted to noise and vibration impact that arises due to the waterborne vehicles movement.
As it appears from the data adduced in section 4.7 of this volume, noise will be perceived by birds in 2 - 3
km radius.
Thus, maximal impact on avifauna will be shown at a distance below up to 0.5 km from the place of the
works; at a distance from 0.5 km to 1 km strong impact will appear, at a distance 1 - 2 km the impact on
avifauna will be moderate and at a distance from 2 to 3 km the impact on avifauna will be minor.

Page 315

In the result the impact of the construction taking place in the sea the breeding success decrease or radical
change of spatial structure of nesting population of island avifauna and as a consequence reducing of its
numbers and productivity is unlikely. Mainly by the case that the islands are distant from the planned
pipeline, namely: Bolshoy Fiskar - 2.90 km and Gogland - 2.70 km, and others at the distance over 4 km.
The exception is Maly Fiskar located 0.94 km from the proposed Nord Stream route) The island avifauna
will be subject to strong impact that be expressed as reduction of densities of the birds nesting on the
shore, several individuals will probably use adjacent islands or coast of Gulf of Finland for breeding, i.e.
areas very distanced from the work area and not having strong noise emission. It cannot be excluded that
in the year of the works some birds may nest in north part of Maly Fiskar, as it is more distant from the
place of the works as opposed to the south one.
Construction of the marine part of gas pipeline will impact on spring staging sites for waterfowl in the
area between Berezovye Islands and Portovaya Bay (see Nature conservation atlas of the Russian part of
the Gulf of Finland and also descriptions of spring migrations in section 3.6 of this book. The total
number of migrants staying on this area is nearly 800 thousand individuals in spring and 2 to 2.5 million
at autumn. As the result of construction works displacement of part of migrating waterfowl staying in the
works area, to adjacent parts of Vyborg Bay area is planned, whereas the construction works will not
impact on the dominant (north-east) direction of spring migration flow and timeframes of migration. In
the autumn migration period the birds will also avoid staging near construction works area, and will use
the adjacent parts of Gulf of Finland area for staging and feeding.
Oil spills on water surface generated as the result of incidents pose the most danger for migrating birds
forming aggregations on sea areas. Feathering is easy contaminated with fuel oil and loses its waterproof
features and filling with water and fuel oil does not dry for a long time. Consequently the feathering
becomes heavy, birds loose their ability to fly and die in the result of hypothermia. Moreover, petroleum
products accumulate in birds organism leading to strong poisoning and in some case reproductive
abnormalities. From the aforementioned it follows that oil spills on water surface may considerably
influence number of migrating birds and in some cases affect the success of breeding of these birds. In
order to minimise oil spills at the construction works, compliance with safety and equipment operation
rules is necessary.
During the normal (accident-free) working mode and, provided all environmental protection measures are
taken, technological pollution will be minimal and will not significantly affect birds .
Generally the impacts during construction will be short-term and reversible (disturbance, water turbidity,
temporal withdrawal and breach of habitats). Nevertheless even in complying with all environmental
protection measures the negative impact on avifauna during construction is inevitable. In this connection
calculation of damages for birds is provided in the project material (see article 8, v.8, book 1, part 2).

Page 316

4.5.2.
Operational phase
During the incident free operation of Nord Stream sea pipeline its influence on the environment provided
the actual technological rules, regulations and environmental protection requirements are being obliged
will not result in changes in ecological environment in the gas pipeline area.
During the operational phase birds in the pipeline area will be encountered in quantity typical for natural
environment in this region. During pipeline operational phase, in working mode, density of gulls and
ducks virtually will not differ from their usual density in the sea.
4.5.3.
4.5.3.1. Sources of impact

Impact sources at pipeline dismantling will be similar to the impact at construction stage, namely:
disturbance of animals by working ships and mechanisms.
changes of physical and chemical and also bioproductive properties of habitat;
through anthropogenic contaminations connected with substances from fuel combustion

emissions, spillages of fuels and lubricants.
Impact on avifauna will be comparable with construction stage and will be expressed firstly in avoidance
by birds of the working area. Impact on avifauna during decommissioning of the pipeline will be
described in more detail within the relevant project.

Page 317

4.6.
Impact on marine mammals
4.6.1.
Construction period

The sources on impact on marine mammals will be first of all the work of machines and mechanisms
accompanied with noise disturbing marine mammals and forcing them to avoid working areas.
Main list of the key types of impact comprises:
physical fields actions (thermic, acoustic, electromagnetic etc.);
changes of physical and chemical properties of animals areas (see section 4.3 of this
volume);
disturbance of animals by working ships and mechanisms.
changes of biotic components of habitat (see section 4.4 of this volume) that acts
indirectly through change in condition and availability of food supply;
change in social situation (human presence increase and associated factors including
So, impact on marine mammals at implementation of planned activity may be expressed in their
immigration from the areas with noise effects, decreased foraging success because of feeding base
shortening (fish and lesser macrozoobentos) and death in the result of poaching.
Impact on marine mammals may be strong at the accident situations accompanied with environment
contamination (see article 5 of this volume).
Impact on marine mammals assessment and based on it losses calculation were performed on the basis of
modern information on marine mammals populations condition in Russian part of the Gulf of Finland.
Unofrtunately, modern data on number and distribution of marine mammals in Russian waters of the Gulf
of Finland are rather scant. The sea and coastal area surveys in the region of planned construction that
have been performed during the investigation allow to state absence of stable population of harbour seal
in the Russian part of the Gulf of Finland and the stay character of this species as occasional. Hence, it
seems difficult to predict impact of this pinnipeds species. For similar reason (occasional character of
stay) impact on cetaceans in the region of pipeline construction is assessed as minor.
At the process of the project implementation the impact on Baltic ringed seal and grey seal inhabiting in
area within the pipeline route will be insufficient. Both of the species are rare and protected in the region
in question and within the last years their number has shown a sharp decline. They are included in Red
Book of the Russian Federation and Red Book of Leningrad Region.

Page 318

Ringed seal as far as water warms leaves mainland shore and in the summer uses for rookeries small
islands and reefs, so, its summer population is rather dispersed and is not permanently connected with any
section of the shore, in this season ringed seal may perform local migrations. The character of ringed seal
staying in the works region lets predict insufficient impact on its population at performing the works.
The timings of construction of the offshore part of the pipeline (1st June - 1st November) are chosen not
to coincide with pupping period when the youth can be significantly damaged.
Grey seal uses Halikarti island situated 5-6 km from pipeline route for summer rookeries. This is an
important part of habitat used by seals every year at movement time. Taking into account distance from
the island to the pipeline route, it is possible to predict that there will be no impact on seals using the
island for rookeries, moreover, in summer period and in movement period the seals are not connected
with definite section and are less subject to local impacts. Nevertheless, to provide the grey seal herd
integrity on Halikarti island it is recommended not to perform construction works near the island in May
and July (moulting period).
To conclude:
The planned pipeline route virtually does not cross the main migration routes of ringed seal and grey seal
(see maps in Appendix to chapter 2 of this volume). Taking into account local character of impact of
pipeline laying works and existing navigational situation (in conditions of which ringed seal and grey seal
inhabit) as well as seals number and distributions in Gulf of Finland, it may be stated that pipeline
construction will have no significant negative impact on seasonal migrations and feeding of seals in the
Gulf of Finland.
On the basis of the surveys made in 2006, including the special seal registrations performed by Biological
research institute specialists (in the days of marine mammals international registration 28.05 02.06.2006) from the shipboard following the planned pipeline route it may be concluded that in summer
period in the Gulf of Finland, within the area adjacent to the planned pipeline route, the seals virtually do
not occur with the exception of large rookery on Halikarti island (110 - 130 individuals), situated at the
distance 6 km prom the planned pipeline route, but not having permanent character (the herd uses various
islands for rookeries in the region).
Data establishing presence of seals in Portovaya Bay region in summer period are absent.
In winter period grey seal in Russian sea area of Gulf of Finland is solitary (see section 3.7), and ringed
seal is predominantly near the coastline where makes dens and pups on ice. According to the information
available (see section 3.7) in winter period the basic mass of seals is situated to the south and east of
planned pipeline route.

Page 319

The main places of seals rookeries are situated in central and south sector of Russian part of the Gulf of
Finland being on considerable distance from the planned pipeline route and will not be impacted as the
result of planned works.
Due to existing probability of ships meeting with marine mammals the ships will be equipped with
special instructions for the crew on how to handle such situations. The directions forbid purposeful
pursuit, frightening away, feeding and any kind of hunting these animals.
To minimize the impact on marine mammals the timing of construction of the offshore part of the
pipeline is chosen so that the possibility of death of youth and pupping females of seal and destruction of
seal dens situated on ice is excluded. The sea works will be performed from June to November, i.e. within
the season when sea is free of ice.
As the result of analysis of research material and archival data about the modern state of cetaceans in the
Russian part of the Gulf of Finland it is possible to conclude that all 4 cetacean species inhabiting the
Baltic sea are currently absent in the water area of Russian part of the Gulf of Finland or are encountered
here exclusively incidentally. Incidental nature of this group of animals stay within the pipeline
construction area does not allow forecasting impact on them.
Thus, the data presented as the results of engineering and environmental investigations and sparse literary
data on number and seasonal distribution of pinnipeds in the Russian part of the Gulf of Finland allow
predicting insignificant impact on this group of marine mammals at the planned pipeline construction
period.
4.6.2.
Operational phase

In operational phase sources of impacts on marine mammals are non-existent as during the pipelines
operation phase no significant impact of physical are expected (see section 4.7 of this volume).
There will be no impact on marine mammals during the normal (accident-free) operation of the pipeline.
Impact in accidental situations is examined in article 5 v.8, book 1, part 1.

Page 320

4.6.3.
Impact on marine mammals at pipeline dismantling will be comparable to the impact at construction stage
both by space and time. Specific description of the impact and calculation of losses will be performed
after development of decisions on the pipeline dismantling project and taking into account environment
conditions changed during the pipeline operation (50 years).

Page 321

4.7.
Impact of physical factors
4.7.1.
Sources and types of impact
Harmful physical impacts on environment include, first of all, noise, vibration, electromagnetic
radiations.
As noise considered any untidy, undesirable sound or totality of sounds preventing from perception of
useful signals, breaking the silence, impacting harmfully or irritantly on human body, decreasing capacity
for work and/or being disturbance factor for animals. Noise impact on environment is characterized by
bandwidth and acoustic vibration amplitude.
Vibration is a kind of mechanical oscillations spread in solid medium. Vibration affecting biological
objects has dual character. In some cases they stimulate vital processes, in other cases they depress them,
cause baseless fright, failure of nerve, inadequate response on surrounding environment.
Vessels park (towboats, pipe-laying vessels, tankers, supply vessels, etc.) should be noted as one of the
main sources of noise and vibrations at construction phases as their main motors and propellers generate
underwater noise, whereas the flue-pipes of main motors ventilation and air conditioning systems, bow
and stern swashes of vessel on pure water generate air noise.
At underwater crossing operation the source of acoustic impact is gas transport in the pipeline.
Electromagnetic fields impact on marine biota and humans. Fish is one of the most sensitive to
electromagnetic fields. Threshold of sensitivity for it is fewV/m. Impact of electromagnetic fields on
neurohumoral system cause metabolic disorder, sensitize organism. The effect of electromagnetic fields is
not studied in full-scale just as has not been studied the effect of harmful factors complex acting
simultaneously with electromagnetic fields.
Normalization of electromagnetic field intensity with respect to human is carried out depending on
frequency: with frequency increasing the admissible values of intensity decrease.
The sources of electromagnetic fields are waterborne vehicles equipped with radio stations and also other
sources - radio communication and broadcasting, microwave radiation used in radar stations, infrared
radiation from heating elements and tools, ultraviolet radiation, video terminals and computers.

Page 322

4.7.2.
Assessment of impact of physical factors
The route of offshore section of Russian sector of Nord Stream pipeline passes through an area of high
shipping traffic so the ecosystems are adapted to the high background levels of physical factors (noise,
vibration, electromagnetic radiation).
Noise impact on water ecosystems depends on background noise level of water area, determined by
hydrometeorological conditions and depths, as well as the characteristics of noise distribution, damping
out and dissipation under certain conditions. In addition, background noise of the water area is determined
by the technical equipment and other works in the vicinity of the pipeline.
The sea constitutes a rather noisy environment by its very nature. Natural background noise is largely
linked to the sea conditions. The results of the multiannual hydrographic surveys indicate that background
sea noise has a tendency to rise with increasing wind speed and wave height. Broadband underwater
background noise levels and noise levels in predominant frequencies caused by the artificial nature of the
various activities associated with shipping, engineering works and directly by industrial activities during
the laying of offshore pipeline are presented in Table 4.7-1. In addition, there are noise data to compare
with other activities.
Table 4.7-1
Broadband underwater background noise levels and noise levels in predominant frequencies
Source levels
Source
In predominant frequencies
Broadband
dB re 1 Pa
Hz
dB re 1 Pa
Background noise, wind < 1 knot
Wind 11-16 knots
Wind 22-27 knots
Intensive ship traffic
Insignificant ship traffic
Outlying ship traffic
Seismic airguns
Supply vessels
With guiding headpiece of ship propeller
With accessorial propeller on ship nose
Large tanker
Supertanker
216-259
170
160
180
186
190-205
100
100
100
50
50
50
50-100
20-100
60
97
102
105
86
81
125
70
177
175
The main types of noise impact on marine ecosystems are:

Page 323

underwater noise of vessels caused by ship engines, and propellers;
underwater noise of vessels caused by dredger;
air noise of vessels caused by gas-freeing of main engines, ventilation and air
conditioning systems, nose and aft breaking wave on clear water.
In assessing the noise impact on the ecosystems it should be noted that the marine biota well perceives
sounds in the frequency range about 500 - 600 Hz. Above these frequencies the sensitiveness drops
rapidly. Frequencies that exceed 1.5 - 2.0 kHz are not actually accepted. Therefore, noises over 1 kHz
have virtually no negative impact on marine biota.
Spectrum comparison for the deep and shallow waters shows that above 500 Hz the noise levels in the
coastal areas are 5-10 dB higher than in deep-water areas (see Figure 4.7-1).
The sound pressure level of the spectrum, dB relative to background value of 0.0002 dyne/cm2
Frequency (Hz)
Figure 4.7-1.
Sea noise spectrum
1 - border of the prevalent noise, 2 - the noise from the bubbles and splashing depending on the wind, 3 low-frequency dependence of the wind in very shallow areas, 4 - serious atmospheric deposition, 5 noises caused by intensive ship traffic, 6 - noises caused by usual ship traffic in shallow areas, 7 - noises
caused by the normal traffic in deep waters, 8 - thermal noise, 9 - general characteristics of noise from
earthquakes and explosions, 10 - extrapolation.

Page 324

I.
Intermittent and local impact: 11 - earthquakes and explosions, 12 - biological phenomena, 13 atmospheric deposition, 14 - ship traffic, industrial activities, 15 - sea ice.
II.
Prevalent noise: 16 - pressure fluctuations due to turbulent phenomena, 17 - ship traffic, 18 - bubbles and
splash (mixing of surface layers), 19 - surface waves (pressure impact of second-order), 20 - background associated
with seismic events. Horizontal arrows indicate the approximate frequency range of of different sources impact, the
blue figures indicate wind strength (Beaufort Scale).
According to survey data in the performing of similar projects the potential negative impact of noise will
occur at a distance from a vessel in which within the range of frequencies up to 1 kHz the noise levels
from a vessel will exceed more than 20 dB the natural background noise in the water area. The
environmentally dangerous area around a noise source is determined by levels of background noise of
water area, and by the features of hydrology and bathymetry of route section. The noise level is reduced
to background values at a distance of 10-12 km from the construction sites. The noise will be perceived
by animals in a 2 3 km radius.
The impact of acoustic fields and vibrations on marine biota during the construction of the pipeline will
be local and episodic in nature, will depend on the animal species, season of the year and reflected in
animals leaving from the source of noise.
During the normal operation of the pipeline, the impacts on marine biota are minor.
The people of Bolshoy Bor area located on the coast of the Gulf of Finland at a distance of approximately
4 km from the site of construction works of Nord Stream offshore pipeline may also be a recipient of the
acoustic impacts.
Acoustic level dB (A) at the calculation point in the construction site, a subject to noise impact due to
vessels operations in water area is defined by the formula (SNiP 2303-2003 Protection from noise):
where
sound power level of noise source, dB(). The maximum level of noise from the propellers of
ships does not exceed 180 dB(). Given the noise dampening in water column the noise level
from vessels does not exceed 140 dB();
spatial angle (in steradians) of noise emission, 10lg = 8 dB();

distance, m, from acoustic point of noise source to the estimated point (the nearest residential
area), r = 4000 m;
amendment, dB (A), to the absorption of sound in air, Ar = 0.96 dB();
increasing the sound level due to sound reflection from large surfaces (ground, wall, corner of
two walls), located at a distance from the estimated point of no more than 0.1 r, dB (A), AL
= 0;
additional reduction in sound level, dB (A), by the elements of the environment, LC = 0;

Page 325

sound level decrease in dBA by strips of green planting, as there is a forest between the
construction site and the residential area, the maximum value is adopted
accordance with SNIP 23-03-2003 Protection from noise.
= 12 dB(A) in
Predicted noise level in the residential area Bolshoy Bor due to vessels operations in water area of the
Bay Portovaya is:
L1A = 140 - 8 - 20lg4000 - 0.96 + 0 - 0 -12 = 46.6 dB().
The maximum allowable noise level for residential areas in accordance with the CH 2.2.4/2.1.8.562-96 is
60 dB at night and 70 dB in the daytime. Consequently, the noise level due to vessels operation for a
residential area is not higher than health and safety rules and standards.
Heat exposure. It is expected that the gas temperature after the compressor station in Vyborg is high (4060 C), which may cause an increase of water and sediment temperature around the pipeline sector close
to the Russian coast, and the possible impact on the marine environment of the Gulf of Finland. In order
to assess the heat around the projected pipeline to the marine environment, a mathematical modelling of
hydrodynamic processes (computational hydrodynamics of continuous environments) was carried out, as
set out in the report of Ramboll company Offshore Pipeline through the Baltic Sea. Memo no. 4.3r.
Temperature and difference)) 2007. Modelling was carried out for pipeline sections freely resting on the
seabed, and for the pipeline lowered into the seabed. As a result it was found that the thermal impact of
the pipeline on the environment is insignificant. Nevertheless, the temperature difference between the
pipeline and the environment along the first ten km of the route is 25-35 C depending on the initial
temperature of gas at the pipeline inlet.
When modelling the temperature effects on crossing the coastline near Vyborg, the following initial
conditions are adopted: the inlet gas temperature: 60 C, water temperature: (-2)C, sediment
temperature:- 0C, and velocity of sea current - 0.1 m/sec. It is a slight increase of temperature (up to
0,5C) in adjacent layers of water that is predicted in these conditions for pipeline sections freely lying on
the seabed near the coastline crossing in the vicinity of Vyborg. Whereas the temperature impact shows at
a distance of 0.5-1 m from the pipeline. The temperature of the sediments around the lowered into the
seabed pipeline is slightly increased in the 10-20 cm layer around the pipe, and directly in its vicinity at a
distance of several centimetres the maximum increase of temperature can reach 40 C.
Along the entire route of the Nord Stream gas pipeline in the Russian waters in accordance with the
results of calculations a slight temperature impact on the environment will be observed: temperature
difference between the Nord Stream pipeline and the environment at a distance of 10 km from the
beginning of the pipeline on the Russian coast is (depending on the adopted initial temperature) 30-40
C; at a distance of 20 km - 25-30 C; at a distance of 30 km - 18-22 C; and at a distance of 40 km - 1225 C.
Such a slight but steady increase of water temperature will have a positive impact on the marine biota.

Page 326

4.8.
Impact from Industrial and Consumption Wastes
From temporal point of view, all sources of environmental impact can be classified as short-term. They
are typical for the period of construction and installation works.
The impact on the environment from wastes generated during construction of the pipeline is minimal,
since all the waste refers to non-fugative types.
The impact of construction and installation work is reversible, as at the end of pipeline laying the water
area would no longer be exposed to equipment impacts, and degraded ecosystems would be expected to
recover.
All places of temporary storage of waste are in line with Russian environmental requirements.
4.8.1.
Characteristic of object as a source of waste generation
Under construction
When carrying out pipeline construction works the industrial and consumption wastes accumulate during
the preparation works, and directly during the construction period (running in the pipeline joints on the
shore, welding pipe within the water area).
During the construction and installation works will be produced the following types of waste:
Non-sorted scrap ferrous metal;
steel welding electrode stubs and residues;
waste from bitumen in hard form;
waste from the use of vessels

discharge wastewaters, etc.).
(TBT, food waste, operating costs, household
The reducing of the amount of industrial and consumption wastes to the minimum possible level by the
use of modern equipment and advanced technologies is stipulated in the design of offshore pipeline.
Operational phase
In normal operation of the pipeline the accumulation of any industrial and consumption wastes is not
planned, except for possible repair works, which are not considered in this project.
The waste would not be accumulated if implementing the variant of the pipeline conservation.
In complete removal of the pipeline the list of wastes will be similar to the list of wastes in construction,
namely:
Non-sorted scrap ferrous metal;

Page 327

steel welding electrode stubs and residues;
waste from bitumen in hard form;
waste from the use of vessels

discharge wastewaters, etc.).
(TBT, food waste, operating costs, household
Due to the fact that for the removal of the pipeline a separate project would be created, the calculation and
substantiation of the volume of wastes will be produced in this project.
4.8.2. Calculation and grounds of waste generation volume

Wastes' amounts, generated during construction works, are determined by reference to relative quantity of
wastes's generation, or to normal construction loss in corresponding materials (except of the shop-built
pieceworks) for the whole construction period, with calculating method.
The initial information used for evaluation of the waste quantity is data on the volumes of required
materials:
waste = Mi Dpot
for: i - the volume of required material for whole construction period
Dpot - relative degree of waste's generation, i.e. normal construction loss (%), used in accordance with
"Reference Documentation on Relative Degrees of Most Important Industrial and Consumption Wastes'
Generation", "The Material Consumption in Common Construction Works", "The Material Consumption
in Special Construction Works".
In the design of waste generation limits projects the following documents were used:
"Reference Documentation on Relative Degrees of Most Important Industrial and

Consumption Wastes' Generation", Moscow, 1996;
"Collection of Relative Degrees of Industrial and Consumption Wastes' Generation",

Moscow, 1999;
RDS 82-202-96 "Rules of developing and adopting standards labour organisation losses
and material waste during construction";
RDS 153-39.4-115-01 "Relative standard degrees of waste generation during construction

and operation of production facilities OAO "AK "TransNeft"
For more detailed information on evaluation of waste generation's amounts please refer Volume 8
"Environment Protection", Book 1 "Offshore Section", Part 2, and Section 7. Waste amounts are shown in
Section 4.8-4 of this Volume.

Page 328

4.8.3.
Determination of a hazard class for wastes
Assignment of hazardous wastes to the hazard class for environment was approved in accordance with
Article 14 of the Federal Law "On Industrial and Consumption Wastes", "Criteria of the assignment of
hazardous wastes to the hazard class for environment" (MNR RF Order No. 511 dated 15 June 2001),
"Federal Classification Registry of Wastes" with appendix (MNR RF Order No. 663 dated 30 July 2003
and MNR RF Order No. 786 dated 2 December 2002). The list of wastes with hazard class and code
noted by the FKKO is shown in the table 4.8-1.
Wastes are divided into 5 hazard classes with the magnitude of an impact on the environment:
Table 4.8-1
Hazard classes of wastes
Hazard class of wastes
Hazard degree of wastes
1st class of hazard

2nd class of hazard
3rd class of hazard
4th class of hazard
5th class of hazard
Extremely hazardous
Highly hazardous
Moderately hazardous
Lowly hazardous
Almost non-hazardous
Hazard class of wastes was identified with one of the following methods:
based on the last number of code by FKKO;
based on the hazard degree of wastes's components (meth. 2001) (MNR RF Order No.
511 dated 15 June 2001 "On the confirmation of the criteria of the assignment of
hazardous wastes to the hazard class for environment");
based on "A temporary classification of toxic industrial wastes and methodological

recommendations for identification of the wastes class of toxicity" Moscow, 1987,
Ministry of Health of the USSR, State committee for science and technology of the USSR
(meth. 1987);
by analogy in "A temporary classification of toxic industrial wastes" (analogy).

Table 4.8-2
List of wastes generated during construction of the object and their hazard classes
Wastes class
of hazard to
Reference book's name
Code by FKKO
Wastes' name
the
environme nt
1
2
3
4
351 301 00 01 99 5
351 216 01 01 99 5
549 012 00 01 00 4
Ungraded scrap iron

Welding electrode remains and stubs
Solid wastes from bitumen
5
5
4
FKKO
FKKO
FKKO

Page 329

Code by FKKO
Wastes' name
1
2
912 004 00 01 00 4 Ungraded debris from amenity
rooms of organisations (except large)
912 010 01 00 00 5 Ungraded food wastes from kitchens
and public catering organizations
Operational wastes
Wastes (sediments) from dump wells
and service-utility runoffs
Wastes class of
hazard to the
environme nt
3
4
Reference book's name
FKKO
3
4
., 2001
., 2001
4
FKKO

Page 330

4.8.4.
Wastes' name
Waste types, physical and chemical features and sites of generation

Site of waste
generation
(industrial plant,
facility,
technological
operation,
machine)
2
Hazard
class of
wastes
(FKKO)
Physical and chemical features of the wastes

(composition, contents of the elements, condition,
humidity, weight etc)
Physical
Component
Dissolvability Volatility
state
content, %
in water
Wastes
quantity
(total), t
Wastes using (t)
Site,
requirements
for temporary
waste
accumulation
places
Method of
removal
(storage) of the
wastes
11
12
In containers
Specialised
organisation
Handed
over to
other
companies
9
Construction site,
deck of the pipelaying vessel
Welding electrode
Construction site,
remains and stubs
Solid wastes from
Construction site,
bitumen
Ungraded debris from Vessels, wastes
amenity rooms of
from the normal
organisations (except living activities of
large)
the staff
Solid
Insoluble
Nonfugative
2,604
2,604
Solid
Insoluble
Nonfugative
9,812
9,812
In containers
Specialised
organisation
Solid
Insoluble
Nonfugative
166,68
166,68
In containers
Specialised
organisation
Solid
Insoluble
Nonfugative
63,184
63,184
In containers
Specialised
organisation
Ungraded food
wastes from kitchens
and public catering
organizations
Solid
Scrap iron - 98%,

mechanical
admixtures - 2%
Scrap iron - 94%,
remains of daub 3%, mud - 3%
Bitumen - 98%,
mechanical
admixtures - 2%
Food wastes 4049%, paper and
board 22-30%,
polyethylene
films and
polymeric
packaging 3-6%,
glass waste 2-3%,
others 12-23%
Food wastes 80%,
others 20%
Insoluble
Nonfugative
125,810
125,810
In containers
Specialised
organisation
1
Ungraded scrap iron
Vessels, wastes
from the normal
living activities of
the staff

Page 331
Dumped in
storages, mud
depository,
landfill sites
10
-

Name
Site of waste
generation
(industrial plant,
facility,
technological
operation,
machine)
Hazard
class of
wastes
(FKKO)
Physical and chemical features of the wastes

(composition, contents of the elements, condition,
humidity, weight etc)
Physical
Component
Solubility in
Volatility
state
content, %
water
1
2
Operational wastes Maintenance of parts
and facilities
3
4
4
Solid
Wastes (sediments)
Wastes from the
from dump wells
normal living
and service-utility activities of the staff
runoffs
Liquid
5
Paint - 50%,
rags - 20%,
engine
sediments 30%
Sand, iron
oxides, oil
products 12%, water
70%,
Other - 18%
Wastes
quantity
(total), t
Wastes utilization
(t)
Handed
over
to other
companies
6
Insoluble
7
Nonfugative
8
6,288
9
6,288
Solute
Nonfugative
21 049,93
21 049,93

Page 332
Dumped
in
storages,
mud
depository,
landfill
sites
10
Site,
requirements
for
temporary
waste
accumulation
places
Method of
removal
(storage) of
the wastes
11
In containers
12
Specialised
organisation
In tanks
Delivered in
port

4.8.5.
Requirements for temporary waste accumulation places
Scrap and waste of iron are collected into containers on the pipe-laying vessel and delivered to
VtorCherMet for the subsequent disposal in port of registration or in contractor organization's harbour.
It is not allowed:
inputs of others wastes in iron waste, as it significantly hampers its further recycling.
Solid domestic waste, food waste and operational waste are collected and delivered in the port.
Used oil is collected into vessels with closable lids. The containers for used oil storage must be placed on
metal pallets.
It is not allowed:
overflow of vessels for used oil storage and its exuding;
input of water into the vessels for oil storage.
Waste in the form of rugs, polluted with oils, is collected at the point of its generation in special closed
containers complying with fire safety rules. Wastes generated on vessels are dispensed by special
organisation. Temporary accumulation places for wastes in the form of vehicles polluted with oils must
be equipped with fire fighting equipment.
It is not allowed:
input of oiled rugs in containers for SDW or any other types of wastes;
input of foreign objects into the containers for oiled rugs accumulation;
violation of fire safety rules during the waste storage.
The project includes measures to handling industrial and consumption wastes, offering to minimise the
environmental impact during construction and installation work. For more detailed information on
environmental protective measures please refer Volume 8, Book 1 "Environment Protection at the
Offshore Section", Part 2 EIA, Section 7.
Payments for industrial and consumption wastes disposal are calculated in Volume 8, Book 1
"Environment Protection at the Offshore Section", Part 2 EIA, Section 8.3.

Page 333

4.9.
Impacts on the socioeconomic environme nt
The project in general is set to have a positive impact on the situation in the socioeconomic sphere
(amongst economic impact of Europes natural gas supplies itself). Construction and, partly, operation of
the Nord Stream pipeline will result in creation of new jobs. Taking into consideration that approximately
5,000 people in the area of Vyborg search for work and 1000 are registered as unemployed, new
workplaces creation will allow to resolve the problem of employment of local people. Average wages
increase too due to appearance of relatively high paid staff. Construction of the gas pipelines will require
intensification of the local mineral extraction (sands and gravel), expansion of the food export market,
resulting positive impact on local life and economics of the region in general.
However, some negative impact on certain aspects of economic activities cannot be neglected.
Primarily the pipeline construction will entail temporary deterioration of conditions for fishery. Damage
to fishing will be composed of the damage to fish stocks by water pollution with suspended matter during
trenching operations, post-trenching, embankment construction, gravel supports for free spans elimination
installing, etc, (calculations are detailed in Chapter 4.4 of this Book, and in Chapter 5.2, Volume 8, Book
2), and of the damage, difficult to assess, resulted by obstructing fishing vessels due to temporary
exclusion of areas around lay barges. However, the fact that new substrates, resulted by construction
(pipelines' surface itself, gravel supports etc), is known due to experience of construction and operation of
pipelines in the North Sea and in other areas to be rapidly colonised by benthos, macrophytes, cannot be
neglected. This, in turn, develops favourable conditions for benthos feeding fishes, and subsequently has
a positive impact on fishing. Unfortunately there are no methods of quantitative assessment of this
positive impact.
While the Gulf of Finland is a shipping hotspot, the main traffic sailing routes are located to the south
from the projected pipeline. Therefore, establishment of safety zones around the pipe-laying vessels
(where unauthorised vessels are not permitted to enter) and safety zones along the route of the pipeline
operation (where no vessel are permitted to anchoring) will have no impact on the shipping.
During construction and commissioning (pressure test) phases, noise, producing by vessels and machines,
will have some impact on recreation in the coastal area. Due to the absence of the tourist infrastructure
objects (recreation houses, hotel complexes etc) in the area, it will impact non-organised recreation only resting Vyborg and St Petersburg's population in Bolshoy Bor. The same factors will impact on the
residency comfort of local population in the residential area (13 people), though severity of the impacts
(refer to Chapter 4.7 of this Book) suggest that the construction will not threaten the sanitaryepidemiological well-being, both local and vacationist's.

Page 334

There are some archaeological features on the bottom of the Gulf of Finland in the construction area wrecks and rigging parts. The construction corridor had been primarily surveyed with the magnetometers
method, SSS (side-scan sonar), all targets had been inspected with ROV (Remotely Operated underwater
Vehicle) in order to prevent possible impact on these cultural heritage artefacts and the monuments
destruction. Archaeological assessment, compiled by the Institute of Material Culture History of the
Russian Academy of Sciences (refer to Volume 14) has approved the status of the located objects, based
on this, Leningrad Region Culture Committee confirmed the pipeline's route provided that the distance
between each of the runs' centreline and the discovered objects should be more than 100 m, and it should
be more than 50 m in places with relief, which does not permit lager distance. The result of the
corrections of the pipeline route was that the requirement of the Culture Committee has been regarded:
distance from the pipeline route to the discovered cultural heritage artefacts is more than 100 m in all
cases, but the one where relief of the bottom did not permit to move the pipeline away more than 50 m
from a discovered wooden wreck. The confirmed pipeline route with regard to discovered objects is
shown on Fig. 4.9-1. Fig. 4.9-2 shows pipe-laying at the maximal possible distance (50 m) from the
object G_07_e173 involving complex conditions of bottom relief. During the construction of the pipeline
near the cultural heritage artefacts super-accurate pipe-laying will be employed and dredging or other
excavation works are excluded from the Project in order to decrease negative impact. The construction of
the pipeline will not therefore result in impacts on the cultural heritage artefacts. It is also important to
note that it is the surveys carried out in the framework of the Nord Stream project, that allowed to
discover previously unknown archaeological sites, which have both cultural and scientific values.

Page 335

Figure 4.9-1.
Cultural Heritage Sites with Regard to the Pipeline Route.

Page 336

Figure 4.9-2.
The Pipeline Route Correction Near the Object G_07_e173. The Radius of the
Circle is 50 m.

Page 337

4.10.
Transboundary Impacts
Analysis of the potential environmental impacts during implementation of the Nord Stream project shows
that proposed activity in general might cause only insignificant transboundary impact.
During the construction phase some transboundary effect may be caused by the following activities and
related impacts:
Atmospheric transport of substances from fuel combustion in power source of pipe-laying and support
vessels. It may cause insignificant air pollution increasing over the waters of Estonian EEZ and, less
likely, due to domination of north-easterly winds, of the Finish one. The impact of and 2 emission
on the global climate will be insignificant due to the negligible emissions' amount.
Transport with currents of the bottom sediments disturbed during excavation works.
The spreading of the suspends may be observed with a range beyond from 1 to 3 km from the sites of
intervention works. There are no reported strong currents in the construction area; Portovaya Bay, where
the main excavations will take place, is semi-enclosed area, and the distance from the area to the Finish
and Estonian EEZ boarder is much larger than even maximal possible distance of suspend transport; the
suspend transport therefore will not be observed.
When carrying out large-scale post-trenching during the fourth stage, the concentrations of 10 mg/l of
added suspension may occur at distances up to 2 km from the source. The prevailing direction of
suspended matter spreading is the direction along the pipeline route, as it coincides with the predominant
direction of currents in this area. The position of the contour line with a suspension concentration of 10
mg/l does not exceed from 300 to 500 m from the pipeline across the route. As the post trenching is up to
120 km from the route, there will be no transboundary impact.
Spillage of diesel fuel and other oil products caused by accidents (collisions etc) of the lay barge and
support vessels. Oil spillage may exceed the border of the construction area, and, if the appropriate
measures of the emergency situation's liquidation were not taken, reach the EEZ of adjoining countries.
However, it should be noted that such accidents are highly unlikely due to application of the system of
vessel movements' management in the Gulf of Finland (GOPREP), establishment of safety zones around
the pipe-laying vessels (that makes the vessels collisions with third parties unlikely), using of superior
navigation systems, using of double-hulled tankers to carry the fuel for the pipe-laying vessels, taking
appropriate measures to prevent and liquidate emergency situations (see Section 5).

Page 338

During the operational phase of the Nord Stream gas pipeline offshore section, an accidental gas release
(failure of the pipeline) is the only impact that may have a transboundary effect. Such an accident results
in natural gas streams reaching the sea surface and forming an ascending plume of gas above the surface
which mixing with the surrounding air disperses above the area (see Volume 11. Book 2. Estimates
explanatory report of the Industrial Safety Declaration). In these circumstances, a sufficiently significant
amount of the greenhouse gas methane (around 216,621.8 t) may release in atmosphere within the short
term. Although the gas cloud formed on the sea surface is inflammable, its explosion is unlikely, since
there are virtually no ignition sources on the sea surface, and ignition of the cloud by an accidental sparks
or by lightning strike is very unlikely.
It should be noted that dispersion of natural gas into the atmosphere, caused by pipeline failure, may
occur to be a significant factor, having impact on content of the greenhouse gases in the atmosphere of the
countries in the Baltic Region and on the accordance with the obligations of the Kyoto Protocol.
However, failure probability on offshore Russian section of the route is low (9.16-03), in other words,
0.9 failures are expected to happen per 100 years of pipeline operation (see G-GE-PIE-REP-10200085203-02. Risk Assessment Report Offshore).

Page 339
PITER GAS NO. 36/07-01- TEO-OOC-0801(1)-S6

NORD STREAM No. G-PE-LFR-EIA-101-08010100-06
5.
PREDICTION AND MEASURES TO PREVENT AND ERADICATE

ACCIDENT SITUATIONS
An accident is understood to be the failure of facilities and (or) technical equipment used on a dangerous
production object, an uncontrolled explosion and (or) emission of hazardous substances. Accidents can be
caused by acts of nature or be man-made. As a rule, they are of an arbitrary and random nature.
Therefore, for every potential type of accident, the probability of its occurrence can be determined, which
is linked with an understanding of the risk.
One of the main objectives of the analysis and assessment of risks is to prove that the risks are reduced to
a practically reasonable level for the object considered.
The assessment of potential danger of the planned gas pipeline in the current stage of planning was based
on the determination of the maximum threat, i.e. the identification of the accident development scenarios
with the worst impact on the environment during the stages of construction and use. From the perspective
of assessing the maximum damage, this section considers the most unfavourable variants of potential
accident situations connected with a tanker accident or gas pipeline explosion.
The section was prepared on the basis of work conducted by OOO Piter Gaz as part of a preliminary
identification of dangers and assessment of risks, which was carried out for the Russian sector of the Nord
Stream sea gas pipeline to be laid on the bed of the Baltic Sea.
5.1.
Construction period
5.1.1.
Principal project characteristics and dangers occurring during the implementation of

the project
When assessing the risks linked to the construction of the Nord Stream gas pipeline, mainly data from
prior experience of constructing and using similar objects in the North Sea and the Gulf of Mexico were
used. Furthermore, systematic statistical data on accidents in maritime transport were also used. The data
used constitute sufficiently reliable information. However, as a result of differences between the
conditions of use in different regions, the results of the risk assessment cannot be considered to be
absolutely precise. They enable a sufficiently reliable assessment of the order of magnitude and obtaining
the level of risk.
When considering this project, it was established that the principal reasons for an accident during the
construction of the gas pipeline may be:
An exit from the equipment system of floating craft used during construction;
Errors of the staff or team of tank vessels;
Extreme acts of nature (weather, commotion, fog, etc.).
Extreme acts of nature (weather, commotion, fog, etc.).

Page340

According to statistics, 70-80% of accidents are caused by human failure.

The main reasons which may cause an accident with vessels involving an oil spill are:
A collision of floating craft;
A grounding of a vessel;
Fire and explosions on the floating craft;
A destruction of the body of floating craft as a result of impact from wind-wave loads.
5.1.2.
Analysis of risks of a spill of hydrocarbons during the construction of the Nord

Stream gas pipeline
A detailed analysis of the risk oil product spills due to accidents during the construction of the sea section
of of the Russian part of the Nord Stream gas pipeline represents overall a very complex task and can
only be carried out when drafting a plan to eradicate accidental spills of oil products during construction.
This analysis must include the methods of risk analysis, such as: the check list method, an analysis of
danger and working capacity, an analysis of the types and consequences of failures, an analysis of the
graphs of failures and events and a quantitative risk analysis.
The rulings of the Russian Federation Government of 21 August 2000 (No. 613) and 15 April 2002 (No.
240) establish the Main requirements for the development of plans for the warning of and eradication of
accidental oil and oil product spills and the Rules of organising measures for the warning of and
eradication of oil and oil product spills in the Russian Federation. In accordance with these documents as
well as Order No. 156 of the Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation of 03.03.2003, oil
and oil product spills are classified as emergency situations and eradicated in accordance with the oil spill
contingency plan (PLARN).
PLARN is developed in accordance with the applicable legal acts, taking into account the maximum
possible volume of spilled oil and oil products, which is specified for the following objects:
oil vessel - 2 tanks;
oil barge - 50 per cents of its total tonnage;
stationary and floating extraction units and oil terminals 1,500 tonnes;
tanker lorry 100 per cent of the volume;
transportation by rail 50 per cent of the total volume of the tanks on the train;
pipelines in the event of leaks 25 per cent of the maximum volume of throughput
over 6 hours and the volume of oil between the blocking valves in the burst section of
the pipeline;
pipelines in the event of puncture - 2 per cent of the maximum amount of
throughput over 14 days.

Page341

Depending on the volume of the oil or oil product spill in the sea, the following categories are assigned to
emergency situations:
local significance low level of oil and oil products spill (determined by a specially
authorised federal executive body in the area of environmental protection) up to 500
tonnes of oil and oil products;
regional significance spill of 500 to 5000 tonnes of oil and oil products;
federal significance spill in excess of 5000 tonnes of oil and oil products.
On the basis of the location of the spill and hydrometeorological conditions, the emergency situation
category may be increased.
The risks of oil spills were assessed on the basis of a conservative, integrated approach. The main
information was that on previous accidents during the construction of sea gas pipelines in connection with
accidents of pipe-laying barges when laying a pipeline, dredge ships, supply ships, during the conducting
of dredging work, transporting loads and assembly/disassembly work. When assessing the risks, the
governing norms and industrial recommendations were taken into account, as specified in the collection
of sources stated in Table 5.1-1.
Table 5.1-1
List of sources of statistical information on hydrocarbon spills
Name
Description
2
3
4
5
R. I. Vyakhirev, B. A. Nikitin, D. A. Mirzoev Development

and exploration of oil and gas deposits. M., Publishing House
of the Academy of Mining, 1999
Information on the reliability of the classification society of
Norway, Veritas, DNV, WOAD -98
Statistical information from HSE UK
Information of the US State Department (Mineral Resources
Service, 1991).
Oil in the sea. Input, Fates and Effects. The National
Academies Press. Washington, DC, 2003
Statistical information on accidents

on the sea shelf
on the sea shelf
Assessment of consequences
on the sea shelf
Information on the volumes of oil in
the sea
The conception of the risk assessment for the planned facility means that the facility considered must be
planned in such a way that the threshold of the initial risk as specified as acceptable or permissible must
not be exceeded.
Depending on the number of people injured in accidents, level of disruption of the habitable conditions
and amounts of material and environmental damage, accident situations are classified in accordance with
the Provisions on the classification of emergency situations caused by nature or technology. Ministry of
Natural Resources, 1996 as follows:
local;
areal;

Page342

territorial;
regional;
federal;
cross-border.
The environmental conditions in areas of accident (emergency) situations is characterised in accordance

with the Criteria of assessing the ecological conditions of territories in order to define areas of an
emergency ecological situation and zones of ecological disaster (RF Ministry of Natural Resources, 1992)
as follows:
relatively satisfactory;
strained;
critical;
crisis;
catastrophic.
In order to assess extremely high levels of environmental pollution, the following special criteria have
been developed. In particular, for sea waters the following indicators are used:
maximum one-off content for standard substances of danger classes 1 and 2 in

concentrations not exceeding the maximum contamination level five-fold or more,
and for substances of danger classes 3-4 fifty-fold or more;
occurrence of smells not inherent to water, with an intensity of more than 4 points;
covering with a film (oil, grease or other origin) of more than 1/3 of the water body
surface with its area ranging up to 6 km2;
drop of the level of dissolved oxygen in the water up to 2 or less mg/l;
increase in the biochemical consumption of oxygen (BCO) in excess of 40 mg/l;
mass perishing of fish, molluscs, crabs, algae and water flora, etc.
When assessing the admissibility of environmental risks, two keywords are used, one of which is linked
to the probability of an accident and its consequences and the other to its scale. The criteria used for the
risks of accidents in terms of the probability of their occurrence are specified in Table 5.1-2, and the
categories of the scales of accidents are in Table 5.1-3.

Page343

Table 5.1-2
Category
1
2
3
4
5
Categories of accidents and freque ncy of their imple mentation

Accident
Frequency of the
Description
characteristics
occurrence of
accidents in the events
per year
Practically
<10-6
An event of this type has virtually never taken
impossible
place, but is not ruled out
Rare
10-6 10-4
Such events have taken place on a global scale,
but only a couple of times
Unlikely
10-4 10-2
Such an accident occurs, but is unlikely over
the term of implementing the project
Likely
10-2 1
It is possible that such an accident will occur
over the term of implementing the project
Practically
>1
May occur, on average, more frequently than
inevitable
once a year
Table 5.1-3
Category
Categories of the scales of the consequences of accidents

Consequences
Description
Insignificant
Minor
Severe
Catastrophic
does not affect the health and safety of the population;

no injury on the facility;
no damage to the facility;
does not affect natural resources;
oil spill up to 1.0 m3.
no serious injury to or death of people;
minor damage to the facility;
no down time;
minor, short-term impact on natural resources;
oil spill of 1-40 m3.
severe injuries to and death of people on the facility possible, but
no threat to the health and life of the public;
significant, negative, but ultimately reversible impact on several
natural resources;
some damage is caused to the non-production facilities on the
shore;
oil spill of 40-400 m3.
injuries to and death of a small number of the local population or
injuries to and death of a large number of workers on the facility;
significant damage to facilities; significant and long-term damage
is caused to two or more natural resources;
oil spill in excess of 400 m3.
In the distribution model of Poisson the probability P (n, T) of the occurrence of accidents of a certain
scale (for instance, more than 1 m3) during the time interval T depending on the average number of
accidents in the time unit (usually a year) is determined in the formula:
The probability that the accident will not occur (n=0) is equal:

Page344

while the assessment of the risk of accident for the period T is:
For instance, if during the carrying out of a certain operation on average one accident with an oil spill
occurs over 100 years (1=0.01), which is equal to an accident on one of 100 similar facilities on the sea
shelf per year, the probability of such an accident for the period in 0.5 years is 4.98 10-3 and the risk 4.98
10-3. The probability of two accidents (and the scale of risk) for the same period is 1.24 10-5.
The example specified shows that for small amounts the Poisson T model provides virtually coinciding
levels of the probability of the occurrence of one accident and risk, which are sufficiently precisely
assessed by the value: (in the reviewed case (=1, T) = R = = 5 10-3). In virtually all cases
considered below T<<1. It is therefore possible to use the interrelation (n=1, ) = R = T.
Parameter 1 can be a certain function of the scale of the accident. For instance, in the event of oil spills,
its value is reduced when increasing the amount of oil spilled. Parameter 1 has the maximum value if
accidents with any small amount of spill are considered as the event when conducting operations
characterising the specific type of production activity.
If parameter is a function of the mass of the spill, the expression (2.3) provides the probability of
exceeding the set amount of the spill, while the function
can be considered to be the function of distributing the probability of the scales of the spill during the set
period of time. If the risks are considered over one year, then
The next step is to determine the suitable dependence of parameter of the scale of the spill; one possible
approach is the following:
In this event the distribution (2.5) has the Freshe distribution type
The task of the statistical analysis is to assess the parameters m, .

Page345

The results of the analysis conducted are specified as a risk curve for material losses (F/G curve) in Fig.
5.1-1. This curve describes the probability of the occurrence of accidents, in which the scale of spill is
larger than a certain value. When analysing the chart (Fig. 5.1.-1), the conclusion can be drawn that waste
water from accidents with volumes in excess of 100 m3 are categorised as rare events. During
construction, oil vessel - Bunkerovshik-5 - total capacity of 8 oil tanks, comprising 3424 cub m will be
used. Accordingly, the volume of one tank is 428 cub m, while the volume of 2 tanks is 856 cub m. As
such, an event of damage to two bunker tanks and leakage of the respective amount of oil of the vessels
mainly used can be essentially categorised as events occurring on a global scale, but only a couple of
times.
During transport operations for the delivery of cargo and removal of waste, short-term weather forecasts
will be used which are sufficiently accurate, for which reason the risks of accidents and discharges related
to them will be even smaller.
Fig. 5.1-1.
Probability of hydrocarbon spill in excess of the set values

over the course of a year
Taking into account the assessment obtained when modelling spills, it can be recommended that values of
approx. 1 tonne, 10 tonnes, 50 tonnes, 100 tonnes, 45 tonnes and 856 tonnes be used. The last spill value
has a small probability. It complies with the volume of two tanks of an oil vessel, and is used in
modelling in accordance with ruling No. 613 of 21 August 2000 of the RF Government. When modelling
the various spill scenarios, it can be assumed that they occur in the area of the Russian section of the line
and they last 1-2 hours. A detailed description of the methods of creating the causes for environmental
risks can be found in the Environmental risk assessment report and mathematical modelling of the spread
of oil spills in a sea environment during the construction of the Russian section of the Nord Stream sea
gas pipeline and is available in the archive of OOO Piter Gaz.
5.1.3.
Environmental risk assessment
The method of calculating the possible spread of oil in the event of an accidental spill is based on the
model simulation of possible scenarios of oil behaviour under the set hydrometeorological conditions.

Page346

The assessments of the spread of accidental oil spills in a water environment are conducted separately for
on-going and extraordinary oil spills.
The set hydrometeorological conditions (wind and current causes, including tides) imitate the
hydrometeorological situations which are typical, and sometimes extreme, for the Baltic Sea. It is
assumed that an oil spill may occur with the equal probability at any time of a given hydrometereological
situation. The meteorological situation to be used for the assessments may be developed on the basis of an
analysis of the long-standing data of synoptic observations. With the continuous and sufficiently longstanding data on the causes for ground wind and pressure and sea current calculated on the basis of a
mathematical model in accordance with these causes, a selection of equally likely scenarios of
hydrometeorological conditions can be developed.
The following main stages of conduct oil spread assessments after accidental leakage into the sea can be
emphasised.
1.
Preparation of scenarios of hydrometeorological conditions on the basis of an analysis of archive
data and a reconstruction of missing information with the help of mathematical models, including a model
for the calculation of ground wind causes, sea current models and other models required to fulfil specific
tasks.
2.
Preparation of scenarios of possible accidental oil leakage into the sea environment during
transport operations in the waters of the Baltic Sea on the basis of an analysis of spill risks. A calculation
of the probability of the occurrence of accidental hydrocarbon spills of various volumes on the basis of
statistical data. To this end, this paper uses the Freshe distribution
, which
provides the probability of the occurrence of a spill over a year of a specified volume (1/year). Example
F/G a risk curve for material losses is specified in Figure 5.1-1.
3.
Trajectory analysis: determination of the conditions for the probability of oil slick transfer to
various points of the waters and coastal area. Calculation of possible trajectories for the carrying over of
contamination and their subsequent analysis in order to establish where the trajectories of oil slick
movements cross environmentally vulnerable facilities on the coast and waters. This is conducted
excluding the probability oil volumes or weathering, based on the modelling of movement markers under
the influence of hydrodynamic factors (wind, current). Approximation of these probabilities for various
moments of the analysis. Determination of the spread parameters

4.
Calculation of the processes of the physical and chemical transformation of an oil spill, on the
account of which part of the oil fractions enter into the atmosphere as a result of evaporation and is spread
as atmospheric pollution and part of the oil enters as water-in-oil emulsion into the water column and
forms inter-mass pollution of the water environment. Calculation of the weathering characteristics in
average conditions and specific environmental parameter values. Obtaining of a weathering tables
characterising the amount of oil remaining on the surface, evaporating and dispersed in the water and
transformation of its properties.

Page347

5.
Calculation on the basis of a "weathering functions" weathering model, dependence of the oil
mass remaining on the water on the time or inverse function of the time passed of the oil remaining on the
water in the form of

6.
Determination of the conditional probability of mass transfer greater than that set in the region of
the waters and the coastal area in the form of

7.
Statistical processing of the results of calculating the oil spread trajectory taking into account the
results of calculating the physical and chemical transformation of an oil spill in a sea environment in
order to determine the areas contaminated by the oil spill, water sections for specific time intervals,
breakdown of times of reaching coastal areas and contamination of coastal sections in various
hydrometeorological situations. Determination of risk causes, i.e. calculation of the probability of oil
mass transfer greater than the set value m into specific sections of the waters and/or coast over one year in
the form of the following loss function
In order to conduct numerical calculations of the Baltic Sea's current and spread of oil, the wind data of
an entire year were prepared. The following was used as the initial information: NCEP/NCAR re-analysis
archive for 2006.
To calculate the currents which comply with the tidal impacts and prepared causes of ground wind
regarded as typical for the region of the Baltic Sea, a three-dimensional barocline model was used.
5.1.3.1. Trajectory analysis of the causes for the environmental risks of oil spills
A mathematical modelling of the possible spread of oil from the source of an accidental leakage located
in the region of the route of the Russian section of the Nord Stream gas pipeline in the Baltic Sea was
conducted on the basis of 1360 equally likely scenarios of meteorological conditions set according to the
data of the meteorological conditions of an entire "typical year". Using the trajectory model, the regions
were specified which are vulnerable to oil spills.
The calculations were carried out at the control points specified in Figure 5.1-2.

Page348

Fig. 5.1-2.
Location of the spill control point.
In order to assess the probability of a transfer of oil spills to the Russia's territorial waters, point I is
selected, which is located in the centre of the gas pipeline's Russian section. Figures 5.1- 3 and 5.1-4
specify the results of modelling the possible spread of oil from the source of an accidental leakage with
two value types:
the probability of slick transfer to the various regions of the waters;
minimum time of reaching these regions or the coast.
It must be noted that at this stage the trajectory analysis is carried out without taking into account
weathering characteristics only on the basis of the movement of markers under the influence of wind and
currents.
The configuration of the probability causes and risk zones (times of reaching) in the various regions of the
sea is determined by the space and time structure of the cause and the according current causes. In coastal
areas the risk zones change in accordance with the characteristics of littoral circulation and the influence
of coastal features.

Page349


Page350


Page351

Fig. 5.1-3.
Conditional probability of an oil spill transfer to the various regions of the waters
over a year in the event of an oil spill calculated in respect of a typical meteorological year: a after
10 hours, b after 50 hours, c after 100 hours, d after 200 hours and e after 480 hours.

Page352

Fig. 5.1-4.
Times of reaching various sections of the waters in the event of an oil spill
calculated in respect of a typical meteorological year: a - waters, b coast line.
Probability distribution analysis for the transfer of oil spills to various points in the waters (Fig. 5.1-3)
and risk calculation zones (minimum time of reaching) (Fig. 5.1-4) reveals the following:
in the first 10 hours the oil spill spread area is no more than 10-15 km from the point
of spill and the probability of reaching the coast does not exceed 0.01;
the oil slick may reach the northern and southern coasts of the Gulf of Finland within
approx. 50 hours, in particular the regions of Helsinki will be reached within approx.
100 hours;
judging from the calculation results, under no conditions can oil contamination reach
the region of the Baltic proper, the Gulf of Bothnia or the Gulf of Riga;
The calculations show that the probability of transfer of a spill to the territorial waters
of Latvia, Lithuania and, in particular, Poland is small. The conditional probability is
below 10-5, the absolute probability, taking into account the occurrence of several
independent events of minor probability, is below 10-9 and is categorised as an
virtually impossible event. More significant is the conditional probability of a spill
transfer to the territorial waters of Finland and Estonia (approx. < 10-2).
Simultaneously, the absolute probability (taking into account the occurrence of
several independent events of minor probability) of penetration into the territorial
waters of these countries of significant volumes of oil is small (< 5 10 -7) and is also
categorised as a virtually impossible event.
A description of the model for the possible spread of oil from the source of the accidental leakage at
control points, calculations and detailed modelling results are presented in volume Environmental risk
assessment and mathematical modelling of the spread of oil spills in a sea environment during the
construction of the Russian section of the Nord Stream sea gas pipeline and is available in the archive of
OOO Piter Gaz.

Page353

5.1.3.2. Oil weathering assessment

The calculations of the physical and chemical transformation of an oil spill were conducted for an average
temperature of the environment of 10 C in the in the regions of the Baltic Sea considered and are
presented in the volume Environmental risk assessment and mathematical modelling of the spread of oil
spills in a sea environment during the construction of the Russian section of the Nord Stream sea gas
pipeline.
An analysis of the data obtained shows that at average winds (6m/sec) approx. 40% of the oil remains on
the surface and 60% is weathered. At winds of more than 9m/sec, the amount of oil remaining on the
surface is less than 22%. The hydrocarbons composition used for modelling is characterised by a rather
large content of heavy fractions and its characteristics are similar to rather heavy oil (Fig. 5.1-5, Group 4).
Fig. 5.1-5.
Weathering characteristics of various types of oil

Table 5.1-5
Group
Characteristics of various types of oil per consistency level

Relative weight
Examples
Group I
Group II
Group III
< 0,8
0,8 - 0,85
0,85-0,95
Group IV
> 0,95
gasoline, kerosene
crude oil at deposits in Abu Dhabi, gas oil
Arabic crude oil, oil in deposits of the North Sea, for instance
Forties
heavy fuel oil
It was established by calculations that the mass of the water which may emulsify in the oil is 70% of the
oil's mass. The viscosity is also increased due to the processes of evaporation and emulsification and may
reach 20 times the value of the initial composition's viscosity.
The characteristics of calculating the weathering of an oil spill (diesel oil) drifting in the waters at various
wind speeds ranging from 3-12 m/sec are listed in Table 5.1-6.

Page354

Table 5.1-6
mg/l
0.87
0.68
0.56
0.44
0.33
0.27
0.23
0.18
0.15
0.14
3.49
2.67
2.14
1.65
1.20
0.96
0.80
0.62
0.53
0.48
7.81
5.83
4.55
kg
498.52
5755.39
14759.87
34273.18
64356.85
85905.54
108815.18
144558.11
170029.75
183379.34
725.03
8229.77
20419.30
43644.90
74212.31
98408.84
122828.14
150915.89
163885.73
169429.22
993.12
11035.58
26224.71
kg
1489.37
8422.63
15695.56
27372.10
42631.76
51349.58
57004.21
61359.70
62798.84
63224.06
5940.27
33069.11
60561.18
102599.34
153814.76
181102.34
197872.59
210266.10
214309.05
215513.70
13302.15
72196.58
128652.76
kg
724512.11
712321.99
696044.57
664854.71
619511.38
589244.88
560680.60
520582.19
493671.41
479896.61
719834.70
685201.12
645519.52
580255.76
498472.93
446988.82
405799.27
365318.01
348305.22
341557.09
712204.74
643267.84
571622.53
kg
86115.74
558007.30
1056684.38
1456064.19
1443742.62
1374872.04
1308254.43
1214691.78
1151899.95
1119758.75
276080.68
1366414.28
1494445.19
1353905.05
1163103.49
1042973.91
946864.96
852408.69
812712.18
796966.53
582615.64
1490615.69
1333766.73
10.62
43.93
60.29
68.65
69.97
70.00
70.00
70.00
70.00
70.00
27.72
66.60
69.84
70.00
70.00
70.00
70.00
70.00
70.00
70.00
45.00
69.85
70.00

Page355
Viscosity
Water
mass in
the oil
%
99.73
98.05
95.81
91.51
85.27
81.11
77.18
71.66
67.95
66.06
99.08
94.32
88.85
79.87
68.61
61.53
55.86
50.28
47.94
47.01
98.03
88.54
78.68
Oil and
the sea
surface,
0.21
1.16
2.16
3.77
5.87
7.07
7.85
8.45
8.64
8.70
0.82
4.55
8.34
14.12
21.17
24.93
27.24
28.94
29.50
29.66
1.83
9.94
17.71
Dispersed
oil,
0.07
0.79
2.03
4.72
8.86
11.82
14.98
19.90
23.40
25.24
0.10
1.13
2.81
6.01
10.22
13.55
16.91
20.77
22.56
23.32
0.14
1.52
3.61
Oil and
the sea
surface,
conceptio
n
of oil
locked in
water in a
layer of 2
Evaporat
ed oil,
9 m/s
square km
0.17
1.24
2.83
6.23
12.84
18.79
24.86
33.78
40.79
45.36
0.17
1.24
2.83
6.23
12.84
18.79
24.86
33.78
40.79
45.36
0.17
1.24
2.83
Share of
water in
the oil
6 m/s
1
6
12
24
48
72
100
150
200
240
1
6
12
24
48
72
100
150
200
240
1
6
12
Dispersed
oil,
hours
3 m/s
Evaporati
ng oil,
Area,
Time,
Wind
speed
Change of the main characteristics of an accidental oil spill and contamination of the sea for a leakage volume of 856 m3 at a sea surface temperature of 10
sPz
4.00
14.00
35.89
66.77
74.50
74.66
74.66
74.66
74.66
74.66
7.01
56.72
73.63
74.66
74.66
74.66
74.66
74.66
74.66
74.66
14.76
73.75
74.66
12 m/s
24
48
72
100
150
200
240
1
6
12
24
48
72
100
150
200
240
6.23
12.84
18.79
24.86
33.78
40.79
45.36
0.17
1.24
2.83
6.23
12.84
18.79
24.86
33.78
40.79
45.36
3.35
2.30
1.79
1.45
1.11
0.94
0.85
13.78
9.95
7.50
5.22
3.35
2.51
1.99
1.51
1.26
1.13
kg
70.00
70.00
70.00
70.00
70.00
70.00
70.00
57.72
70.00
70.00
70.00
70.00
70.00
70.00
70.00
70.00
70.00
50799.80
81575.81
105713.48
122876.85
134453.03
139064.04
141445.71
1241.04
13492.76
30584.11
54144.59
84078.74
100635.92
107030.60
110918.47
113113.35
114792.57
kg
208609.44
295603.20
336653.45
359938.29
376491.67
381859.69
383459.47
23492.97
123196.06
211795.70
324982.91
430021.08
471895.01
493761.46
508669.97
513361.80
514738.74

Page356
kg
467090.76
349320.98
284133.06
243684.86
215555.30
205576.27
201594.82
701765.99
589811.18
484120.19
347372.50
212400.19
153969.07
125707.94
106911.56
100024.85
96968.68
Viscosity
mg/l
64.29
48.08
39.11
33.54
29.67
28.30
27.75
96.60
81.19
66.64
47.81
29.24
21.19
17.30
14.72
13.77
13.35
Water mass in
the oil
28.71
40.69
46.34
49.54
51.82
52.56
52.78
3.23
16.96
29.15
44.73
59.19
64.95
67.96
70.02
70.66
70.85
Oil and the sea

surface,
Share of water
in the oil
6.99
11.23
14.55
16.91
18.51
19.14
19.47
0.17
1.86
4.21
7.45
11.57
13.85
14.73
15.27
15.57
15.80
Dispersed oil,
Max.
conception of
oil locked in
water in a
layer of 2 m
Evaporated
oil,
Oil and the sea

surface,
square km
Dispersed oil,
hours
Evaporating
oil,
Area,
Time,
Wind speed

kg
sPz
1089878.44
815082.30
662977.15
568598.00
502962.38
479677.96
470387.91
958177.57
1376092.60
1129613.78
810535.84
495600.43
359261.17
293318.52
249460.32
233391.32
226260.26
74.66
74.66
74.66
74.66
74.66
74.66
74.66
30.31
74.65
74.66
74.66
74.66
74.66
74.66
74.66
74.66
74.66

Figure 5.1-6 shows the oil weathering characteristics (percentage of oil on the surface, evaporating and
dispersing).
Fig. 5.1-6.
Change of the main characteristics of an accidental oil spill and contamination of

the sea for a leakage volume of 856 m3 at a sea surface temperature of 10
5.1.3.3. Environmental risk causes of oil spills

In accordance with the methods of assessing environmental risks, the ultimate objective is to assess the
probability of a transfer of oil during possible spills into various regions of the waters and coast line.
Figure 5.1-3 shows the results of a trajectory analysis of the conditional probability of a spill entering
Russia's territorial waters. They were obtained by examining the trajectories of markers and proportion
entering the grid cell examined over one year. Furthermore, the analysis does not take into account the
probability of spills and the processes of oil weathering.
To determine the risk causes, i.e. calculation of the probability of oil mass transfer greater than the set
value m into specific sections of the waters and/or coast over one year, both of these factors must be taken
into account as a loss function.
The probability of a transfer over one year of an oil volume greater than that set into a specific region of
the sea is determined by generating two probabilities: the probability that the spill of a specific volume
m0 occurred and the probability of a transfer of the slick to the region examined. In the second value, oil
weathering is also taken into account in respect of approaching the region examined.
Figure 5.1-7 shows the probability of a transfer of specific oil masses (environmental risk causes) for the
waters of the Baltic Sea (within Russia's territorial waters) in the assumption of a spill at the point
examined (Fig. 5.1-2).
An analysis of the probability distribution of a transfer of oil spills to various points of the waters shows
that in all cases considered only for masses of 0.5 t and 1 t the probability of a transfer outside an area of
15 km around the point of spill is 10-5. With a mass size in excess of 1 t, the probability is significantly
smaller. Probabilities of reaching the coasts for various masses:

Page357

mass of 0.5 tonnes - probability of 10-6
A comparison of the data obtained with the risk criteria specified in Table 5.1-2 shows that the value of a
risk of oil volumes occurring outside an area of 15 km from the point of spill is classified as rare and for
large oil volumes as virtually impossible.

Page358


Page359

Fig. 5.1-7.
Environme ntal risk zones, probability of a transfer of a specific mass of oil to
various regions of the waters over one year in the event of an oil spill from point No. 1, calculated
for a typical meteorological year: a for a mass of 0.5 t, b for a mass of 1 t, c for a mass of 5 t, d
for a mass of 10 t.
The results obtained allow drawing the following conclusions:
in the first 10 hours the oil spill spread area is no more than 15 km from the point of
spill and the probability of reaching the coast does not exceed 0.01;
coastal areas are reached within a time of approx. 50-100 hours;
an analysis of the probability distribution of a transfer of oil spills to various points of

the waters shows that in all cases considered only for masses of 0.5 t and 1 t the
probability of a transfer outside an area of 15 km around the point of spill is 10-5. With
a mass size in excess of 1 t, the probability is significantly smaller.
a comparison of the data obtained with the criteria of risk (Table 5.1-2) shows that
the value of a risk of oil volumes occurring outside an area of 15 km from the point of
spill is classified as rare and for oil volumes larger than 1 t is virtually impossible.
5.1.3.4. Individual spill assessment

Figure 5.1-8 shows the location of an oil slick for the spill of 856 t from a marked point at various
moments in time. It follows that under certain conditions an oil spill reached the coast within approx. 35
hours. Furthermore, of the 856 t of oil spilled, approx. 362.5 t reached the coast. (Fig. 5.1-9). Figure 5.110 shows the oil weathering characteristics (percentage of oil on the surface, evaporating and dispersing).

Page360

Fig. 5.1-8.
Fig. 5.1-9.
Oil slick location
Amount of oil reaching the coast

Page361

Fig. 5.1-10.
Weathering characteristics of a specific oil spill.
5.1.4.
Assessment of the possibility of an oil slick migrating to special protected natural

areas
A list of special protected natural areas (SPNT) is stated in Table 5.1-6, and location of their characteristic
points is shown in Fig. 5.1-11.
Table 5.1-6
Special protected natural area

(SPNT)
The Beryozovyye Islands
Vyborgsky
Kurgalsky
Dolgy Kamen
SPNTs in the area of work

Northern
East
latitude
longitude
60 17 30
28 32 00
60 29 40
28 34 00
59 50 00
28 03 00
60 29 00
27 54 30
Kopytin
60 25 42
27 42 30
Bolshoy Fiskar
60 24 15
27 56 15
Skala Hally
60 24 12
28 08 18
Virginy
59 56 00
26 52 30
Maly Tuters
59 48 00
26 57 00
Bolshoy Tuters
59 51 00
27 12 00
Skala Virgund
59 46 42
27 44 00
Seskar
60 01 30
28 23 00
Prigranichnyy
60 31 00
27 51 00
Comme nts
Ingermanlandsky Reserve of
federal significance

Page362

Special protected natural area

(SPNT)
Suursaari
Pokhyaskorkiya
Gustoy Island
Fig. 5.1-11.
Northern
latitude
60 02 30
60 05 30
60 40 00
East
longitude
27 00 00
26 57 30
28 35 30
Comme nts
Location of the characteristic points of SPNTs in relation to the line
Table 5.1-7. states the minimum distances to the characteristic points of these areas from the pipeline and
the maximum possible amount of oil which may reach them in the event of a spill of 856 3 in the area of
the line.
Table 5.1-7
Assessment of the maximum oil mass possible (in the event of a spill of 856 m3)
Maximum oil
Transfer
Special protected
mass possible
Distance
Drift time
natural area
Point
(in the event of probability
(km)
(hours)
assessment
(SPNA)
a spill of 856
m3) (t)
With the
The Beryozovyye
Beryozovyye
27.8
51.5
435.2
< 5 10-7
Islands
Island)
Vyborgsky
Lisy Island
26.0
48.1
445.7
< 5 10-7
Kurgalsky
59.9
110.9
313.2
< 10-7
Ostrovok
Dolgy Kamen
7.7
14.3
609.2
< 210-6
(depth 27 m)

Page363

Special protected
natural area
(SPNA)
Kopytin
Bolshoy Fiskar
Skala Hally
Virginy
Maly Tuters
Bolshoy Tuters
Skala Virgund
Seskar
Prigranichnyy
Suursaari
Pokhyaskorkiya
Gustoy Island
Point
Around the border

of the terr. waters
B. Fiskar
Archipelago
Hally Island
near B.
Prigranichny Island
South Gogland
North Gogland
Gustoy Island
Distance
(km)
Drift time
(hours)
Maximum oil
mass possible
(in the event of
a spill of 856
m3) (t)
15.5
28.7
522.8
< 510-7
3.2
5.9
683.2
< 510-6
10.0
18.6
33.3
35.7
43.3
38.4
18.5
34.4
61.7
66.1
80.2
71.1
579.7
496.6
406.5
395.3
364.4
383.7
< 10-6
< 510-7
< 50-7
< 510-7
< 20-7
< 310-7
12.5
23.1
551.9
< 10-6
10.5
3.2
2.1
19.4
5.9
3.9
573.9
683.2
706.8
< 10-6
< 510-6
< 510-6
Transfer
probability
assessment
It follows from the above data that a significant proportion of the oil spilled may reach the regions
examined. Furthermore, it must not be forgotten that, as follows from probability assessments of previous
spills, the probability of such events during the construction of gas pipelines in the Russian section is
extremely small. These assessments establish that this probability is in all cases smaller than a value of
10-6. In accordance with the classification of Table 5.1-2, the relevant events are classified as virtually
impossible.
There is an even smaller probability of a transfer of a spill to the territorial waters of Latvia, Lithuania
and, in particular, Poland. As the results of sections 2.2 and 7.1 show, this probability is smaller than 10-9
and is classified as a virtually impossible event. More significant is the conditional probability of a spill
transfer to the territorial waters of Finland and Estonia (approx. 10-2). Simultaneously, the absolute
probability (taking into account the occurrence of several independent events of minor probability) of
penetration into the territorial waters of these countries of significant volumes of oil is low (< 5 -10-7) and
is also categorised as a virtually impossible event.
It follows from the above data that a significant proportion of the oil spilled may reach the SPNTs if an
accident occurs. It follows from the probability assessments that the full (unconditional) probability of
such events during the construction of gas pipelines in the Russian sector is not big. The assessments
show that this probability is in fact smaller than a value of 10-6 because it is determined by the generation
of small probabilities of independent events. In accordance with the classification of Table 2.1, the
relevant events are classified as virtually impossible.

Page364

5.1.5.
As the calculations of the physical and chemical transformation of an oil spill have shown, approx. 60%
of oil products (diesel oil) are weathered, while saturated hydrocarbons and hydrogen sulphide enter the
atmospheric air.
Possible volumes of polluting substances transferring to the air environment during the evaporation of a
diesel oil spill from the sea surface are presented in Table 5.1-8.
Table 5.1-8
Transfer of polluting substances to atmospheric air
saturated
aromatic hydrocarbons
hydrogen sulphide
hydrocarbons
t
g/s
t
g/s
t
g/s
Wind
speeds,
m/s
Spill volume,
kg
3
6
9
183379,34
169429,22
141445,71
182,59
168,70
140,84
0,000395
0,000503
0,000585
0,28
0,25
0,21
0,000000596
0,000000758
0,000000882
0,46
0,42
0,35
0,0000009925
0,0000012625
0,0000014700
12
114792,57
114,30
0,000624
0,17
0,000000941
0,29
0,0000015675
The results of calculating the spread of hazardous substances during an accident situation of an oil
product spill in the waters of the Baltic Sea during construction work are specified in Table 5.1-9 and in
the Annex to the section.
Table 5.1-9
Maximum calculation ground concentrations of polluting substances in accide nt situations - oil
product spill without fire
Concentration, maximum
Maximum permissible
contamination level shares
Component
concentrations
maximum
in residential area
Hydrogen sulphide
0,008
0,0056
Aromatic hydrocarbons
0,3
0.0000896
Maximum hydrocarbons S 12-S 19
50,0
0.0178297
The results of calculating the spread show that, in the event of an accident situation developing in this
scenario, the maximum concentration levels of polluting substances and concentration levels on the
border of residential areas does not exceed the sanitary and hygienic standards.
Oil product spills are subject to extreme fire risks. If there is a source of ignition (discharge of
atmospheric electricity, sparks from friction or blows, etc.), there is a possibility of fire and release into
the atmosphere of polluting substances (carbon monoxide, nitrogen, sulphur, soot, etc.). The probability
of a fire or explosion, with the main causes for tanker accidents being grounding, collisions or damage to
the body, is, according to the statistics of the International Maritime Organisation and International
Association of Tanker Owners, equal: 0.17, 0.03 and 0.1.
Possible volumes of polluting substances transferring to the air environment during the burning of a diesel
oil spill from the sea surface are presented in Table 5.1-10.

Page365

Substance
Carbon monoxide
Hydrogen sulphide
Nitrogen dioxide
Sulphur dioxide
Soot
Hydrocyanic acid
Vanadium pentoxide
Benzapyrene
Release in the event of fire, kg

kg
g/s
810,436
4,4266E-06
114,793
6,2700E-07
2996,086
1,6365E-05
114,793
6,2700E-07
1480,824
8,0883E-06
114,793
6,2700E-07
2,640
1,4421E-08
0,008
4,3263E-11
The results of calculating of the spread of hazardous substances during an accident situation of an oil
product fire during the spill in the waters of the Baltic Sea during construction work are specified in Table
5.1-11 and in the Annex to the section.
Table 5.1-11
Maximum calculation ground concentrations of polluting substances in accide nt situations - oil
product spill with fire
Concentration, maximum
contamination level shares
Maximum permissible
Component
concentrations
in residential
maximum
area
Carbon monoxide
5,0
0,300000
0,300000
Hydrogen sulphide
0,008
0,0022394
Nitrogen dioxide
0,2
0,2500018
0,2500005
Sulphur dioxide
0,5
0,0300358
Soot
0,15
0,0046222
Hydrocyanic acid
maximum contamination
0,0001792
level ss = 0.01
Vanadium pentoxide
0,0000618
level ss = 0.002
Benzapyrene
0,0001236
level ss = 1.0-5
Summation group (SO2+NO2)
0,2800019
0,2800005
Summation group (V2O5+SO2)
0,0300976
Summation group (H2S+SO2)
0,0322753
The results of calculating the spread show that, in the event of an accident situation developing in this
scenario, the maximum concentration levels of polluting substances and concentration levels on the
border of residential areas does not exceed the sanitary and hygienic standards.
Taking into account the conducting of measures to eradicate accident spills of oil products, the spread of
contamination and the distance from residential areas, the impact on the atmospheric air can be classified
as insignificant.
5.1.6.
From an environmental perspective, it is important to distinguish the two main types of oil spills in the
sea. One of them includes spills which start and end in open waters without affecting the coast line
(pelagic spill scenarios). Their consequences are, as a rule, of a temporary, local and invertible nature.
The other spill
type assumes ENGLISH
a carry-over TRANSLATION
of the slick to the coast,
an accumulation
of oil
on the shore and
UNOFFICIAL
FOR
COURTESY
ONLY
Page366

long-term environmental disruption in the coastal and littoral area. A specific oil contamination scenario
depends on the wind conditions observed at the time of the accident and over the following days.

Page367

The behaviour of oil spills in the sea is determined both by the physical and chemical properties of the
actual oil and the condition of the sea environment [240, 241]. It is generally accepted that three main
processes determine the behaviour of oil in the sea - advection, flowing properties and weathering.
Advection is the process whereby the oil is carried under the influence of wind and currents. As a rule, oil
moves across the surface of the sea at a speed ranging between 3-3.5% of the speed of wind and 60-100%
of the speed of the current. Flowing is a process which depends on the activity of the oil's positive
buoyancy, the flowing coefficient on account of surface tension and diffusion, which results in an
increase of the sea surface area covered in the oil layer. Over time the process of gravitational flowing
slows down, while horizontal turbulent diffusion starts to take effect.
At various moments in time, various processes, the temporary characteristics of which are specified in
Figure 5.1-12, are significant.
Fig. 5.1-12. Temporary characteristics of the main processes the oil slick is subject to
Oil entering sea water causes:
a change to the physical properties of the water;
a change to the chemical properties of the water;
creation of floating contamination on the surface of the water (oil mousse, aggregates)
and their sedimentation on the seabed.
The maximum concentration of hydrocarbons in the top layer (on average for a layer of 10 m) of the sea
under an oil slick significantly exceeds the maximum contamination level (0.05 mg/l) and may reach
values of 3-4 mg/l.

Page368

5.1.7.
Impact on sea biota
Oil spills have different effects on the sea biota depending on the volume of oil spilled, time of year,
weather conditions, chemical characteristics of the oil and the effectiveness of the work to eradicate spills.
There are different types of the impact of oils spills - from short-term severe (death in certain instances)
to chronic at the level of species, populations and communities [127, 240, 241]. Long-term chronic
impact on many types of communities prevails.
Permanent impact (after clean-up) on areas of the environment can usually be assessed as weak to
moderate. Several years pass for a full recovery of the environment to the initial condition. Important
exceptions are spills near places where birds nest (or their colonies) or places of mass concentration of
protected species. A strong impact in these exceptional instances requires the drawing up of complex
plans to tackle spills.
Mainly birds and the young of many fish and water invertebrates (including fish eggs and larvae) suffer
from oil spills, and many of them die within the first hours or days after a spill. In the event of spills in
the spring, autumn or end of winter, the high mortality rate can threaten entire age groups and
subpopulations of species (in particular if climatic and other biophysical factors have a synergetic impact
on the surviving populations).
Numerous studies of plankton communities [127, 240, 241] have shown that spills in the open sea have
an insignificant impact on the structure and functions of the community for the following reasons: () the
oil concentration quickly drops to harmless levels as a result of the spread and dilution as well as
evaporation and photochemical decomposition, (b) the displacement of a "new" flora and fauna after the
displacement of water masses from neighbouring areas; (c) the high speed of reproduction (with a
doubling of the population within several hours or days).
Thanks to the fast passing of the oil slick and its spreading in the open sea as well as the processes of
evaporation, photochemical decomposition and biological breakdown of solid particles, little oil is built
up in the sediments of littoral areas (while in the open sea only an insignificant amount of oil reaches the
seabed). The only exception are shallow waters near the coast and half-closed bays as well as when spills
occur during the spring development of plankton (in April/May, when zooplankton and diatomic algae
form aggregates, which fall to the seabed quickly and take many other particles and polluting substances
from the waters with them). As such, if the exceptional instances are not considered, benthos is usually
not subject to impact from oil spills on a significant scale. In shallow waters and after the sedimentation
of a large amount of particles contaminated by oil, benthos reacts in the same way as phyto- and
zooplankton and the impact can be predominantly classified as severe and short-term with minimum
changes to the structure and functions of benthic communities or their complete absence.
Generally speaking, marine mammals are less subject to impact from oil than other marine organisms,
such as sea birds or invertebrates.

Page369

The types of impact which can be caused by oil spills include:
direct negative impact on marine mammals (sea lions and whales) as a consequence of
them coming into contact and breathing fumes of toxic substances;
indirect negative impact on marine mammals through the impact on their food supply;
collapse of food supply in this region for marine mammals;
avoiding by marine mammals of the region of the oil spill due to noise and work
conducted to clean up the region from the oil spilled.
The impact can be serious for marine mammals if:
oil collects next to their rookeries and breeding grounds;
the spill occurs in the winter next to breeding grounds;
the spill occurs on the migration routes
5.1.8.
Impact on sediments
Hydrocarbon contamination of water inevitably results in the contamination of seabeds. The process of
hydrocarbon contamination of seabeds markedly increases in the presence of a large amount of suspended
solid particles in the water, which absorb these pollutants. The subsequent sedimentation of suspended
solid particles results in an accumulation of hydrocarbons in the seabeds and to a repeat contamination of
the water when spreading the sediments of the contaminated seabed. While oil contamination of sea
waters can in many cases be of a transitional nature, because hydrocarbons are generally carried outside
of the waters where their leakage occurred, they can remain stored in the seabeds for long periods of time.
In the event of an intensive sedimentation, the hydrocarbons connected to the seabed are usually buried
on the seabed under fresh sediments, as a result of which their further biodegradation is extremely limited
due to a lack of oxygen.
5.2.
Period of use
5.2.1.
List of the main factors and possible causes for the occurrence of dangers
Below are possible factors and causes for the occurrence and unfolding of accidents for the linear section
of Nord Stream.
1.
Equipment failure:
high pressure of transported gas (up to 22 MPa);
internal corrosion;
external corrosion with defects in the anti-corrosion protection systems;

Page370

structural failure or mechanical defects of pipes, welding joints, insufficient

ballasting, etc., cracking of steel pipes, deformation of pipes under the impact of an
external water column in combination with bending. Accidents can happen as a result
of the development of initial defects of the base metal, joints or welding;
increase in pressure in the pipeline during the use of the pipeline over a long period of
time without timely cleaning of intelligent pigs or the consequence of a formation of
hydrated-gas stoppers in the pipeline;
failure of automatic systems.
2.
Misoperation of the staff:
improper diagnostics and detection of defects during the use of technical equipment
and pipelines;
absence or insufficient quality of repair work,
untimely detection or underestimation of the risk of defects of the technical equipment

and pipelines;
non-compliance of terms of conducting diagnostics of equipment (or non-conducting),

inspecting protective devices as well as terms of inspecting and calibrating EC&I
devices.
operator errors.
Mechanical damage to the pipeline when carrying out construction and repair work
and as a result of falling to the seabed of various objects, planting anchors or impact
of trawl nets.
3.
External impact of a natural and technological nature:
seismic activity and faults;
geo hazards (diluation of seabeds, instability of banks, density currents fault

displacements);
erosion of the bottom seabed and stripping of the pipeline;
extreme wind and eave loads, storms;
impact from fishing vessels (trawling);
impact on the gas pipeline as a result of vessels anchoring;
falling of objects (for instance, containers for the disposal of waste) on the ground of
the sea;
sabotage and terrorist attacks, acts of vandalism.
5.2.2.
Main scenarios of the occurrence of accidents

Page371

On the basis of an analysis of the statistical data on accidents and failures of sea pipelines [373] used in
various sea regions, the following picture can be forecast:
An underwater release of compressed gas under high pressure forms high-speed gas jets which converge
at the place of decompression, but although the difference in the density of the gas and water is
sufficiently large and buoyancy significantly higher, the strong resistance power results in the destruction
of the underwater gas-water plume and it ascension to the sea surface in the form of a series of gas
bubbles.
On the surface, the gas release reduces to concentrations which do not exceed the limits of inflammation
if the inflammable air-gas cloud does not reach the source of fire.
Above the sea surface, an ascending plume of gas forms which mixes with the surrounding air and forms
an inflammable cloud above the sea surface. If a vessel enters the inflammable area, the air-gas cloud may
ignite from sources on the vessel and, as a result, burn members of the crew or passengers on the vessel.
If there are no ignition sources (from passing vessels) on the sea surface, the inflammable cloud disperses
safely.
Therefore, the following typical scenarios of the unfolding of accidents are considered for the sea section
of the projected gas pipeline:
Scenario group Air and Gas Releases 1 Release of gas into the atmosphere with ignition of air and gas
cloud by sources on a passing vessel:
Destruction of the gas pipeline > expansion of compressed gas into the surrounding area with creation
of a compression wave spreading in the water and on the seabed > discharge of a powerful gas column
drawing in a large amount of surrounding water and eroding the bottom seabed with creation of a crater
> ascension of gas from the crater to the sea surface with drawing in of surrounding water and creation
on the sea surface of a more or less intensive gas and water "plume" (powerful water column) >
discharge of gas from a restricted area on the sea surface with formation of a gas and air cloud (plume)
above the surface of the water > entry of a vessel in the inflammable area of the inflammable gas and
air cloud expansion with possible ignition of the cloud from sources on the vessel > entry of members
of the vessel's crew into the area of radiation, thermal impact > burns of various levels of severity
suffered by people > formation and expansion of a cloud of combustion products, pollution of the
environment.
Scenario group Air and Gas Releases 2 Release of gas into the atmosphere without ignition:
Destruction of the gas pipeline over an entire section > discharge of gas from the underwater gas
pipeline into the sea environment with creation of a plume of gas bubbles > rising of gas bubbles to the
sea surface and their destruction with discharge of gas into the atmosphere > spread of gas in the
atmosphere, contamination of the environment, intensification of the greenhouse effect.
The scenarios of both groups can be equally dangerous in terms of their environmental consequences.
On the basis of an analysis of data on the accident risk of sea pipelines, the average statistical intensity of
accidents occurring with a leakage of the product transported is assessed at a level of 7.9610-5 1/ (km
year). This value takes into account possible damage to the gas pipeline as the result of the impact of
corrosion, defects to material, faults when constructing the gas pipeline and as a result of the possible
impact on the planned gas pipeline by third parties (shipping, loss of cargo and flooding of vessels) and is
used to analyse the accident risk in the sea section of the planned gas pipeline.

Page372

To calculate the consequences of underwater gas releases in the event of accidents on gas pipelines, the
general three-dimensional numerical model was used to model the behaviour of submerged jets which
occur as the result of underwater gas releases from pipelines and underwater cracks and the subsequent
transfer to the sea surface. The model is based on the Lagrange intervals method. The model includes
both a cross-directed drawing in of water into the plume as well as their forced carry-over. The existence
of multidirectional external currents is also taken into account. A symbolic apparatus of the model
includes a description of the processes of diffusion and dissolution of the stream from the underwater gas
and water plume into the environment and expansion of the liquid phase (of oil products) (if present in the
release) on the sea surface.
The above numerical model was implemented as a special POL-PLUME software. The program allows
assessing the radius and other parameters (speed, share of gas) of an underwater gas and water plume
occurring as the result of underwater gas releases along the axis of the plume in discontinuous time
intervals.
The results of modelling the underwater gas and water plume using the POL-PLUME program were
compared to the data of modelling in respect of master models as well as with a series of results of
experiments stated in the report from Professor Fannelop "Highlander Plume Study". The limitation of the
model is that the radius of an underwater gas and water plume weakly depends on the accident gas flow
rate and is mainly determined by the depth of the place of release.
The dynamics of changing the mass flow rate of gas over time from the damaged sea section of the
planned gas pipeline is shown in Figure 5.2-1.

Page373

Fig. 5.2-1.
Dynamics of changing the mass flow rate of gas over time in the event of an
explosion of the sea section of the gas pipeline
As shown in Figure 5.2-1, a complete explosion of a pipeline is characterised by a very high initial mass
flow rate of gas which drops quickly. Although the gas release from the sea section lasts several hours,
already within ~40 s the accident gas flow is half of its initial rate.
As a result of such a change to the flow rate, by the time the gas reaches the sea surface (i.e. within ~10
seconds) the underwater release of gas drops significantly and does not ensure the formation of a gas and
air plume above the sea surface in accordance with the initial accident gas flow rate.
In the further calculations, the assumption was used that the established regime of gas release from the
explosion is in line with the gas flow rate 180 seconds after the explosion.
The calculation values of the main parameters of gas and water jets (if the accident occurred in the
territorial waters of Russia) are specified in Table 5.2-1.
Table 5.2-1
Parameter
Value
Section of the planned gas pipeline

Kilometre note selected for modelling (KR), km
Grounds for selecting KR
off-shore section (Russian sector)

58
This section of the line is crossed by vessel routes
between the ports of Kotka (Finland) and Sillame
(Estonia)
Sea depth, m
63,6
Radius of the underwater gas and water plume near 18,2
the sea surface, m
Proportion of gas in the plume (near the sea surface) 99%

Page374

Table 5.2-2
Time the water rises

to the surface in the
central part of the jet
tw, s
Level of agitation of
the water surface or
height of "plume"
above the surface hw,
m
Mass share of water

reaching the surface
in the centre of the jet
xw0
Radius of the area of

gas release on the
surface bg0, m
Mass flow rate of gas

Ga, kg/s
Depth H, m
Section
Distance to explosion
L, km
Gas and water jet parameters

Comments
(forecast of
visually
observed
picture)
0,5
Major gas
release,
surrounded by
individual jets
and splashes of
water
0,8
Gas release,
noticeable gas
and water
"plume"
3,3
Insignificant
agitation of free
surface with gas
release as
bubbles
Jet parameters during sonic release stage

Littoral section
from the Russian
side
10
84720
43,6
0,00
49,8
Jet parameters during subsonic release stage ("powerful" jet)

Littoral section
from the Russian
side
10
1000
8,8
0,29
11,9
Jet parameters during subsonic release stage ("weak" jet)

Littoral section
from the Russian
side
10
1,0
1,8
0,935
0,34
For the sea section of the planned gas pipeline, concentration fields of a gas plume were considered which
is formed at the level of 10 metres (characteristic location of possible ignition sources on vessels) above
the water surface. The data in Table 5.2-1 were used as the initial data and the release direction was
assumed to be equal 45 (conservative assessment). The results of calculating the dispersion of gas in the
atmosphere are listed in Table 5.2-3.
Table 5.2-3
Parameter
Section of the planned gas pipeline
Kilometre note selected for modelling (KR), km
Maximum distance at which a concentration is observed in
accordance with the maximum concentration limit of
inflammability, m
accordance with the minimum concentration limit of
inflammability, m
accordance with 1A of the minimum concentration limit of
inflammability, m
Value
off-shore section (Russian sector)
58
79,7
136,8
194,1

Page375

In order to determine the part of the cloud which may be involved in the formation of a fire outburst for
the purposes of a further risk analysis, the maximum distance value is used at which a concentration in
accordance with 1/2 of the minimum concentration limit of inflammability is observed at a level of 10 m
above the sea surface.
A modelling of the spread of the above-water gas and air plume showed that the areas of inflammability
risk (limited to 1/2 of the minimum concentration limit of inflammability) at a level where an ignition of a
gas and air mixture is possible can reach 194.1 m in the wind direction. The reason for such insignificant
distances for the spreading of an inflammable cloud is the occurrence of a marked vertical flow at speeds
in the range of 1-4 m/s caused by the effect of the powers of Archimedes, which are due to the discharge
of a gas lighter than air from a large area of the sea surface.
The total mass of natural gas release during an accident of one line in the sea section of the gas pipeline
may reach 216621.8 t. Approx. 75% of the total amount of gas is released into the environment over the
course of the first 35-60 mins from the moment the accident occurs when the the stage of powerful sonic
gas release from the pipeline explosion sets in. The remaining amount of the gas is later discharged in a
less powerful subsonic jet, the intensity of which drops over time.
5.2.3.
After analysing the calculation results, the conclusion can be drawn that during the clearly expressed jet
discharge stage the time of contact between the water and the gas phase tw is not big. Furthermore, the
mass share of water xw, which comes into contact with the gas phase, also turns out to be small. It follows
from here that a noticeable dissolution of gas in the water is only possible in a relatively tight periphery of
the jet's "gas core" or in the very next stages of the gas discharge process, when its release is small, a
"bubble plume" is created directly on the seabed of the waters, and the rising time of the water drawn into
the "plume" is relatively long. However, in this case too the water saturated with diluted natural gas will
initially enter the near-surface layer of the waters, where in contact with the atmosphere it will experience
quick degassing, because the gas concentration in the atmosphere is virtually equal to nil. We are also
taking into account that the dissolvability of saturated hydrocarbons is extremely low in the water
(dissolvability of methane at normal pressure and t 10C is equal 0.03 l/l).
Based on the above, the conclusion can be drawn that a noticeable contamination of water with saturated
hydrocarbons resulting in the death of the marine biota will not occur, while the entire natural gas
discharged as a result of the accident will enter the atmosphere.
5.2.4.
After the methane enters the atmosphere, the specific density of which is less than the specific density of
air, is quickly dispersed. A specific environmental danger is only presented if heavier saturated
hydrocarbons (ethane, etc.), whose specific density is greater than the specific density of air, enter the air.
The mass share of them in the natural gas pumped constitutes about 2.1%.

Page376

The amount of dangerous substances entering the environment reaches up to 216621.8 tonnes.
During the unfolding of an accident with ignition, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide and unburnt
methane enter the atmospheric air. An approximate amount of substances from gas combustion, which are
created during the unfolding of an accident with ignition of gas, is listed in Table 5.2-4.
Table 5.2-4
Amount of substances from gas combustion entering the atmosphere in the event of a gas pipeline
explosion (with ignition)
Component
Mass, t
Methane
Carbon monoxide
Nitrogen oxide
Nitrogen dioxide
5.2.5.
3247,3
12347,4
28,2
173,3
Impact on the geological environment
During accident situations, the impact on sediments can result in the short-term fluidisation of the
material covering the pipe or of the sludge over the trench through ascending flows of water with bubbles
in the event of pipe explosions or demolition by currents.
The jet occurring during a pipeline explosion moves the main mass of the seabed outside the explosion
crater, a thin layer of the seabed becomes fluid and drifts with the current and settles on the seabed,
forming newly created sediments. The duration of the source's activity is about half an hour. The amount
of sediments from the thin layer of seabed becoming fluid is 2.5%. As a result of the mathematical
modelling, assessments of the seabed release volumes (Table 5.2-5) in the event of an accident in the
territorial waters of Russia were obtained.
Table 5.2-5
Volume of seabed displaced as a result of an accident
Distance to
Volume of
Crater surface area SH, Crater depth h,
Section
explosion L,
seabed displaced
2
m
m
km
V, m3
Littoral section from the
2
7222
4.6
33221
Russian side
5.2.6.
Impact on sea biota
A negative impact on the sea biota occurs as the result of a release of methane to the sea surface, benthic
sediment spreading and their subsequent settling on the seabed.
In the event of accident transfer of methane from a pipeline, its concentration will quickly drop on
account of the gas rising to the sea surface and diluting of the water column contaminated with dissolved
gas. The dimensions of slicks of water with a contaminated surface layer can reach hundreds of metres.
Contaminated areas exist for several hours.

Page377

The death of organisms, in particular plankton, resulting from a toxic level of methane is only possible in
the direct vicinity of the place of gas release to the water surface. Pelagic fish, mammals and birds are
able to avoid areas of impact and will be in those for too short a time such as to die or suffer noticeable
injury. The impact on benthos will be of a punctuated nature due to the low solubility of methane in water
and its fast rise to the sea surface. Population reactions and disruption in the event of an accident are not
forecast.
In the event of an accident situation on the gas pipeline in the winter period in waters with a solid ice
cover, the negative environmental consequences will be significantly more intensive. This may result in
mass death of fish in hibernation locations or death of a significant amount of plankton and benthic
organisms.
As regards the impact on the sea biota, the two possible types of gas pipeline accidents - leakage and
explosion - are entirely different. The impact of leakage in the deep water area of the gas pipeline will
have no effect on the sea biota.
For the ecosystem of the open sea, the impact of a gas pipeline explosion will result in the release of gas
to the surface. Such an impact appears particularly severe in the part of the sea where the gas in the
pipeline is under the greatest pressure. However, such an impact will be strictly local (the slick is no more
than 1-3 km in diameter), gas will be released into the atmosphere partly and the impact on the ecosystem
must be considered insignificant, because the dissolution of gas in the water is not expected in this
instance.
Impact on the ichthyoplankton and ichthyofauna. In waters with a solid ice cover. In this case, part of the
gas released during an accident is dissolved in the water.
Preliminary conclusions from experiments studying the impact of dissolved gas on the sea biota [343]
show that natural gas has a negative effect on plankton crustaceans in concentrations of 2 mg/l and above,
concentrations below 0.4 mg/l had no effect on the survival rate or fertility of this group. Benthic
crustaceans are affected by natural gas in a concentration of 2.0 mg/l, a toxic impact started to take effect
in a concentration range from 2.6-4.7 mg/l, concentrations of 5.0 mg/l and above triggered a severely
toxic effect. In experiments with littoral gastropod molluscs, the toxic impact of natural gas was detected
starting from concentrations of 1.6 mg/l; a reduction of the reproductive ability of molluscs was detected
at concentrations of 3.3-7.2 mg/l.
A direct impact of methane and its homologues on the early stages of the development of fish was
virtually not studied. It is assumed that methane and other hydrocarbons have a narcotic, neuroparalytic
and "generally toxic" impact on water organisms developing during increased water temperatures. Its
impact is based on hypoxia, which severely increases the presence of ethane, propane, butane and other
homologues of this series. It is believed that the initial semi lethal effects start at methane concentrations
in the sea water of approx. 10-1 and severe toxicity starts at levels of more than 1 ml/l.

Page378

In the event of a gas pipeline explosion in shallow waters, the negative impact of natural gas on the early
stages of fish development is increased by a powerful hydrodynamic blow, which occurs during an
explosive release of gas transported under great pressure. However, the negative effect of such a blow
will be of a local nature and its impact on the ichthyoplankton can be assessed as weak. It is established
that during the most powerful impact of elastic waves from explosions of multiple kilogramme explosive
devices, the radius of the area of lethal injury for fish does not exceed several dozen metres. Another
factor with a negative impact of the gas pipeline on ichthyoplankton is the increase in suspended
sedimentation concentrations formed from bottom sediments.
The maximum calculation speed of the spreading of suspended sedimentation does not exceed 30 sm/s,
while the speed of movement of all food fish (young and adult) exceeds 300 sm/s. It follows from this
that, possessing a firm reaction to avoid areas of increased muddiness and a speed of movement several
times higher than that the speed of suspended sedimentation spreading, food fish do not come into contact
with the area of muddiness.
Accident releases of gas during the explosion of an underwater pipeline result in the formation of an
erosion crater on the seabed of the local area of increased muddiness, which constitutes a danger for the
biota in the section adjoining the location of the accident.
Overall, the muddying of sediments during an accident explosion of a gas pipeline is of a local and shortterm nature and does not have a significantly negative impact on the environment.
The impact on the sediment in the event of a partial explosion of a pipeline (diameter of the hole up to
10% of the entire section of the gas pipeline) can result in the short-term fluidisation of the seabed
covering the pipe over the trench through ascending flows of water with bubbles and their demolition by
currents.
Microphytobenthos . During an explosion of the pipe, the impact results in a muddying of sediments and
disruption of communities when conducting repair work. During a leakage through the seabed in the
surface layers, methanol acidic bacteria develop, which can result in a reduction of microphytobenthic
wealth, which is in no way comparable to the loss when conducting maintenance and repair work.
Macrophytobenthos. Neither pipe explosions in shallow waters nor methane leakage through the seabed
result in damage to the macrophytobenthos.

Page379

6.
MEASURES TO REDUCE ANY POSSIBLE NEGATIVE IMPACT
In accordance with Russian environmental protection legislation and the applicable regulative documents
for environmental protection, in all stages of the implementation of the Nord Stream gas pipeline
construction plan, the measures to reduce any possible negative impact must be complied with.
The main purpose of these measures is to reduce any negative impact on all environments specified in
Volume 8 Environmental Impact Assessment.
A detailed description of the measures is presented in a special volume of EIA materials for this project
(Volume 8. Protection of the Environment. Book 2, Part 1).

Page380

7.
ENVIRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC ASSESSMENT
As a result of conducting an environmental and economic assessment of the planned facility's impact on
the environment, the main environmental and economic parameters were obtained, which are presented in
Table 7.1-1.
Table 7.1-1
Environme ntal and economic parameters of the impact of the Nord Stream gas pipeline (Russian
off-shore section) on the environme nt
Measurement
No.
Parameter name
Quantity
unit
1.
Expansion of the gas pipeline's offshore sections:
km
Western (first) line
124
Eastern (second) line
123,5
2.
Du/working pressure
mm/MPa
1200/22
3.
Gas pipeline capacity
billion.m3/year
55
4.
General area of waters used, including: Temporary
247,5
diversion (construction phase) Permanent diversion km2 km2
61,76
(operation phase)
5.
Amount of sea water required during the construction
m3
2 599 501,43
phase
6.
Repeat contamination of suspended substances:
Seabed mass converted into suspended condition during t
58 164
construction
7.
Overall (gross) amount of contaminated substances
t
released into the atmosphere by the planned facilities
- during construction
t
3861,337
- during operation
t/year
8.
Amount of production waste during the period
of construction:
- 1st class
- 2nd class
t
- 3rd class
t
6,288
- 4th class
t
21 279,794
- 5th class
t
138,226
Amount of production waste during the period
of use:
- 1st class
t/year
- 2nd class
t/year
- 3rd class
t/year
- 4th class
t/year
- 5th class
t/year
9.
Amount of used and disposed
production waste during construction:
- handed over to other enterprises
t
21 062,346
- dumped in landfill sites
t
361,962
Amount of used and disposed production waste during
operation:
- transferred to other enterprises
t/year
-

Page381

No.
10.
Parameter name
- dumped in landfill sites
Environmental damage over the period of construction
to the fauna
to marine bioresources
as a result of releases of contaminated substances
to
the atmosphere during construction
as a result of using the water area
as a result of contamination of the sea waters
with suspended
substances
as a result of repeat chemical contamination
of the waters
as a result of water supply intake
as a result of a release of contaminated runoffs
after
hydrotesting
as a result of waste disposal occurring during
the construction period
Total
Environmental damage within the operation phase
to the atmosphere as a result of a release of
contaminating substances
as a result of using the waters
to the environment as a result of waste disposal
from production and use
Total
Measurement
unit
t/year
Quantity
RUB
RUB
RUB
16 414 338
16 003 516
RUB
RUB
8 375 400
312 000
10 082 148
RUB
402
RUB
RUB
21 551
RUB
114 445
RUB
51 336 074
12 274
RUB/year
RUB/year
RUB/year
2 089 870
-
RUB/year
2 089 870
The environmental and economic parameters calculated are preliminary and must be corrected in respect
of the actual data after construction.

Page382

8.
PRODUCTION
CONTROL
AND
ENVIRONMENTAL
MONITORING
AND
In accordance with Russian environmental protection legislation and the applicable normative legal
documents for environmental protection, in all stages of the implementation of the project production and
environmental monitoring (PEM) must be conducted.
The main purposes of the PEMC system of the Nord Stream gas pipeline is to obtain reliable information
on the environmental condition of the facility examined and to provide it in good time to the management
of the object, the environmental protection services and investor in the project (user) in order to take
administrative decisions in the area of environmental protection.
Furthermore, the PEMC system will perform the following tasks:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Collection of original information on the sources and types of impact on areas of the
environment in the region of Nord Stream gas pipeline's influence;
Complex assessment of the environmental condition of the areas of the environment;
Forecasting of the dynamics of the environmental situation;
Presentation of information to the management to take decisions;
Obtaining of documents on the effectiveness of environmental protection measures.
In order to achieve the objectives set during the construction and use of the examined Nord Stream gas
pipeline in the sea section, a monitoring system is being organised for the condition and quantity
determination of the parameters of contaminating the main areas of the environment. Furthermore, the
following specialist sub-systems in the PEMC system stand out for the controlled areas:
For the Russian sea section of the gas pipeline:
1.
2.
3.
Monitoring of sea waters and bottom sediments;

Monitoring of the geological environment;
Monitoring of the sea biota.
For both the sea and coast section:

1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Monitoring of the air environment;

Operational satellite monitoring;
Production and environmental control of compliance with environmental protection
norms - PEC;
Monitoring of the handling of waste;
Monitoring of socioeconomic conditions.
The following periods of conducting production and environmental monitoring are scheduled:
1.
monitoring during the period of construction;

Page383

2.
monitoring during the period of operation.
During the period of construction, three monitoring stages are planned:

1.
2.
3.
start phase (until the start of construction);

main phase (during the carrying out of the main construction work);
final phase (after completing the main construction work).
A detailed description of the environmental monitoring programme is presented in a special volume of

EIA materials for this project (Volume 8. Protection of the Environment. Book 3. Production and
Environmental Monitoring and Control (PEMC)).

Page384

CONCLUSION
The Russian offshore section of the planned Nord Stream gas pipeline is located in the eastern part of the
Gulf of Finland of the Baltic Sea. An analysis of the existing materials, a qualitative and quantitative
analysis of the probable impact of the construction and use of this section of the gas pipeline on the
environment allow drawing the following conclusions.
Underlying condition of the environment of the Baltic Sea in the area of laying the route of the Russian
offshore section of the Nord Stream gas pipeline (in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland) can be
characterised as relatively unharmed. In geological relation, the seabed of the Gulf of Finland in the area
of the planned laying of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline is characterised as a typical platform
structure with a prevalence of a relief of an accumulative type. The most representative part of the seabed
area's profile are the quarternary sediments, sand sediments presented (b. Portovaya and area of the Island
of Gogland) and sludge (central part of the off-shore section) with a high level of ferromanganese
concrete. The lithodynamic system of the shore area is in stable condition. The sea waters and bottom
sediments of the Gulf of Finland are "clean" or "relatively clean" as regards their quality class. The
biodiversity in the regions examined complies with the level typical for the eastern part of the Gulf of
Finland, including the detected vulnerable and particularly protected types listed in the Red Books of the
Russian Federation, Leningrad Region, etc. Over a significant length of the oil pipeline, the ecosystems
are distinguished by a low level of biodiversity, in particular, there are sections without any benthos along
the planned line. The region is relatively poor in biological resources (mainly fish), however, the shore
part of the waters, where the gas pipeline is to be laid (in b. Portovaya), is of great importance to the
fishing industry - sprat breeding grounds are located here. This part of the waters is used for industrial
fishing with passive fishing equipment. The industrial activities in the Gulf of Finland are characterised to
be of a low and average level of intensity, with the exception of shipping south of the Nord Stream line.
The development of technological and technical solutions for the transportation of gas in the Nord Stream
off-shore gas pipeline system is based on the principle of ensuring maximum reliability and safety of the
planned facilities. The plan is to apply state-of-the-art methods of constructing offshore gas pipelines with
the use of high-tech and environmentally sound contemporary equipment, both from domestic and
imported production.
A comparison of the various variants of implementing the project (including a refusal of activities,
onshore gas transport routes, etc.) shows that the line variant selected is ideal from the perspective of
environmental protection, because it allows:
minimising the length of the gas pipeline;
reducing the number of states whose territorial waters and exclusive economic zones
are crossed by the route;

Page385

reducing to a minimum the routes crossing of special protected natural areas (such a
crossing is only unavoidable where crossing the shores of Germany) and maintaining
a maximum distance of the line from borders located close to special protected natural
territories;
reducing to a minimum the number of shipping routes, cables and other infrastructure
facilities crossed;
avoiding the crossing of objects of cultural heritage, as well as zones of concentrating

military interests, recreation areas, intensive fishing zones and mining regions.
A final optimisation of the line within the restrictions of the selected and examined two-kilometre
corridor was carried out.
The principal project decisions are developed in accordance with the governing provisions of the public
health regulations and other normative legal documents governing the relations in the area of
environmental protection and natural resource management in the Russian Federation, which are directed
towards the warning and mitigation of negative impacts of specified industrial activities on the
environment.
In order to ensure the environmental soundness of the construction and use of the gas pipeline, a system
of measures was developed, which are designed to minimise or avoid in full any negative impacts.
Because the greatest impact on the environment may be during the period of conducting the construction
work, precisely during this period the strictest measures to warn of or reduce negative impacts will be
taken. The main measures can be described in brief as follows:
selection of the most ideal dimensions of the trench when crossing shore lines,
application of the best technology for laying it, minimisation of seabed volumes
displaced;
mandatory recultivation of sections in the places of the gas pipeline entering the shore
disturbed during construction.
use of non-reactive, natural materials (gravel, macrofragmental material) which has no

negative impact on the ecosystem, to cover up the trench;
establishment of safety zones around the pipe-laying vessels and taking of other
measures to ensure the safety of shipping in the region of conducting the work;
conducting of permanent environmental monitoring in the region of construction and

control of compliance with all legal requirements;
collection, transportation to the shore and use of all solid waste, liquid runoffs from
vessels used in construction;

Page386

conducting of construction work in seasons most beneficial for the biotic components
of the ecosystem (i.e. outside periods of nesting and molting of birds or egg-laying of
fish, etc.);
The conducted assessment of the potential impact of the processes of constructing and using the off-shore
section of the planned gas pipeline on the environment allows forecasting that when implementing the
designed activities and complying with all environmental protection measures specified by the project,
there will be no significant or irreversible changes to the environment:
the calculations of the spreading of contaminated substances in the ground layer of the
atmosphere showed that no residential areas enter into the area exceeding the
maximum contamination level during the pipe-laying work and that on the border of
the residential area of Bolshoy Bor the concentration of toxic substances does not
exceed the maximum contamination level even when simultaneously taking into
account the sources working in the coast and shore areas, i.e. at the turn of
construction of the shore and off-shore sections;
when conducting construction and installation work, there is a switch of the

electromagnetic, thermal and radiation background in the region examined, in view of
the absence of sources of electromagnetic or radiation contamination. The maximum
level of noise in the closes residential area of Bolshoy Bor during the carrying out of
the construction work is 14.16 dB(A), which does not exceed the public health norms
in accordance with SN 2.2.4/2.1.8.562-96;
the main impact on the sea water environment will be an increase in the content of
suspended substances, predominantly as a result of conducting dredging work when
developing and the covering of the underwater trench, the construction of dams, as
well the eradication of free transits (there is virtually no impact on the water's
chemical composition). The impact will consist of a diversion of sea water to conduct
the hydrotesting of the gas pipeline;
the impact on fish stocks, birds and marine mammals will come as a result of the
physical and chemical and bioproductive properties amongst their population, while
these impacts will be predominantly reversible and short-term and not result in
significant and large-scale restructuring of the communities. With inadvertent
environmental protection measures, losses in the number of living organisms
indigenous to the region of the planned construction will be compensated with the
help of paying out money in compensation for the fauna and fish stocks in accordance
with the state authorities responsible for the protection of the biodiversity and
condition of the bioresources in the region;
in the processes of conducting the construction and installation work, 7 types of waste
disposal and use of 3-5 danger classes will be created, with a total volume of
21,425,308 tonnes. Service-utility runoffs will be directed to a service vessel
collecting bilge water and disposed of in the Primorsk port (OOO Spetsimornegeport
Primorsk). For the removal of waste in the form of scrap iron and electrode stubs, an
agreement will be concluded with a specialist company (ZAO Ekoproekt). Waste
from bitumen, the normal living activities of the staff and the use of vessels will go to
landfill. Environmental protection fees will be imposed for the use of waste.

Page387

Overall, in standard accident-free use of the gas pipeline, there are no or only negligible negative impacts
on the environment.
The economic component of damage inflicted on the environment during the construction of the coast
section is taken into account in the estimated calculation. Main expense items are payments for the use of
natural resources, payments for the contamination of components of the environment and compensation
payments. The probable material losses of third parties must be compensated by Nord Stream AG.
The issue of a safe shut-down of the gas pipeline will probably be resolved later - after terminating the
planned term of its operation (50 years), taking into account the legal requirements and technological
possibilities which will exist at this time.
The materials of the Assessment of the impact on the environment allow drawing the following
conclusions:
1. Under the condition of complying with the planned decisions and environmental protection measures
during the period of constructing and operation of the Russian offshore section of the Nord Stream gas
pipeline specified by the project, the impact on the region's environment will be of a predominantly local
and short-term nature, negative changes to the ecosystems of the Baltic Sea will be reversible and
moderate in scale.
2. The damage to the environment and interests of third parties may be compensated by the operator of
the project as specified by law.
3. The route of the gas pipeline selected and the construction technologies applied are ideal from an
environmental perspective.
4. The specified range of environmental protection measures is sufficient to minimise any damage to
the environment.
Overall, the Russian section of the Nord Stream off-shore gas pipeline will not have a significant impact
on the environment. The main impact of the activities anticipated on the environment, which is of a local
and short-term nature, will be linked to the construction stage, while there will be virtually no impact
during the operation phase of the gas pipeline. The implementation of the project is permissible from an
environmental perspective.

Page388

LITERATURE
1.
V. A. Abakumov, G. M. Chernogaeva, Condition of ecosystems on surface waters in Russia

according to data from many years of monitoring // Condition and complex monitoring of the
natural environment and climate. Variation limits. .: Nauka, 2001. pp. 177-191.
2.
V. A. Abakumov, V. N. Maksimov, A. P. Levich, N. G. Bulgakov, 2004, The ecology of fresh

waters in Russia and neighbouring countries information system. 3.2 Monitoring macrozoobenthos
// http://ecgrade.belozersky.msu/ru/opis3.htp#3.2.
3.
V. A. Avinsky, I. V. Telesh, Composition and qualitative parameters of zooplankton. In the book

The Gulf of Finland under anthropogenic impact conditions. 1999. pp. 161-188.
4.
N. A. Aybulatov, Russia's activities in the shore area of the sea and environmental problems. -.:
Nauka, 2005 - 364 p.
5.
A. F. Alimov Functional physiology of freshwater bivalve molluscs. L., 1981. 248 p.
6.
A. F. Alimov, V. N. Nikulina, V. E. Panov, I. V. Telesh, N. P. Finogenova, 1993, Hydrobiological

characteristics of the Neva Bay in the Gulf of Finland. - Gidrobiol. zhurnal., vol. 29, No. 3: 3-14.
7.
A. F. Alimov, V. E. Panov, E. V. Balushkina, S. M. Golubkov, V. N. Nikulina, I. V. Telesh, N. P.

Finogenova, L. P. Umnova, Assessment of the condition of the Neva Bay and eastern part of the
Gulf of Finland in terms of hydrobiological parameters. /Environmental conditions in St
Petersburg and the Leningrad Region in 1997. Reference and analytical review, SPb, 1998, pp.
109-119.
8.
L. Almkvist, M. Olsson, D. D. Tormosov, A. V. Yablokov, 1987, Condition of populations and

problems of protecting the Baltics, Zool. zh. vol. LXVI, issue 4, pp. 588 - 597. Moscow.
9.
M. A. Antipin, A. R. Gaginskaya, 2006, Obersvations of the migration of birds on the Island of

Gogland // Migration routes and stop-overs of birds in Eastern Fennoscandia. The. of an
international symposium 14-16 March 2006, SPb. pp. 7-8.
10.
A. E. Antonov, Large-scale variability of the hydrometeorological condition of the Baltic Sea and
its impact on the industry. L.: Gidrometeoizdat, 1987-248 p.
11.
L. J. Appleby, L. Devell, Yu. K. Mishra et al. Migration routes of artificial radionuclides in the
environment. Radioecology after Chernobyl: Transl. from English. Edited by F. Warner and R.
Harrison. - .: Mir, 1999 - 512 p.
R. A. Aps Age and growth of the Baltic sprat. Riga.- 1986.
12.
13.
V. K. Arguchintsev, 1999, Numerical modelling of hydrologic characteristics and processes or the

spread of gas pollutants in the water environment // RAN Pres. -Vol.370. 6. -803-806.
14.
N. M. Arshanitsa, 1990, Fish as indicators of water quality // All-Union Conference. Methodology

of Environmental Standardisation. Thes. pres. Kharkov. pp. 73-74.

Page389

15.
N. M. Arshanitsa, B. K. KArimov, 1986, Materials for the diagnosis and prevention of fish
toxicoses // Sb. scientific work GosNUORKh. Issue 257. pp. 85-97.
16.
Atlas of flooding and wind of the Gulf of Finland. - L.: Gidrometeoizdat, 1967, 48 p.
17.
Atlas of ice of the Gulf of Finland, ed. by V. A. Drabkin. - published by GUNiO MO, 2000 Adm.
6225.
18.
Atlas of hydrometeorological occurrences which are dangerous and particularly dangerous for
shipping and fishing. North and Baltic seas. L.,1980-168 p.
19.
N. B. Balashova, V. N. Nikitina, 1983, Towards a specific and environmental composition of the

phytoplankton in the Kopor Bay in the Gulf of Finland. In the collection: Environmental aspects of
examining heat sink atomic power stations. : 24-32.
20.
M. Ya. Balode, 1991, Environmental situation in the Baltic Sea during the "blooming" of
optionally toxic cyanobacteriae. Biological resources of water bodies in the Baltic Sea. Thes. pres.
23 scientific conf. for the research of the water bodies of the Baltics. Petrozavodsk: 201-202.
21.
E. B. Balushkina Functional significance of larvae chironomids in continental water reservoirs. L.:

Nauka, 1987, 179 p.
22.
E. V. Balushkina, G. G. Vinberg, Dependence between mass and length of the body of plankton
animals. //Main general findings of water ecosystems, ed. by G. G. Vinberg, L: Nauka, 1979, pp.
169-172.
23.
S. L. Basova, D. E. Bychenkov, V. V. Kovaleva, E. K. Lange, N. V. Rodionova, 1997,

Hydrobiological characteristics of water quality in the Neva Bay an eastern part of the Gulf of
Finland. - Environmental conditions in St Petersburg and the Leningrad Region in 1996. Reference
and analytical review. SPb: 67-76.
24.
S. L. Basova, E. K. Lange, V. V. Kovaleva, 1999, Characteristics of the Neva Bay and shallow
water region of the eastern Gulf of Finland in respect of hydrobiological parameters.
Environmental protection, nature management and safeguarding of environmental safety in St
Petersburg in 1998, SPb: 202-210.
25.
S. L. Basova, M. G. Rodionova, Z. P. Zheludkova, L. P. Sugonyaeva, V. D. Malysh, N. A.

Alekseevna,, 1984, Overview of the pollution conditions in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland
in respect of hydrobiological parameters in 1983. - FOL SZUGKS. L.: 105 p.
26.
A. P. Belavskaya, 1987, Characteristics of littoral vegetation. In the book The Neva Bay:
hydrobiological findings. L.: pp. 66-69.
27.
V. V. Belov et al. Synoptic wind variability over the Baltic Sea. Trudy LGMTs, 1991, issue 5, pp.
10-16.
28.
A. P. Belyshev, L. Yu. Preobrazhensky, Structure of currents in the Neva Bay and eastern part of
the Gulf of Finland. - Trudy GGI, 1988, issue 321, pp. 4-16.
29.
A. S. Berezhnoy, S. S. Berezhnoy, Boats and vessels of the USSR Navy 1928-1945. . 1988.

Page390

30.
A. A. Berezovsky, Examinations of the water quality in the Baltic Sea basin. .,

Gudrometeoizdat, 1991, 98 p.
31.
V. V. Betin, P. V. Panteleev, Maps of the surface currents in the gulfs of Finland and Riga on the
basis of materials from aerial photography of the currents in 1966 // Trudy LGMO, 1967, No. 4,
pp. 3-42.
32.
V. V. Betin, P. V. Panteleev, Seasonal variations of the permanent currents scheme in the Baltic
Sea and their changes under the influence of the wind // Collection of the Leningrad GMO and
Petrozavodsk GMO, 1970, issue 6, pp. 45-69.
33.
E. P. Bityukob, Zooplankton of the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland and its significance for the
food of Baltic gerring.- Avtoref. kand. diss. L. 1961.
34.
E. P. Bityukov, .. Food supply of Baltic herring (Clupea harengis membras L.) in the
eastern part of the Gulf of Finland. Questions of ichthyology. Vol.1, issue 4 (21). M., 1961, pp.
723-736.
35.
E. P. Bityukov, V. N. Greze, M. V. Petrovskaya, 1971, Zooplankton of the Gulf of Finland. - Izv.

GosNIORKh, vol. 76. pp. 46-64.
36.
A. I. Blazhchishin, Paelography and evolution of later quarterny sedimentation in the Baltic Sea.
Editos A. A. Gaygalas, 1998, Kaliningrad: Yantarny skaz. - 160 p.
37.
Bogatyrev 1994 - S. V. Bogatyrev, Losses of military ships and cutters of the USSR Navy during
the Second World War. L. 3.
38.
V. N. Bokov et al. Synoptic wind variability over the Baltic Sea. Trudy LGMTs, 1991, issue 5, pp.
10-16.
39.
M. M. Borisenko .., N. K. Kravchenko, Some results of examining the mode of

strong winds in the Baltic Sea and north west of the ET USSR//Tr.Zap.-Sib.NIGMI, -1979,- No.
45. Pp.41- 51.
40.
L. P. Vraginsky, 1955, On the level of toxicity of blue and green algae. Priroda, pp. 1-117.
41.
I. F. Brandta (1856) Vertebrates of northern European Russia and in the characteristics of the
Northern Urals // Annex to the book by Gofman Northern Urals and littoral range of Pay-Khoy.
SPb.
42.
R. R. Bruks, Pollution by microelements // Chemistry of the environment, 1982, pp. 371-413.
43.
V. A. Buzun, 1998, Details on the migration of birds on the Island of Seskar (Gulf of Finland,
Baltic Sea) // Materials from the programme Examination of the condition of populations of
migrating birds and tendencies of their changes in Russia. V.2. pp. 47-69.
44.
V. A. Buzun, 1998, Migration of birds on the archipelago of the Kurgal reef (south eastern part of
the Gulf of Finland) in autumn 1997 // Materials from the programme Examination of the
condition of populations of migrating birds and tendencies of their changes in Russia. ., 2: 108122.
45.
V. A. Buzun, P. Kerauskas, 1993, Ornithological findings in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland
// Ris. ornitol. zhurnal, No. 2, issue 2 . pp. 253-259.

Page391
PETER GAZ NO. 36/07-01- TEO-OOS-0801(1)-S6

46.
V. V. Bulyon, Original plankton production in inland waters. L., 1983. 150 p.
47.
V. V. Kosheleva, M. A. Novikov, I. P. Migalovsky, A. M. Lapteva, E. A. Gorbacheva
48.
A. Viller, Determinant of sea fish and fresh waters of the North European Basin, ., 1983, 429 p.
49.
G. G. Vinberg,, Original plankton production, Minsk., 1960, 329 p.
50.
Algae. Handbook. 1989. Kiev: Nauk. dumka. 608 p.
51.
K. V. Volkov, A. N. Popov, Intertype contingency of fish of the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland according to
data of trawler mapping. Collection of scientific work of the GosNIORKh, issue 291, pp. 87-97. L.1989.
52.
E. G. Volkova, V. N. Pesonichny, Influence of dredging on the environment. Hydromechanisation and problems

for the environment, Theses pres. All-Union Scientific and Research Conference, M, 1981.
53.
Temporary method of assessing damage inflicted on fish stocks as a result of construction, reconstruction or
expansion of businesses, buildings and other facilities and conducting various types of work on fishing
reservoirs. M., 1990.
54.
A. R. Gaginskaya, 1967, On the migration of birds on the southern coast of the Gulf of Finland (according to
observations from 1960-1962 in the region of Stary Petergof) // Results of ornithological research in the Baltics.
Tallin.
55.
N. P. Galkina, L. V. Shirokov, On the distribution and number of fish larvae in the eastern part of the Gulf of
Finland. // News from the GosNIORKh. 1978., vol. 129, pp. 43 -52.
56.
V. F. Galchenko, Bacterial cycle of methane in marine ecosystems // Nature. 1995. 6. pp. 35-48.
57.
Geography and monitoring of biodiversity, authors' collective, .: Publishing house of the Scientific and
Education Technology Centre, 2002. 432 p.
58.
Geology of the Baltic Sea Edited by V. K. Gudelis, E. M. Emelyanov, Vilnius: Mokslas, 1976, 380 p.
59.
D. E. Gershanovich, A. A. Elizarov, V. V. Sapozhnikov, Bioproductivity of the ocean, .: Agropromizdat,

1990, 237 p.
60.
Hygienic demands on the quality and safety of food staples and alimentary products. Sanitary rules and
standards. SanPiN 2.3.2.560-96., ., 1997
61.
Hydrometeorological conditions of the shelf zone in the seas of the USSR. Handbook. Vol.1. Issue 1.- L.:
Gidrometeoizdat, 1983.-173 p.
62.
Hydrometeorology and hydrochemistry of the seas of the USSR. Volume 3. The Baltic Sea, issue 1.
Hydrometeorological conditions. - SPb: Gidrometeoizdat, 1992, 450 p.

Page 391

63.
Hydrometeorology and hydrochemistry of the seas. Vol. III. The Baltic Sea. Issue 2. Hydrometeorological
conditions and oceanographic foundations of the formation of biological productivity. Gidrometeoizdat, 1994.
64.
A. Gill, Dynamics of the atmosphere and ocean. Vol. 2. .: Mir. 1986, 415 p.
65.
M. M. Gollerbakh, L. K. Krasavina, Determinant of freshwater algae in the USSR. Issue 14. Charophytes. L.:
Nauka. 190 p.
66.
M. M. Gollerbakh, E. K. Kosinskaya, 1953, V. I. Polyansky, Blue and green algae. Determinant of freshwater
algae in the USSR. .- L.:, Nauka, issue 3, 643 p.
67.
A. V. Gorbunova, Influence of an increased content of sediments in the water on the growth of three cladoceran
species // Sb. nauch. tr. GosNIORKh, 1986, issue 255, pp. 79-82.
68.
State water registry. Multiple-year data. Vol. 1. RSFSR, issue 5, Nos. 1 and 2. -L., 1986, 344 p.
69.
G. B. Grauman, Ichthyoplankton, in the book: Studies into the biological productivity of the Baltic Sea, vol. 3,
. 1984, pp. 259-456.
70.
G. B. Grauman, Environmental features of reproduction of the principal pelagic fish in the Baltic Sea.//
Fischerei-Forschung. 1980. 18. 77-81.
71.
A. I. Gritsenko, G. S. Akopova, V. M. Maksimov, Ecology. Oil and gas. - .: Nauka, 1997.
72.
V. K. Gudelis, History of the development of the Baltic Sea. Chapter 3 in the book: Geology of the Baltic Sea,
pp. 95-116. Publishing house Moklas, Vilnius, 1976.
73.
V. V. Gurvich, Methods for quantitative research of the micro- and mezobenthos // Biol. intern. wat. Inform.
biol. 1969. 3. pp. 57-63.
74.
I. N. Davidan, A. E. Mikhaylov, A. I. Smirnova, Long-term variability of the hydrological conditions of the

Baltic Sea. // Problems of researching and mathematical modelling of ecosystems in the Baltic Sea. International
project Baltika. Issue 4.- L.: Gidrometeoizdat, 1989, pp. 6-61.
75.
A. N. Dzyuban, I. N. Krylova, I. A. Kuznetsova, Features of the spread of bacteria and gas mode in the waters of
the Baltic Sea in the winter period // Oceanology. 1999, vol. 39, No. 3.
76.
A. N. Dobrotvorsky et al. Results of examining the processes of shelf seabed transformation under the influence
of waves, currents and ice cover in some littoral areas of the Baltic Sea. RAO / CIS OFFSHORE - 2005.
September 13-15, 2005.
77.
V. A. Dogel, Zoology of invertebrates. M., 1975.
78.
V. R. Dolnik, 1981, "Eksperiment" programmes: comparison of methods of observing the flight of birds // Tr.
Zool. in-ta AN SSSR 104: 3-7.
79.
V. B. Evstigneeva, L. I. Prokhorova, 1968, On the determination of chlorophyll a and b // Biochemistry, vol. 33,
issue 2.

Page 392

80.
Almanach of the quality of the sea waters in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland according to hydrobiological
parameters in 1988. 1989. L.
81.
parameters in 1989. 1990. L.
82.
parameters in 1989. 1990. Sevzapgidromet, L. 90 p.
83.
Almanach of the quality of the surface waters according to hydrobiological parameters in the area of activity of
SZUGKS in 1987. 1988. L.
84.
E. M. Emelyanov, Barrier zones in the ocean. Sedimentation and mineralisation, geoecology. Yantarny skaz,
Kaliningrad. 1998, 416 p.
85.
E .M. Emelyanov, Powers of winkle sludge and natural long-term currents in cavities of the Baltic Sea below the
halocline. Thes. pres. Kh\Ch Intern. scientific school for marine geology, Moscow, 14-18 November 2005. .,
2005. GEOS, vol. I, pp.189-190.
86.
E .M. Emelyanov, Spread of chemical elements in bottom sediments. In the book: Ecosystem models.
Assessment of the current condition in the Gulf of Finland. S-Petersburg, Gidrometeoizdat, 1997, Issue 5, part II,
pp. 166-175.
87.
E .M. Emelyanov, V. A. Kravtsov, Transitional and heavy metals in the waters of the Gulf of Finland. In the
book: Ecosystem models. Assessment of the current condition in the Gulf of Finland. Gidrometeoizdat, SPetersburg, 1997, Issue 5, part II, pp. 329-351.
88.
E. M. Emleyanov, V. T. Paka, V. A. Kravtsov, The problem of the Baltics in the 20th century. Captured
chemical weapons. Journal of the RF Navy Morskoy Sbornik. 2000. No. 2(1839), pp. 41- 43.
89.
E. M. Emelyanov, E. S. Trimonis, G. S. Kharin, Geological structure of the seabed of the Northern Baltics.
Oceanology, 1996, vol. 36, No. 6, pp. 910-918.
90.
L. A. Zenkevich, Biology of the seas of the USSR, ., 1963, 739 p.
91.
L. A. Zenkevich, Seas of the USSR, their fauna and flora. ., 1956, 424 p.
92.
V. V. Zernova, Autumn phytoplankton of the Baltic Sea // Oceanology 1997. Vol. 37, No. 2. pp. 236-244.
93.
V. V. Zernova, V. P. Shevchenko, Structure of phytocens of the Baltic Sea under conditions of continuous
eutrophication of the waters // Oceanology. 2001. Vol. 41., No. 2, pp. 231 -239.
94.
V. A. Zubakin, 1988, Polar tern // Birds of the USSR. Seagulls. M. pp. 337-347.
95.
V. I. Zubov, V. N. Koterov, V. M. Krivtsov, A. V. Shipilin, Non-stationary gas-dynamic processes in the gas

pipeline on the underwater crossing of the Black Sea // Mathematical modelling. 2001. Vol. 13, No. 4. pp.58-70.
96.
M. M. Zubova, Dependence of wind speed on the gradient of atmospheric pressure for the Baltic Sea // Tr.
GOIN, 1962, issue 70, pp. 25-31.
97.
V. V. Ivanova, Experimental modelling zoobenthos choking when dumping soil. // Collection of scientific works
from GosNIORKh, 1988, issue 285. pp. 107-113.

Page 393

98.
Ivankovskoe water reservoir: current condition and problems of protection. ,: Nauka, 2000, 344 p.
99.
Yu. A. Izrael, A. V. Tsyban, Anthropogenic ocean ecology. L.: Gidrometeoizdat, 1989, 528 p.
100.
Yu. A. Izrael, A. V. Tsyban, ed. Examination of the Baltic Sea ecosystem. St Petersburg, Gidrometeoizdat, 2005.
101.
Yu. A. Izrael, A. V. Tsyban., S. A. Shuka, S. A. Mosharov, 1999, Flows of polychlorinated biphenyls in the
ecosystems of the Baltic Sea // Meteorology and hydrology. 10. pp. 63-74.
102.
V. V. Ilinsky, Heterotrophic bacterioplankton: ecology and role in the processes of natural cleaning of the
environment from oil contamination. Avtoref. dis. dotkora biol. nauk. M: Prostator, 2000.
103.
IOS, vol. 1, 1996 - History of domestic shipbuilding. Vol. 1. SPb.
104.
IOS, vol. 2, 1996 - History of domestic shipbuilding. Vol. 2. SPb.
105.
Yu. A. Isakov, 1982, Situation of studying the fauna of the USSR // Birds of the USSR. Study history, divers,
toadstools, tube-nosed. .:pp. 208-224.
106.
I. I. Kazanova, Determinant of eggs and larvae of fish in the Baltic Sea and its gulfs // Tr. VNIRO / Biology and
industry of the main commercial fish in the Baltic Sea / ed. by N. A. Dmitrieva - 1954, vol. XXVI. pp. 221-265.
107.
N. E. Kaygorodov, Influence of mineral sediments on marine life and spread of suspended particles with the
flow during dredging work // Collection of scientific works of GosNIORKh, 1979, issue 2. pp. 128-131.
108.
B. Ya. Kalveka, 1980, On the seasonal cycles of phytoplankton development in the open parts of the Baltics and
the Riga Gulf in 1976, works of BaltNIIRKh, 15, pp. 36-45.
109.
M. V. Kaleys, Contemporary hydrological conditions in the Baltic Sea // Ashyu Special Report, 1976, No. 4, pp.
37-44.
110.
S. S. Kamaeva, Corrosiveness of soil taking into account microbiological factors. Methods of determination.
NRTs Gazprom. Moscow, 2000, 79 p.
111.
K. Karri-Lindal, Birds over the land and sea: Global overview of the migration of birds. .: Mysl, 1984. 204 p.
112.
V. M. Katanskaya, 1981, Increased aquatic vegetation of continental water bodies of the USSR. L., Nauka. 187
p.
113.
Catastrophe of the Globe Asimi tanker in the port of Klaipeda and its environmental consequences, M.:
Gidrometeoizdat, 1990, 232 p.
114.
I. L. Kiselev, 1948, On the photoplankton of the subsaline region of the Gulf of Finland (area of the Koporskoy
and Luzhskoy bays and Gulf of Narva). Collection of articles in memory of academician A. S. Zernov. L.: 192204.

Page 394

115.
R. K. Klige On the influence of global hydrometeorological changes to the level and thermal mode of the
Atlantic Ocean and Baltic Sea // Works of the 12th conference of Baltic oceonographic scientists and 7th
meeting of experts on the hydrologic equilibrium in the Baltic Sea, L.,1981, pp. 27-41.
116.
The climate of Leningrad. - L.: Gidrometeoizdat, 1982, 252 p.
117.
Key ornithological territories of Russia's Baltic region (Kaliningrad and Leningrad regions). SPb: Russian
Association for the Protection of Birds, 2000, 136 p.
118.
R. Z. Kovalevskaya, .. Assimilation numbers of plankton // General foundations of studying

water ecosystems. L.: 1979. pp. 157-163.
119.
V. I. Kozhanchikov, 1964, Marine flora of the Neva in Leningrad and its surroundings. - LGU Messenger, 15,
biol. series, 3.
120.
M. P. Kokuricheva et al. Impact of suspended substances during the extraction of sand on marine organisms.
Hydromechanisation and problems for the environment. Theses pres. All-Union Scientific and Technical
Conference, M., 1981.
121.
A. M. Kolmogorov, Towards a cinematics of the movement of liquid with variable muddiness. Information from
the AN SSSR No. 5, ONTI, 1946.
122.
A. V. Kondratiev, 2000, Key ornithological territories of Russia's Baltic region (Kaliningrad and Leningrad
regions). SPb., 136 p.
123.
N. V. Kondratieva, O. V. Kovalenko, 1975, Brief determinant of the types of toxic blue and green algae, Naukova dumka, Kiev: 80 p.
124.
Konkevich 1869 - L. Konkevich, Chronicle of accidents and other disasters of military vessels, SPb, 1874.
125.
I. L. Korelyakjova, 1989, The Gulf of Vyborg: marine flora and life. Collection of scientific work of the
GosNIORKh, issue 291: 26-43.
126.
I. L. Korelyakova, 1997, Increased marine life of the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland. SPb.:GosNIORKh. 160
p.
127.
T. V. Koronelli, V. V. Ilinsky, M. N. Semenenko, Oil contamination and stable marine ecosystems // Ecology,
1993. 4. pp. 78-80.
128.
A. A. Korchagin, 1976, Structure of plant communities // Field geobotanics. L., vol. 5, pp. 7-313.
129.
V. N. Koterov, V. I. Zubov, V. M. Krivtsov, Study of the processes of hydrogen sulphide release in the area of
laying a gas pipeline in the instance of its explosion in the off-shore section. Scientific and technical report - .:
VTs RAN - IBRAE - VNIIGAZ, 2000.
130.
Red book of the nature of the Leningrad Region. 1999. Vol. 1. Particularly protected natural areas (ed. G. A.
Noskov, M. S. Boch) SPb., Publishing house Aktsioner i K. 352 p.

Page 395

131.
Red book of the nature of the Leningrad Region. 2002. Vol. 3. Animals. (ed. G. A. Noskov) SPb, ANO NPO Mir
i Semya. 480 p.
132.
Red book of the RSFSR. 1983. Animals. M. Rosselkhozizdat. 456 p.
133.
Red book of the USSR. 1984. Vol. 1. .: Lesnaya Prom., 478 p.
134.
Accident of the Amerika tanker at the northern tip of Gogland. 15.10. 1856. Morskoy sb. XXVI No. 14 pp. 3235.
135.
I. I. Kryshev, V. N. Ryabova, 1986, Periodic processes in the dynamics of zooplankton in the eastern part of the
Gulf of Finland. In the book: Hydrobiological estuary studies. Works of ZIN AN SSSR. Vol. 141. pp. 43-57.
136.
L. A. Kudersky, Quantitative report of the bottom fauna in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland of the Baltic
Sea // Works of GosNIORKh, 1982, issue 192. pp. 78-93.
137.
L. A. Kudersky, G. M. Lavrentieva, Assessment of damage to waters of the fishing industry from disposing soil
masses (relating to the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland). SPb. 1996. 52 p.
138.
L. A. Kudresky, V. A. Rumyantsev, V. G. Drabkova, 2000, Ecological condition of the Onega Lake, Ladoga
Lake, River Neva and Gulf of Finland water system at the turn of the 21st century. - SPb: 79 p.
139.
Kh. A. Kuk, 1979, .. 1979. Macrophytes of the eastern and north-eastern coast of the Gulf of Finland, News from the systematics of lower plants, vol. 16: 15-18.
140.
E. V. Kumarin, 1979, Method of studying the visible migration of birds, Tartu: 1-59.
141.
E. A. Kurashov, Meiobenthos as a component of lake ecosystems, SPb: Alga-Fond, 1994. 224 p.
142.
E. A. Kurashov, On the interrelation of the biomass meio- and macrobenthos and share of meiobenthos in the
general biomass of lake ecosystems during various productive levels of benthos communities // Examination of
freshwater and marine invertebrates. L., 1986. pp. 162-171.
143.
G. M. Lavrentieva (manager). Report: Conducting environmental monitoring of the environment in the region of
the construction of facilities of hydrotechnological equipment and port structure of Primorsk oil-loading
terminal. Section: Fishing industry monitoring. 2002 . - Funds of GosNIORKh.
144.
G. M. Lavrentieva (manager). Report: Fish industry monitoring of the area of the construction of a equipment to
protect St Petersburg from flooding, Funds of GosNIORKh. 2003
145.
G. M. Lavrentieva, S. V. Mesheryakova, O. I. Mitskevich, V. A. Ogorodnikova, O. N. Susloparova, T. V.

Tereshenkova, Hydrobiological characteristics of the Gulf of Vyborg, straits of Berkezund, Bay of Batareyna
and Luzhskoy Bay (eastern part of the Gulf of Finland). In the book: The Gulf of Finland under anthropogenic
impact conditions. 1999. SPb. pp. 211-256.

Page 396

146.
G. M. Lavrentiev, O. N. Susloparova, V. A. Ogorodnikova, O. I. Mitskevich, O. V. Lebedeva, T. V. Tereshkova,

H. I. Volkhonskaya, G. A. Alekseeva, A. S. Shurukhin, Fish industry assessment of major second-level gulfs
(Vyborg, Koporskaya and Luzhskaya bays) of the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland. - Thes. pres. VIII
conference of the Hydrobiological Society RAN. Kaliningrad, 2001, vol. 1, pp. 51 -52.
147.
V. D. Lebedev, Fish of the USSR, M, 1969, 447 p.
148.
I. O. Leontiev, Changes to the coast line under the influence of hydrotechnical equipment // Oceanology, 2007.
Vol. 47 (forthcoming).
149.
I. O. Leontiev, Littoral dynamics: waves, currents and streams of deposits. .: GEOS, 2001, 272 p.
150.
I. O. Leontiev, Account of sediments and forecast of the development of the coast // Oceanology, 2008, vol. 48,
(forthcoming).
151.
I. O. Leontiev, On the mechanism of creating underwater waves on a sandy shore slope // Oceanology, 2008b,
vol. 47 (forthcoming).
152.
L. A. Lesnikov, Biological aspects of conducting dredging work, //Collection of presentations and information
provided at the scientific and technical conference for the study of influence of dredging and soil dumping on the
environment. Leningrad basin management of the scientific and technical society of water transport,
LenmorNIIproekt and LIVT, 1975: 27-32.
153.
L. A. Lesnikov, Biological aspects of conducting dredging work, In the collection: Presentations and information
provided at the scientific and technical conference on the influence of dredging and soil dumping on the
environment, L, Nauka, 1975.
154.
L. A. Lesnikov, Influence of moving soil on fishing industry waters // Collection of scientific work of
GosNIORKh, 1986, issue 255: 3-9.
155.
A. P. Lisitsyn, New possibilities of four-dimensional oceanology and monitoring the second generation experience of two years' of examining the White Sea // Contemporary problems of oceanology, .: Nauka,
2003.
156.
A. P. Lisitsyn, Sediment formation in the Bering Sea, ., Nauka, 1966, 574 p.
157.
A. P. Lisitsyn, The marginal filter of oceans // Oceanology, 1994. Vol. 34, 5. pp. 735- 747.
158.
D. S. Lyuleeva, M. M. Zhapakyavichus, M. E. Shumakov, M. L. Yablonkevich, K. V. Bolshakov, 1981,

Comparison of results of examining the daily flight in autumn 1977 to Kursk plait with five methods // Tr. Zool.
in-ta. AN SSSR 104: 57-70.
159.
Yu. I. Lyakhin, S. V. Makarova, A. A. Maksimov, O. P. Savchuk, N. I. Silina, 1997, Environmental situation in

the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland in July 1996, in the book: Problems of researching and mathematical
modelling of ecosystems in the Baltic Sea, issue 5, Ecosystem models. Assessment of the current condition in
the Gulf of Finland, Part 2, Hydrometeorological, hydrochemical, hydrobiological, geological conditions and
dynamics of the water of the Gulf of Finland, Gidrometeoizdat, SPb: 416-434.

Page 397

160.
. Vol. 3, 1966 - Sea Atlas, Vol. 3, ., 1966.
161.
P. F. Mayevsky, 1964, Flora in moderate climates of the European part of the USSR, L., 880 p.
162.
S. V. Makarov, 1997, Species composition and quantitative characteristics of phytoplankton, In the book:
Problems of researching and mathematical modelling of ecosystems in the Baltic Sea, issue 5, Ecosystem
models. Assessment of the current condition in the Gulf of Finland, Part 2, Hydrometeorological, hydrochemical,
hydrobiological, geological conditions and dynamics of the water of the Gulf of Finland, Gidrometeoizdat, SPb:
354-365.
163.
S. V. Makarov, 1999, Dynamics of structural parameters of phytoplankton of the eastern part of the Gulf of
Finland over many years. - Avtoref. cand. dis., SPb: 24 p.
164.
V. I. Makarova, Calculation of wind fields in accordance with fields of atmospheric pressure over the sea //
Background information, Issue No. 4. Hydrometeorology, Hydrometeorology series, 1989.
165.
A. A. Maksimov, Macrozoobenthos of the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland // Ecosystem models. Assessment
of the current condition in the Gulf of Finland. Part 2, Hydrometeorological, hydrochemical, hydrobiological,
geological conditions and dynamics of the water of the Gulf of Finland, SPb: Gidrometeoizdat, - 1997. - Issue 5.
pp. 405-416.
166.
O. B. Maksimova, Assessment of the influence of increased water muddiness, occurring when conducting
hydrotechnological work, on the structural and functional characteristics of photoplankton. Avtoref. dis. cand.
biol. nauk. SPb.: GosBIORKh, 2002, 22 p.
167.
Yu. S. Malyshev, Yu. V. Polyushkin, Assessment of the condition of ecosystems - a key element of
environmental monitoring//Geography and natural resources, 1998. No. 1. pp. 35-42.
168.
A. S. Malchevsky, Yu. B. Pukinsky, 1983, Birds of the Leningrad Region and surrounding areas, L., vol. 1, 480
p., vol. 2, - 504 p.
169.
G. G. Matishov, B. A. Nikitin, 1997, Scientific and methodical approaches to the assessment of impact of gas
and oil extraction on the ecosystems of the Arctic Sea (based on the example of the Shtokman deposit), Apatity,
Publishing house KNTs RAN, 393 p.
170.
D. G. Matishov, G. G. Matishov, Radiological environmental oceanology, - Apatity: publishing house Kolskogo

NTs RAN, 2001, 417 p.
171.
International environmental protection legislation in the region of the Baltic Sea: comments to the conventions,
St Petersburg, 1999, 37 p.
172.
Methods of assessing the pollution and estimating the volume of damage from the destruction of fauna and
disturbance of their habitat, confirmed by the RF State Environmental Committee. 28 April 2000

Page 398

173.
Methods of assessing the pollution and estimating the volume of damage from the destruction of fauna and
disturbance of their habitat (confirmed by the Russian State Environmental Committee on 28 April 2000).
174.
Methodical recommendations for the collection and processing of materials during hydrobiological studies in
freshwater bodies. Photoplankton and its production, 1981. L.
175.
freshwater bodies. Zooplankton and its production, 1984. L.
176.
freshwater bodies. Zoobenthos and its production, 1983. L.
177.
Procedural MU guidelines 2.1.7.730-99.
178.
Procedural guidelines. Conducting observations of toxic contamination of bottom sediments in freshwater

ecosystems on the basis of biotesting 2002.
179.
Methodical textbook for studying the food supply and food relations of fish in natural conditions. 1974, M:
Nauka, 254 p.
180.
Procedure manual for water biotesting, M, 1991.
181.
Methods of studying organic substances in the ocean / edited by E. A. Romankevich, M, Nauka, 1980, 343 p.
182.
Yu. D. Mikhailov, Probable characteristics of littoral currents of the Baltic Sea//Tr. GOIN, 1972, Issue 111, pp.
76-97.
183.
O. I. Mitskevich (manager) Report: Local fish industry monitoring during hydrotechnical work in the waters of
the specialised oil-loading sea port of Primorsk. Funds of GosNIORKh. 2006
184.
Modelling of the physical effects during accident disturbance of one of the lines of the underwater crossing of
Yamal-Tsentr through Baydaratskaya Bay. Scientific and technical report. - .: RAO Gazprom - NTP
Ekhotekhnorisk Neftegaz, 1996.
185.
T. O. Moiseenko, I. V. Rodyushkin, V. A. Dauvalter, L. P. Kudryavtseva, Formation of the quality of surface

waters and bottom sediments of anthropogenic strain on the catchment area of the Arctic basin. Apatity Kolsky
Research Centre RAN, 1996, 263 p.
186.
T. I. Moiseenko, Theoretical foundations of standardising anthropogenic strain on reservoirs of the Subarctic,

Apatity, Kolsky Research Centre, 1997, 261 p.
187.
A. S. Monin, A. M. Yaglom, Statistical hydromechanics, Part 1.//. Nauka, 1965, 639 p.
188.
F. D. Mordukhay-Boltovskoy, I. K. Rivier, Predatory cladocerans Podonidae, Polyphemidae, Cercopagidae and

Leptodoridae of the world fauna. - L.: Nauka, 1987, -182 p.

Page 399

189.
I. E. Moroz, V. P. Gorelov, V. M. Tyunyakov, Influence of dredging work on the physiological condition of

some hydrobionts//Collection of scientific work of GosNIORKh, 1998, issue 323: 115-125.
190.
V. A. Moskalev, 1975, Migration of water fowl at the tips of the Gulf of Vyborg in autumn 1971//Information
from the Baltic Committee for the Study of the Migration of Birds 9: 47-52.
191.
Manual of applied science in respect of the climate of the USSR. Series 3, parts 1-6, issue 3. - L.:
Gidrometeoizdat, 1988, 692 p.
192.
I. A. Nemirovskaya, Hydrocarbons in the ocean (snow-ice-water-suspended matter-bottom sediments) .:

Nauchny Mir. 2004. 328 p.
193.
I. A. Nemirovskaya, S. A. Zaretskas, 2000, Balance of hydrocarbons in the Baltic Sea // Geochemistry. No. 11
pp. 1210-1225
194.
I. A. Nemirovskaya, S. A. Zaretskas, Composition of hydrocarbons and bottom sediments in the Baltic Sea //
Oceanology. 2001. 1. pp. 53-60.
195.
I. A. Nemirovskaya, M. P. Nesteropva, O. S. Pustelnikov, Organic compounds in the waters of the Eastern

Baltics // Water resources. 1987. 1. pp. 111-118.
196.
I. A. Nemirovskaya, V. P. Pilipenko, Experience of using the Milikhrom chromatograph for the analysis of
polygene in natural objects//Oceanology. 1991, vol. 31. Issue 4. pp. 678-682.
197.
N. Nechaeva, Microbiological studies of the Gulf of Finland // Examination of the seas of the USSR. - 1933 issue 18. pp. 145-164.
198.
I. I. Nikolaev, 1950, Main ecological and geographic complexes of phytoplankton of the Baltic Sea and their
spreading. - Botanical journal, No. 6, vol. 35: 602-611.
199.
I. I. Nikolaev, 1954, On the "flowering" of water in the Baltic Sea, - Works of VNIRO, 26: 210-220.
200.
I. I. Nikolaev, 1961, Short quantitative characteristics of the plankton in the Baltic Sea, - Works BaltVNIRO, 7:
78-98.
201.
I. I. Nikolaev, Plankton and fish productivity of the Baltic Sea, Riga, 1960, 56 p.
202.
V. N. Nikulina, 1987, Dynamics of the number and biomass of phytoplankton in the Neva Bay, - Works of ZIN
AN SSSR, 151:. 20-28.
203.
V. N. Nikulina, 1988, Phytoplankton of the Neva Bay and eastern part of the Gulf of Finland, - Study of the
water system of the Ladoga Lake - River Neva - Neva Bay and eastern part of the Gulf of Finland. Works of
GGI, issue 1: 59-66.
204.
V. N. Nikulina, 1989, Plankton blue and green algae of the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland. Works of ZIN AN
SSSR, vol. 205: 26-37.
205.
V. N. Nikulina, 1991, Composition, spreading and interannual changes to the phytoplankton in eastern part of
the Gulf of Finland, In the collection: Studies of phytoplankton in the system of monitoring the Baltic Sea and
other seas of the USSR, .: 55-68.

Page 400

206.
V. N. Nikulina, 1999, Phytoplankton of the Neva Bay and eastern part of the Gulf of Finland, - the Gulf of
Finland under anthropogenic impact conditions, Institute of Lymnology RAN, SPb: 114-137.
207.
V. N. Nikulina, Plankton blue and green algae of the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland. Works of ZIN AN
SSSR, vol. 205: 1989. 26-37.
208.
V. N. Nikulina, V. A. Bolshakova, 1998, Phytoplanktion of the River Neva estuary in the area of constructing
equipment for the protection of St Petersburg from floods. - Gidrobiol. zhurnal., vol. 34, No. 1: 25-33.
209.
S. Yu. Novoselov, I. V. Bondarenko, A. Yu. Kuzmin, Environmental problems of developing oil and gas
deposits on the shelfs of the Barents and Karsk seas // Materials of the reporting session in respect of the results
of NIR PINRO in 1991, Murmansk: PINRO, 1992, pp. 237-248.
210.
Normative data for the maximum permissible levels of contamination with polluting facilities of the
environment. Reference material. SPb, 1994, 234 p.
211.
Norms and criteria of assessing the contamination of bottom sediments in water facilities, 1996 - Regional
guideline, SPb, 20 p.
212.
Norms and criteria of assessing the contamination of bottom sediments in the water facilities of St Petersburg,
Regional guideline, SPb, 1996, 20 p.
213.
Radiation safety standards (NRB-99): Health guidelines. - .: Centre for health and epidemiological
standardisation, health certification and expert reports of the Russian Ministry of Health, 1999, 116 p.
214.
G. A. Noskov, E. R. Gaginskaya, A. O. Khaare, V. M. Kamenev, K. V. Bolshakov, 1965, Migration of birds in

the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland // Information from the Baltic Committee for the Study of the Migration of
Birds, Tartu, 3: 3-27.
215.
G. A. Noskov, V. A. Fedorov, A. R. Gaginskaya, R. A. Sagitov, V. A. Buzun, 1993, On the ornithological fauna

of the islands of the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland // Russian Ornithological Journal, vol. 2, issue 2, pp. 163173.
216.
Ensuring radiation safety when handling production waste with increased levels of natural radionuclides on
facilities of the RF oil and gas sector. Health and safety rules and standards, SanPiN 2.6.6.1169-02, Moscow:
Russian Ministry of Health, 2002. - 24 p.
217.
Ensuring satellite information of work for the environmental mapping of the Baltic Sea in October 2005 [text]:
report on the work under Agreement No. 01/1005 of 17 October 2005 / Atlantic scientific research of the fishing
industry and oceanography, - Kaliningrad, 2005 - 20 p., 101 p., maps - ordered by: OOO Morskie Sputnikovye
Tekhnologii.
218.
A. I. Obzhirov, Gas chemical fields of the natural layer of seas and oceans, . Nauka, 1993, 138.
219.
Reports on the condition of pollution of the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland in respect of hydrobiological
parameters in 1981-1985, - FOL SZ UGKS.

Page 401

220.
Reports on the environmental condition of the seas of the USSR and specific regions of the Atlantic Ocean in
1990, SPb, Gidrometioizdat, 1991. -144 p.
221.
Reports on the environmental condition of the seas of the USSR and specific regions of the Atlantic Ocean in
1991, SPb, Gidrometioizdat, 1992. - 156 p.
222.
S. N. Olenin, The benthic "desert" and transitional environmental area on the seabed of the eastern part of the
Baltic Sea // Oceanology. - 1989. - vol. 29, issue 6. pp. 1006-1009.
223.
Approximately permissible concentration of heavy metals and arsenic in soils. (Supplement 1 to PDK and ODK
list No. 6229-911) Health guidelines GN 2.1.7.020-94..1995, 7 p.
224.
Main tendencies for the evolution of ecosystems / ed. I. N. Dovidan, O. P. Savchuk, SPb: Gidrometeoizdat, issue
4, 1989, pp. 96-102.
225.
NIR report Theoretical and experimental studies into the processes of transforming relief ground under the
influence of wind waves, currents and ice cover for the purposes of optimising project decisions for the laying of
the lines of the Northern European gas pipeline in the sections with access to the shore and in shallow water
areas of the Baltic Sea. Vol. 3, Description of the models used and results of mathematical modelling, St
Petersburg, 2004.
226.
Report on NIS SChS run 2156, 2005.
227.
Report on STM K-1711 Atlantniro run, 2005.
228.
Report on the topic Analysis of the hydrometeorological conditions in the insular passage area, Ice-1. - GNINGI
MO, 1998, 140 p.
229.
Environmental protection, environmental management and safeguarding environmental safety in St Petersburg in

1997, ed. A. S. Baeva and N. D. Sorokina, SPb, 1998, 306 p.
230.
Assessment of the current condition in the Gulf of Finland. Part. 2, Hydrometeorological, hydrochemical,
hydrobiological, geological conditions and dynamics of the water of the Gulf of Finland/ ed. I. N. Dovidan, O. P.
Savchuk, SPB, Gidrometeoizdat. issue 5, 1997, pp. 390-404.
231.
Assessment of the level of contamination of soils with chemical substances, Part 1, heavy metals and pesticides,
., Minprirody RF, 1982.
232.
Studies into the biological productivity of the Baltic Sea, vol. 2, M., Administration of the SEV Secreteriat,
1984, 374 p.
233.
E. A. Oyaveer, Baltic herring: Biology and industry, M., Agropromizdat, 1988, 2006 p.
234.
E. B. Paveleva, Yu. I. Sorokin, Assessment of the catching efficiency of zooplankton with various fishing
equipment // Biology of inland waters. Information bulleting, 15. L., 1972. pp. 75-79.
235.
V. T. Paka, Submerged chemical weapons: problem status, Russian Chemical Journal VKhO named after D. I.
Mendeleev, 2004, vol. LVIII, pp. 99-109.

Page 402

236.
V. T. Paka, Terminology of the water structure at the sections in the Slupsky stream of the Baltic Sea in spring
1993, Oceanology, 1996, vol. 36, No. 2, pp. 207-217.
237.
S. A. Patin, 1997, Environmental problems of developing oil and gas resources of the sea shelf, M.: VNIRO
publishing house, 350 p.
238.
S. A. Patin, Suspended matter as a natural and anthropogenic factor of influence on the sea environment and
organisms // Protection of marine bioresources under the conditions of intensive development of oil and gas
deposits in the shelf and domestic water bodies of the Russian Federation: Collection of materials from an
international seminar, - ., 2000. pp. 177-181.
239.
S. A. Patin, Influence of contamination on the biological resources and productivity of the Atlantic Ocean, - :
The Food Industry, 1979, 303 p.
240.
S. A. Patin, Oil and the environment of the continental shelf, 2001.
241.
S. A. Patin, Oil and the environment of the continental shelf, .: VNIRO, 2001. 247 p.
242.
F. A. Patokina, N. A. Kalinina, The ecology of the food supply of Baltic codfish and its place in the trophic
structure of the Baltic Sea // ICES C.M. Trophic Relationships 1997/GG:06.
243.
F. A. Patokina, V. N. Feldman // Food supply and food relations of Baltic herring (Clupea harengus membras L)
and Baltic sprat (Sprattus sprattus Balticus Schneider) in the south-eastern part of the Baltic Sea/works of
AtlantNIRO. Industrial and biological studies in the Baltic Sea in 1996-1997, collection of scientific works of
AtlantNIRO, Kaliningrad, 1998, pp. 25-36.
244.
List of maximum permissible concentrations and approximately permissible amounts of chemical substances in
the soil, M., 1993, 14 p.
245.
List of fishing industry standards: maximum permissible concentrations and approximately safe levels of
influence of hazardous substances for water bodies which are of significance for the fishing industry, VNIRO,
., 1999.
246.
Yu. A. Pesenko, Principles and methods of quantitative analysis in fauna studies: // 1982, ., "Nauka", 248 p.
247.
T. B. Petrova, P. S. Miklyaev, V. K. Vlasov et al. Background content of 137Cs in the soils of Moscow // ANRI
Apparatus and news of radiation measurements, - 2004. - 3. pp. 35-41.
248.
M. L. Pidgayko, 1971, Zooplankton of the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland as the nutritional foundation for
Baltic herring, - Information from GosNIORKh, vol. 76.
249.
V. V. Pirogov, V. A. Andriyanov, V. Yu. Andreev, Influence of dredging work on the condition of the fauna of
molluscs in the Eastern Caspian channel. // Dredging work and the problem of protecting fish stocks and the
environment of fishing industry waters, Astrakhan, 1984.
250.
K. S. Pomeranets, Regional variability of the water temperature in the Baltic Sea//Works of GOIN, 1972, issue
110, pp. 37-44.

Page 403

251.
V. M. Ponyatovskaya, 1964, Report on the abundance and characteristics of the spread of species in natural plant
communities // Field geobotany, ., L., vol. 3, pp. 209-299.
252.
A. N. Popov, Food supply of smelt in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland, News from GosNIORKh, vol. 129,
L., 1978, pp. 53-63.
253.
I. F. Pravdin, Management for the study of fish, // ., 1966, 376 p.
254.
L. Prandtl, Hydromechanics, M.: Publishing house for foreign literature, 1949. 520 p.
255.
Maximum permissible concentrations of chemical substances, SPb, 2000.
256.
Order No 372 of 16.05.2000 On confirming the provisions for the assessment of influence of the intended
operations and other activities on the environment of the Russian Federation, Register, In the RF Ministry of
Justice, 4 July 2000, No. 2302.
257.
Annex (database) to Report on the scientific and research work for the study and development of technology for
the interactive supply of the navy with modal and operative-forecasting information on the condition of the sea
environment (code Prozrachnost-1) (conclusive) - Obninsk, 2004, 58 p.
258.
Annex (database) to Report on the scientific and research work for the study and development of technology for
the interactive supply of the navy with modal and operative-forecasting information on the condition of the sea
environment (code Prozrachnost-1) (conclusive) - Obninsk, 2004, 58 p.
259.
Nature conservation atlas of the Russian part of the Gulf of Finland, Edited by: V. B. Pogrebov, R. A. Sagitov,
Publishing house TUSKARORA, SPb, 2006.
260.
Problems of researching and mathematical modelling of ecosystems in the Baltic Sea. International project
Baltika. Issue 1.- L.: Gidrometeoizdat, 1983, 255 p.
261.
Problems of researching and mathematical modelling of ecosystems in the Baltic Sea, issue 5, Ecosystem
models. Assessment of the current condition in the Gulf of Finland. Part 2, Hydrometeorological, hydrochemical,
hydrobiological, geological conditions and dynamics of the water of the Gulf of Finland. Edited by Prof I. N.
Davidan and O. P. Savchuk, SPb, Gidrometeoizdat, 1997, 450 p.
262.
Future assessment of the technogenetic influence on the environment, edited by A. N. Stepanova, M., 2007, 107
p.
263.
Alimentary raw materials and food products. Health requirements for the safety and nutritional value of food
products.
264.
V. R. Protasov, P. B. Bogatyrev, E. Kh. Velikov, Methods of protecting ichthyofauna during various types of
underwater work, 1982. ., pp. 17-23.
265.
O. S. Pustelnikov, Quantitative determination of suspended matter in the south-eastern part of the Baltic
Sea//Oceanology, 1974, issue 9. 6. pp. 815-820.

Page 404

266.
Yu. S. Ravkin, Experience of assessing the damage to wildlife during an environmental expert report on business
projects // The economics of protecting biodiversity, Moscow, 1995, pp. 214-221.
267.
Yu. S. Ravkin, Principles and procedures of calculating the value of assessing resources of land animals and
damage inflicted on them by business activities // Wildlife protection, issue 3(8), Nizhny Novgorod, 1997, pp.
56-61.
268.
Radiation situation in Russia and neighbouring states in 1993, Almanach / edited by K. P. Makhonko, Obninsk,
NPO Tayfun, 1994, 398 p.
269.
Radioactivity of the Baltic Sea, 1984-1991, Works of KHELKOM, issue No. 61, Helsinki, 1995, translation, SPb: OO Ekologiya i biznes, 1996, 244 p.
270.
Development of the scientific foundations for the planning of technological, natural and technical decisions for
the development of the Bovanenkov and Kharasaveysk deposits and construction of the Yamal Centre system of
main gas pipelines. Section 17, Baydaratskaya Bay (items 17.1-17.6). Scientific and technical report. - .: IPO,
EKO-SISTEMA, 1995.
271.
J. Raymont, Plankton and productivity of the ocean,. Vol. 2. Zooplankton: In 2 parts, Part 1, / translated from
English by N. P. Nezlin and A. G. Pelymsky, edited by A. V. Chesunov, .: Agropromizdat, 1988, 544 p.
272.
M. J. S. M. Reine, G. Weinbas, R. Foppe, Forecast of impact of transport on the population of nesting birds,
Engineering department of roads and hydraulics, DLO-Institute for the study of the forest and nature, 1998, 91 p.
273.
I. M. Raspopov, 1985, Increased aquatic vegetation of major lakes of the north west of the USSR, L., Nauka, 199
p.
274.
Russian State Navy Archive, F. 402, op. 2, d. 1044.
275.
Russian State Navy Archive, F. 402, op. 2, d. 1044. The Baltic Sea with marking of vessels' accidents near the
Russian coast from 1884 to 1858.
276.
Russian State Navy Archive, F. 402, op. 2, d. 1314. The Baltic Sea with marking of vessels' accidents near the
Russian coast from 1856 to 1866.
277.
Russian State Navy Archive, F. 402, op. 2, d. 403.
278.
Reactions of hydrobionts to contamination of the environment in the process of developing oil and gas deposits
in the Arctic // Protection of marine bioresources under the conditions of intensive development of oil and gas
deposits on the shelf and internal water bodies of the Russian Federation. Collection of materials from an
international seminar, ., 2000, pp. 80-86.
279.
G. V. Rezvov, 1975, On the spread of breeding grounds of the Baltic jar seal (Phoca hispida botnica Gmelin,
1788) in the Gulf of Finland depending on the harshness of the winter // Marine mammals, Part 2, Keiv: Nauk.
Dumka, pp. 73-74.

Page 405

280.
M. A. Rozanova, M. M. Golubeva, 1921, Materials for the study of increased vegetation of the Petergof coast, Works of the Petrograd Society of Natural Scientists, 52, 1.
281.
N. N. Romanova, Procedural guidelines for the study of benthos of the southern seas of the USSR, - .: 1983. (VNIRO).
282.
S. V. Ruzhin, Species composition of the fish population in the Neva Bay during the spring/summer periods in
connection with the construction of protection dams. Collection of scientific work of the GosNIORKh, issue
247, pp. 4-13, L., 1986.
283.
Management of the methods of analysing sea waters, RD 52.10, 243-92. / edited by S. G. Oradovsky, St
Petersburg, Gidrometeoizdat, 1993. 264 p.
284.
Management of the determination of permissible non-erosive speeds of the water flow for various soils during
the calculation of channels, VTR-11-25-80 /edited by Ts. E. Mirtskhulava, A. V. Magomedova, Yu. P. Polyakov
// M., USSR Ministry of Water Management, 1981, 58 p.
285.
V. A. Rumyantsev, V. G. Drabkova, ed., The Gulf of Finland in the conditions of anthropogenic impact, SPb,
1999, 368 p.
286.
V. V. Rusanov, A. A. Matveev, L. M. Savina, L. M. Pryagunova, S. I. Khvinevich, Environmental assessment of

the impact of hydromechanical work on river biocoenosis, Hydromechanisation and problems for the
environment, Theses pres. All-Union Scientific and Technical Conference, M., 1981.
287.
N. G. Rybalsky, M. A. Malyarov, V. V. Gorbatovsky, V. F. Rybalskaya, T. V. Krasyukova, S. V. Levin,

Environmental safety. Reference book, volume 2, Environmental safety part 2, VNIIPI, Moscow, 1993, 321 p.
288.
O. P. Savchuk, M. Ya. Balode, 1983, Phytoplankton, - Baltika project, The ecosystem and its components. issue
1, L.: 142-152.
289.
O. P. Savchuk, M. Ya. Balode, 1989, Phytoplankton and initial production, - Baltika project, Main tendencies for
the evolution of ecosystems, issue 4, L: 91- 94.
290.
A. F. Sazhin, I. N. Mitskevich, M. N. Poglazova, On the changes to the dimensions of bacterial cells during
insiccation and fixation // Oceanology, - 1987. - 1. pp. 142-145.
291.
Health regulations and standards (SaNPiN 2.1.4.559-96) .: Russian State Committee on Health and
Epidemiology Surveillance, 1996, 110 p.
292.
SaNPiN 2.3.2.1078-01. Russian Ministry of Health, ., 2002.
293.
V. E. Seleznev, V. V. Aleshin, G. G. Klishin, Methods and technologies of numerical modelling of gas pipeline
systems, - .: Editorial URRS, 2002.
294.
V. N. Sergeev, V. N. Ryabova, Analysis of seasonal succession of zooplankton in the eastern part of the Gulf of
Finland, - Ecology, No. 3. 1981.

Page 406

295.
V. N. Sergeev, V. N. Ryabova, L. A. Belogolovaya, 1977, Characteristics of the dynamics and spreading of

zooplankton in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland, 1969-1971, News from GosNIORKh, vol. 123, pp. 52-64.
296.
Yu. T. Sechin, I. B. Bukhanevich, V. V. Blinov, M. V. Matushansky, V. N. Kovalenko, L. M. Lvova, V. I.

Bandura, S. V. Shibaev, L. A. Zykov, V. R. Krokhalevsky, Methodical recommendations for the use of cadastral
information for making forecasts of fish catching amounts in domestic waters (Part I, main calculation
algorithms and examples) ., VNIRO, 1990, 56 p.
297.
N. I. Silina, Birth types of Acartia in the plankton of the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland in the Baltic Sea,
Works of ZIN AN SSSR, vol. 205, 1989. pp. 108-118.
298.
N. I. Silina, Zooplankton and its participation in the biothic cycle, Ecosystem models.
299.
N. I. Silina, Zooplankton and its participation in the biothic cycle, In the book: Ecosystem models, Assessment
of the current condition in the Gulf of Finland. 1977. Issue 5, Part II, pp. 390-404.
300.
N. I. Silina, Current condition of zooplankton in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland of the Baltic Sea //
Oceanology, 1991, vol. 31, 4. pp. 616-620.
301.
A. I. Simonov, ed. The hydrochemical mode of the Baltic Sea, L., Gidrometeoizdat, 1965, 168 p.
302.
A. I. Simonov, V. I. Mikaylov, Content forms of the main contaminating substances in water near the border of
the section with the atmosphere // Words of the State Oceanographic Institute, 1986. Issue 177, pp. 73-81.
303.
A. V. Smirnova et al. Study of the wind energy resources of the Leningrad region, - Works of LGMTs, 1989,
No. 4, pp. 3-33.
304.
Sorokin 2000 Archaeological examination of the place of the Vyborg battle of 1790 // Study of monuments of
marine archaeology, issue 4, SPb, 2000. pp. 60-74.
305.
SP-102-97. Engineering and environmental exploring for construction, ., Gosstroy of Russia, 1997.
306.
Reference book for the hydrological mode of the seas and estuaries of the USSR, Part 1, Vol. 1, Issue 1, Eastern
part of the Gulf of Finland, - L.: GUGMS, 1970, 446 p.
307.
part of the Gulf of Finland, Supplement GMS Kronshtadt, - L.: GUGMS, 1972, 42 p.
308.
part of the Gulf of Finland, - L.: GUGMS, 1970, 446 p.
309.
part of the Gulf of Finland, Supplement GMS Kronshtadt, - L.: GUGMS, 1972, 42 p.

Page 407

310.
Reference book on the climate of the USSR, issue 3, Part 2, L.: Gidrometeoizdat, 1965, 340 p.
311.
312.
313.
314.
Reference data on the mode of winds and waves in the seas washing against the coast of the USSR, In the
register of the USSR, - L.: Maritime transportation, 1962, 156 p.
315.
N. S. Stroganov, Questions of water toxicology, M., Nature, 1970, 219 p.
316.
V. V. Suslova, E. Yu. Zabavin, Questions of the influence of hydromechanised work on the ecosystem of water
bodies // Results of fishing industry studies in the Saratov and Volgograd water reservoirs, GosNIORKh, SPb,
2000, 48-58.
317.
O. N. Susloparova (manager) Report: Local monitoring of the environment during the conducting of dredging
work in the Saymensky channel, Section Fishing industry monitoring, 2001. - Funds of GosNIORKh.
318.
O. N. Susloparova (manager) Report: Local fishing industry monitoring during the creation of waters of the
railway and ferry complex in MTP Ust-Luga, Funds of GosNIORKh, 2003.
319.
O. N. Susloparova (manager) Report: Local fishing industry monitoring during the creation of territory and
dredging waters of the railway/car and ferry complex in MTP Ust-Luga, Funds of GosNIORKh. 2004.
320.
O. N. Susloparova (manager) Report: Calculation of damage to fish stocks when conducting dredging work in
the waters of MTP Vyborg and in the section of the Vyborg track between points PK 0 - PK 21, 2003, Funds of
GosNIORKh.
321.
O. N. Susloparova (manager) Report: Fishing industry monitoring in the composition of work in respect of local
environmental monitoring and environmental accompanying of dredging work in the northern part of MTP UstLuga during the period of summer navigation in 2005, Funds of GosNIORKh. 2005.
322.
O. N. Susloparova (manager) Report: Fishing industry monitoring during the conducting of dredging work in the
harbour of Strelna, Funds of GosNIORKh, 2002.
323.
O. N. Susloparova (manager) Report: Ecomonitoring of the area of construction and use of the port in Primorsk,
Section: Fishing industry monitoring 2001 b. -. Funds of GosNIORKh. 2001.
324.
O. N. Susloparova, L. P. Baranova, N. I. Volkhonskaya, V. A. Ogorodnikova, Cercopagis - a new biota element

in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland, Collection of works of the international conference Natural and
anthropogenic aerosols, III, St Petersburg, 24.09-27.09 2001.
325.
Yu. V. Sustavov, E. S. Chernysheva, I. E. Tsuprova, Examination of the wind currents in the Baltic Sea on the
grounds of a mathematical model of the interaction of boundary layers // Works of GOIN, 1982, issue 157. pp.
29-43.

Page 408

326.
F. S. Tarziev, ed., Hydrometeorology and hydrochemistry of seas, vol. 3, issue 2, Gidrometeoizdat, 1990, 300 p.
327.
A. L. Takhtadzhan, 1974, Plants in the system of organisms // The life of plants, .: Prosveshenie, vol. 1, pp.
49-57.
328.
L. A. Tikhomirova, N. P. Morozov, Mercury, lead and cadmium on the surface of the waters of the Baltic Sea,
Materials of the 1st All-Union Symposium on Oceanographic Aspects of Protecting Water from Chemical
Contaminants, M., 1975, pp. 150-153.
329.
Levels of toxicity in fish with the foundations of pathology, SPb, 2006, 179 p.
330.
A. G. Tomilin, 1957, Beasts of the USSR and neighbouring countries, vol. 1, cetaceans, pp. 7 - 755, Publishing
house of the AN SSSR, Moscow.
331.
A. V. Topachevsky, L. A. Sirenko, A. I. Sakevich, 1968, The role of volatile matter of blue and green algae in
the creation of "flowering" biocenosis, - Hydriobiological Journal., 4, 2: 42-50.
332.
D. D. Tormosov, 1977, Maintaining and studying the populations of jar seals and grey seals in the Baltic Sea //
Rare types of mammals and their protection, M., pp. 166-167.
333.
D. D. Tormosov, 2000, Chemical contamination of the seals of the Baltics (H.grypus, P. hispida botnica ) and
Ladoga ( P. hispida ladogensis ). Book: Marine Mammals, Holarctics: Materials of an international conference,
pp.386-388, Arkhangelsk.
334.
D. D. Tormosov, A. G. Esipenko, 1990, Rare and disappearing types of mammals of the USSR, M., Nauka,
1990.
335.
D. D. Tormosov, A. G. Esipenko, 1990, Grey Baltic seal, Collection: Rare and disappearing types of mammals
of the USS, pp. 44-49. Publishing house Nauka, Moscow.
336.
V. S. Travyanko, L. V. Evdokimova, MT-TE bentometer // Hydrobiological Journal, 1968, vol. 4, No. 1, pp. 9496.
337.
A. I. Treshev, Intensity of fishing // M., Light and food industries, 1983, 236 p.
338.
I. S. Trifonov, V. N.Nikulina, O. A. Pavlova, 1988, Autumn phytoplankton - parameter of the environmental

condition of the system of the Ladoga Lake - - Neva - Neva Bay and eastern part of the Gulf of Finland, - Water
resources, volume 25, No. 2.: 223-230.
339.
S. N. Tupikin, .. Typification of trajectories of storm cyclones for the southern part of the Baltic
Sea // Mode-forming factors, hydrometeorlogical and hydrochemical processes in the seas of the USSR, L.,
Gidrometeoizdat, 1988, pp. 260-269.
340.
S. N. Tupikin, Types and trajectories of storm cyclones in the southern Baltics // Contemporary problems of
studying the Atlantic Ocean: Thes. pres. sect. 37th Conference of the Geographical Society of the USSR, Frunze,
1980, pp. 41-51.
341.
K. V. Tylik, Ichthyofauna of the Kaliningrad Region, Kaliningrad, 2003, 127 p.
342.
Tyulenev 1996 - V. A. Tyulenev, The Gulf of Vyborg as an object of marine archaeological study, Archeology
of Petersburg, issue 1, SPb. pp. 48-51.

Page 409

343.
P. P. Umorin, G. A. Vinogradov, A. S. Mavrin, V. B. Verbitsky, A. A. Bruznitsky, Impact of utility gas on the

ichthyofauna and zooplankton organisms // Theses of presentations of the second All-Union Conference on
Fishing Industry Toxicology, vol. 2, St Petersburg, 1991, pp. 222-224.
344.
D. Ya. Fashuk, V. V. Sapozhnikov, Anthropogenic strain on the geosystem of the sea/catchment area and its
consequences for the fishing industry, .: VNIRO, 1999, 124 p.
345.
S.M. Fedorov et al. Report on the work on topic No. 787d (Kronshtadt object) Marine geological survey work on
sheets P-35-XXXVI, O-35-V, VI, 0-36-I of a scale of 1:200 000 and preparation for publishing of the marine
part of the sheets of the State Geological Map 200 (within the limits of sheets O-35-V, VI), for 1989-1994, St
Petersburg, SZRGTs, December 1994.
346.
J. Khaltiner, F. Martin, Dynamic and physical meteorology.// Publishing house Foreign Literature, Moscow,
1960.
347.
M. I. Khalturina, Food supply of Baltic herring in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland, Feed basis, plankton,
nutrition of plankton-eater and young fish and breeding of the main commercial fish in the eastern part of the
Gulf of Finland, Manager: B. N. Kazansky, 1972, Funds of GosNIORKh.
348.
L. A. Khandozhko, Typical trajectories of storm cyclones for the north west ETS//Works of LGMTs, 1964, issue
22, pp. 54-61.
349.
Characteristics of the current radiation situation in the western industrial basin, Kaliningrad, AtlantNIRO, 19962005.
350.
V. V. Khlebovich, Critical salinity of biological processes, L., 1974. 235 p.
351.
V .G. Khoroshev, T. V. Ermakova, Results of hydrochemical studies of the regions flooded with contaminating
substances in the Baltic Sea, Works of the International Conference on Shipbuilding, Section G., Ecology and
Environmental Protection, St Petersburg, 1994, pp. 32-37.
352.
V. M. Khrabry, 1984, Birds of the Berezovye Islands // Materials on the Fauna of the Vybird Nature Reserve,
Works of ZIN, 123, pp. 116-146.
353.
P. Khupfer, The Baltics, small sea - big problems, L., Gidrometeoizdat, 1982, 135 p.
354.
N. N. Tsvelev, 2002, Determinant of vascular plants in the north west of Russia (Leningrad, Pskov and
Novgorod regions), SPb: Publishing house SPKhFA, 781 p.
355.
V. G. Tserava, Storms in the Baltic Sea and their connection to ESP // Work of GGO, 1965, issue 149, pp. 49-52.
356.
N. L. Tsvetkova, Littoral freshwater shrimps of the northern and far eastern seas of the USSR and neighbouring
waters, - L.: Nauka, 1975, 260 p.
357.
Yu. D. Tsinzerling, 1925, Plants of the sea cost on the shores of the lakes of the north west USSR, - Journal of
the Russian Botanical Society, vol. 10, No. 3-4, pp. 355-374.

Page 410

358.
A. V. Tsyban, ed., Study of the Baltic Sea's ecosystem, issue 1. L., Gidrometeoizdat, 1981, 150 p.
359.
A. V. Tsyban, ed., Study of the Baltic Sea's ecosystem, issue 2, L., Gidrometeoizdat, 1981, 260 p.
360.
A. V. Tsyban, ed., Study of the Baltic Sea's ecosystem, issue 3, L., Gidrometeoizdat, 1990, 168 p.
361.
A. V. Tsyban, Ecological monitoring of the Baltic Sea, - .: Gidrometeoizdat, 1983, 14 p.
362.
A. V. Tsyban, V. M. Kudryavtsev, V. O. Mamaev, N. V. Sukhanov, Microflora and microbiological processes in

the open seas of the Baltic Sea, in the book: Study of the Baltic Sea's ecosystem, issue 3, L., Gidrometeoizdat,
1990, pp. 51-57.
363.
S. K. Cherepanov, 1995, Vascular plants of Russia and neighbouring states, SPb, Mir i Semya, 992 p.
364.
S. N. Cherkinsky, Health conditions of the drainage of waste water and water bodies, M., 1971.
365.
A. I. Chernomashentsev, 1984, Influence of dredging work on the fishing industry in the north western part of
the Black Sea // Thes. pres. All-Union Conference on the Study of the Influence on Dredging Work and Soil
Dumping on the Fishing Industry, 18-20 September 1984, Atrakhan, pp. 201-203.
366.
A. I. Chernomashentsev, I. S. Dzerzhinskaya, G. A. Margalik, Health and hygiene condition of the waster

environment during dredging work, Hydromechanisation and problems for the environment, Theses pres. AllUnion Scientific and Research Conference, M, 1981.
367.
V. I. Chernook, Multispectral air images of seal rookeries, Murmansk, Publishing house PINRO, 1997, 12 p.
368.
A. V. Chernyavsky, Transformation of bottom zoocenoses in the area of the Grigorovsky soil dumping site //
Dredging work and the problems of protecting fish stocks and the environment of fishing industry waters,
Astrakhan, 1984, 208-210.
369.
Z. N. Zhirkova, Microbenthos // Method of studying biogeocenoses of domestic water bodies, ., 1975, pp.
178-185.
370.
A. A. Shelepchikov, N. A. Klyuev, E. S. Brodsky, V. V. Shenderyuk, L. P. Bakholdina, 2003, Contamination of

hydrobionts with dibenso-p-dioxins and dibenzofurans, Materials of the IV International Practical Research
Conference, Production of fish products: problems, new technologies, quality, pp. 219-221.
371.
V. V. Shenderyuk, L. P. Bakholdian, G. N. Rodyuk, Oyu. A. Shukhgalter, G. V. Grikhina, T. I. Grokhova,

Assessment of the chemical contamination and parasite situation in the south eastern part of the Baltic Sea and
connected gulfs, Ways of increasing the quality and safety of fish production, Collection of scientific works,
Kaliningrad, 2002, pp. 27-32.

Page 411

372.
O. A. Sherstneva, Influence of increased water muddiness, occurring during the conducting of hydrotechnical
work, on the productivity of immersed macrophytes, Avtoref. diss. cand. biol. nauk., SPb, 2002, 19 p.
373.
A. V. Shipilin, V. N. Koterov, V. I. Zubov, V. M. Krivtsov, Forecast of non-stationary technological modes of

gas pipeline work and procedures for a gas pipeline in the event of its explosion, Scientific and technical report .: VTs RAN - VNIIGAZ, 1999.
374.
L. V. Shirokov, S. A. Ilenkova, A. N. Popov, 1982, Spreading of fish in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland //
Collection of scientific works of GosNII, lake and river fishing, issue 192, pp. 57-69.
375.
A. Shirokorad, Vessels and boards of the USSR Navy, 1939-1945, Minsk, 2002.
376.
B. A. Shishkin, V. N. Nikulina, A. A. Maksimov, N. I. Silina, Main characteristics of the biota at the top of the
Gulf of Finland and its role in the creation of the water quality // Studies of the River Neva, Neva Bay and
eastern part of the Gulf of Finland, L., 1989, 96 p.
377.
B. A. Shishkin, N. F. Smirnova, Initial production of the Neva Bay and eastern part of the Gulf of Finland //
Study of the water system of the Ladoga Lake - River Neva - Neva Bay and eastern part of the Gulf of Finland,
Works of GGI, 1988, issue 1, pp. 53-58.
378.
A. A. Shlyk, 1968, On the spectrophotometric determination of chlorophyll a and b // Biochemistry, vol. 3, issue
2, Part 2.
379.
O. F. Shmalgauzen, 1874, List of plants included in Yamburg and Petergof districts,

Petersburg Society of Natural Scientists, vol. 5, issue 2. pp. 33-112.
380.
A. A. Shorygin, Food supply and food interrelations of fish in the Caspian Sea, M., Pishepromizdat, 1952, 254 p.
381.
V. P. Shuntov, Birds of the far eastern seas of Russian, vol. 1, Vladivostok, TINRO, 1998, 423 p.
382.
A. S. Shurukhin (manager), Assessing the condition of stocks and developing a forecast of types of herring in the
eastern part of the Gulf of Finland (32 sub-area IKES) for 2001-2007, 2000-2005. - Funds of GosNIORKh.
383.
A. S. Shurukhin, A. N. Popov, D. V. Bogdanov, Current condition of stocks of the main commercial fish in the
eastern part of the Gulf of Finland, Collection of materials from the conference Development of the Russian
fishing industry, SPb. 2004. pp. 18-19.
384.
E. A. Shushkina, M. E. Vinogradov, T. A. Lukasheva, L. P. Lebedeva, S. V. Vostokov, Comparative use of

various equipment for catching plankton when monitoring multi-year changes to Black Sea communities,
Oceanology, vol. 43. 5.2003. pp. 744-750.
385.
Ecosystem models. Assessment of the current condition in the Gulf of Finland. Part 1, 1997, SPb,
Gidrometeoizdat, 450 p.
386.
A. Yarvekyulg, Bottom fauna of the eastern part of the Baltic Sea, Tallinn: Valgus, 1979, 382 p.
- Works of the St

Page 412

387.
A. Yarvekyulg, Quantitative determination and biocenoses of zoobenthos in the Gulf of Finland // Materials of
the IV Soviet-Finnish Symposium on Matters of Protecting the Waters of the Gulf of Finland, - Tallinn, 1973,
pp. 8-15.
388.
A. A. Yarvekyulg, Zoobenthos of the central and eastern Baltics // Reports on the biological productivity of the
Baltic Sea, - ., 1984, vol. 3, pp. 155-256.
389.
Almkvist L. 1982. Baltic Marine Mammals - a status report. Section of Vertebrate Zoology, Swedish Museum of
Natural History, P.B. 50007, S- 104 05 Stockholm, Sweden. (unpublished matter).
390.
Anderson R.S., De Henau A.M. An assessment of the meiobenthos from nine mountain lakes in western Canada
// Hydrobiologia. 1980. V.70. N 3. P.257-264.
391.
Appelberg M.. Swedish standard methods for sampling freshwater fish with multi-mesh gillnets. //
FISKERIVERKET INFORMATION. Drottningholm. 2000.
392.
Arkhipov B.V. About some properties of geophysical hydrodynamic equations on the staggered grid// Journal
Oceanology, v.29, N5, p.723-729,1989
393.
Basova S.L.& Lange, E.K. 1998. Trends in late summer phytoplankton in the Neva Bay and eastern Gulf of
Finland during 1978 to 1990. - Memoranda Soc/Fauna Flora Fennica, 74: 1-14.
394.
Bell R.P. Isopleth's calculations for ruptures in sour gas pipeline // Energy Processing Canada. 1978. JulyAugust. Pp. 36-39.
395.
Biggs R.B., Environmental effects of overboard spoil disposal, ASCE. J. Sanit. Eng. Div., 94,477,1968.
396.
Bondsdorff E., Aarnio K., Sandberg E. Temporal and spatial variability of zoobenthic communities in
archipelago waters of the northern Baltic Sea - consequences of eutrophication // Int. Revue ges. Hydrobiol.
1991.Vol.76 3. . 433-449
397.
Brown, C.L. and Clark, R., Observations on dredging and dissolved oxygen in a tidal waterway, Water Resour.
Res. 4, 1381, 1968.
398.
Bruan G.W. and Langston W.J. Bioavailability, accumulation and effects of heavy metals in sediments with
special reference to United Kingdom estuaries: a review Environmental Pollution vol. 76, Issue 2, 1992, p. 89131.Buzun V.A. 2001. Report on the spring bird migration over the Vyborg Bay of the Baltic Sea in 1998 //
Study of the Status and Trends of Migratory Bird Populations in Russia. 3-rd issue. St Petersburg. . 64-70.
399.
Calmano W, Forstner U. Kersten M. Krause D. Behaviour of dredged mud after stabilization with different
additives. In Assink JW, Van Den Brink WJ (eds.) Contaminated soil. pp. 737-746. Martinus Nijhoff Publ.
Dordrecht ,The Nerher-lands, 1986.
400.
Clarke K.R., Warwick R.M. Change in marine communities: an approach to statistical analysis and
interpretation. - Plymouth: Plymouth Marine Laboratory, 1994. - 144 p.
401.
Davies A.M. A bottom boundary layer-resolving three-dimensional tidal model: a sensitivity study of viscosity
formulation // Journal of physical oceanography. 1993, vol. 23, D92, p. 1437 - 1453.

Page 413

402.
Davies A.M., Lawrence J. The response of the Irish Sea to boundary and wind forcing: Results from a three dimensional hydrodynamic model// Journal of geophysical research. 1994, vol. 99, C11, p. 22,665-22,687.
403.
Davies A.M.. Jones J.E. Application of a three-dimensional turbulence energy model to the determination of
tidal currents on the northwest European shelf // Journal of Geophysical Res.. 1990, vol. 95, p. 18143 - 18162.
404.
Ditmars J.D., Cederwall K. Analysis of Air-Bubble Plums // Coastal Engineering Conference. 1974.
Copenhagen. V.II. Ch.128. P.464-465.
405.
Dudscus 1987 - Dudscus, Henriot, Krumrey. Das grosse Buch der Schiffstypen. Berlin.
406.
Durinck J., Skov H., Jensen F.P., Pihl S. Important Marine Areas for Wintering Birds in the Baltic Sea. Ornis
Consult Ltd, Copenhagen, 1994. 105 pp.
407.
Edwards, M.H., 1986. Digital Image Processing of Local and Global Bathymetric Data. Master's Thesis.
Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Washington Univ., St. Louis, Missouri, USA, 106 p."
408.
Eia Jakobson. Monitoring of radionuclides in the Baltic Sea 2002 // HELCOM MORS-PRO. Document 3/13.
August 2003. - Helsinki, Finland. - 3 p.
409.
Environment of the Baltic Sea Area 1994-1998. Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings no. 82B. 82B. Helsinki
Commission. Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission, 2002. 211 p.
410.
Environmental Protection Agency, Ocean dumping: final regulations and criteria, Fed. Reg., 38,28610,1973.
411.
Etkin D.S. Historical overview of oil spills from all sources (1960-1998)// Proceedings on the 1999 International
Oil Spill Conference. Washington D.C. APL. 1999.
412.
Fannelop T.K., Sjoen K. Hydrodynamics of underwater blowouts. // Norwegian Maritime Research. No 411980.
413.
Final Report of the ad hoc Working Group on Dumped Chemical Munitions (HELCOM CHEMU) to the 16th
Meeting of the Helsinki Commission (March 1995)
414.
Forstner U., Calmano W., Hong J., Kersten M. Sediment Quality Criteria - Role of redox -sensitive components.
5-th Intern.Symp. on River Sediments. Unesco, Paris.1993, .20-25.
415.
Frankenberg, D. And Westerfield, C., W., Oxygen demand and oxygen depletion capacity of sediments from
Wassau Sound, Georgia, Bull. G. Acad. Sci., 26, 160, 1968.
416.
Fredsoe J., Hansen E.A., Mao Y., Summer B.M. 1988. Three dimensional scour below pipelines. J. Offshore
Mech. Arctic Eng.,ASME, V. 110, P. 373-379.
417.
Fredsoe J., Summer B.M, Arnskov M.M. 1992. Time scale for wave/current scour below pipelines. Int. Journ.
Polar Eng., V. 2, P. 13-17.
418.
Gannon,J.E. and Beeton, A.M., Procedures for determining the effects of dredged sediments on biota-bentos
viability and sediment selectivity tests, J. Water Poll. Contr. Fed. 43,392,1971.

Page 414

419.
Gardenfors U. (ed.). Rodlistade arter i Sverige 2005. The 2005 Red List of Swedish Species. Art Databanken,
SLU. Uppsala, 2005. 496 pp.
420.
GESAMP (Joint Group of Experts on the Scientific Aspects of marine pollution) Reports and Studies.1993.
50. IMO, London. 180 p.
421.
Golubkov S.M., Alimov A.F., Telesh I.V., Anokhina L.E., Maximov A.A., Niculina V.N., Pavel'eva E.B., Panov
V.E. Functional response of midsummer planctonic and benthic communities in the Neva Estuary (eastern Gulf
of Finland) to anthropogenic stress // Oceanologia. 2003. V. 45 (1). P. 53-66.
422.
Gray J. The ecology of marine sediments. - Cambridge: 1981.
423.
Gronroos T.T. 1917.Muutamien muuttolintujen tuloja lahtoajat Viipurin kahistolla v. 1916 // Luonnon Ystava
21: 107-108.
424.
Hakanson L. An ecological risk index for aquatic pollution control. A sedimentological approach. Water Res. 14.
1980, p. 975-1001
425.
Hallfors G. Checklist of Baltic Sea Phytoplankton Species. Baltic Sea Environment Proceeding. 95. Helsinki
Commission. Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission. Helsinki. 2004. 208 p.
426.
Hallfors S. Baltic Sea Portal. FIMR, 2005 (http://www.balticseaportal.fi.)
427.
Hario M. & Rudback J. 1996. High frequency of chick diseases in nominate Lesser Black-backed Gull Larus f.
fuscus in the Golf of Finland// Ornis Fennica. 73. P. 69-77.
428.
Hario M. & Uuksulainen J. 1993. Mercury load according to molting area in primaries of the nominante raze of
the Lesser Black-backed Gull Larus f. fuscus // Ornis Fennica. 70. P. 32-39.
429.
Hario M. 1990. Breeding failure and feeding conditions of Lesser Black-backed Gulls Larus f. fuscus in the Golf
of Finland// Ornis Fennica. 67. P.113-129.
430.
Hario M. 1994. Reproductive performance on the nominante Lesser Black-backed Gull under the pressure of
Herring Gull predation// Ornis Fennica. 71. P. 1-10.
431.
Haxby, W.F. et al., 1983. Digital Images of Combined Oceanic and Continental Data Sets and their Use in
Tectonic Studies. EOS Trans actions of the American Physical Union, vol. 64, no. 52, pp. 995-1004."
432.
Heath M.F., Evans M.J. (eds.). Important Bird Areas in Europe. Priority sites for conservation. Vol. 1.
Cambridge, UK: BirdLife International, 2000. 866 pp.
433.
Hela I. Secular changes in the salinity of the upper waters of the Northern Baltic Sea//Comm.Phys.-Math.Soc.Sci
Fennica.-1966.-Vol.31-No.14.-21p.
434.
HELCOM, 2002. Environment of the Baltic Sea area 1994-1998. Baltic Sea Environ. Proc. No.82 B., 215 p.
Helsinki Commission, Helsinki, Finland.
435.
HELCOM, Guidelines for the Baltic Monitoring Programme for the Third Stage: Part D. Biological
Determinants // Baltic Sea Environment Proceedings. - 1988. - 27D, 161 p.

Page 415

436.
HELCOM, Third periodic assessment of the state of the marine environment of the Baltic Sae // Baltic Sea
Environment Proceedings, - 1996. - No 64B.
437.
Holopainen I.J., Paasivirta L. Abundance and biomass of the meiozoobenthos in the oligotrophic and mesohumic
lake Paajarvi, southern Finland // Ann. Zool. Fen. 1977. V.14. N3. P.113-134.
438.
Hussain N.A., Siegel R. Liquid Jet Pumped by Rising Gas Bubbles // Journal of Fluids Engineering. 1976.
March. P.49-57.
439.
Hynen O. 1904. Kevainen lintuelama Viipurinlahdella // Luonnon Ystava 8: 80-84.
440.
ICES (International Council for the Exploration of the Sea), Report of the Working Group on the extraction of
the marine sediments on the marine ecosystem/ Copenhagen 1998. 127 p
441.
Important Bird Areas in Europe. Priority sites for conservation. Vol. 1. - Cambridge, UK: BirdLife International,
2000. - 866 pp.
442.
Important Bird Areas. IBA Criteria. Categories and Thresholds. - BirdLife International, 1995, unpublished
working materials.
443.
IODS (International Oil Spill Database), Oil Spill Intelligence Report 1997.
444.
Iribarren, Talud limitentre la rotura y la reilexion de las olas, Revistra de Obras Publicas, Madrid, fev. 1950.
445.
Kobus H.E. Analysis of Flow Induced by Air-Bubble System // Coastal Engineering Conference. 1968. London.
V.II. Ch.65. P.1016-1031.
446.
Kohn J. Mysidacea of the Baltic Sea - state of the art // Taxonomy, biology and ecology of (Baltic) mysids. Rostock: 1992. - P. 5-23.
447.
Kontiokorpi J., Parviainen A. 1995. Spring migration of arctic waterfowl from Vyborg and Repino (Russia) in
spring 1993. //IWRB Seaduck Research Group Bulletin. 5. P. 25-29.
448.
Kontiokorpi J. 1993. Autumn migration of arctic waterfowl in Finland in 1991// Linnut.
449.
Kontiokorpi J. 1993. Milljoonien vesilintujen syksy// Linnut 28: 9-16.
450.
Kontiokorpi J. 2000. Vyborg, Russia - the Arctic Migration // Alula. 1. P. 8-15.
451.
Kontiokorpi J., Leivo M. 1998. Spring migration of arctic waterfowl in Vyborg, NW Russia. Workshop //
Studies of Arctic Bird Migration in the Region of the Northern Baltic and White Sea. Helsinki. P. 11.
452.
Kontkanen H. 1994. Syksyn 1993 arktika. Suomessa, Virossaja Vena&fls t// Linnut 29: 8-15.
453.
Kotsovinos N.E. A note on the conservation of the axial momentum of a turbulent jet // Journal of Fluid
Mechanics. 1978. V. 87. Pt. 1. P. 55-63.
454.
Laidna A. 1994. The Long-tailed Skua, Stercorarius longicaudus Vieill. // Birds of Estonia: Status, distribution
and numbers. Tallinn: 123-124.

Page 416

455.
Laine A.O., Sandler H., Andersin A.-B., Stigzelius J. Long-term changes of macrozoobenthos in the Eastern
Gotland Basin and the Gulf of Finland (Baltic Sea) in relation to the hydrographical regime // Journal of Sea
Research, - 1997. - Vol. 38. - P. 135-159.
456.
Lappalainen A., Shurukhin A., Alekseev G., Rinne J. Coastal Fish Communities along the Northern Coast of the
Gulf of Finland, Baltic Sea: Responses to salinity and Eutrophication. / Internat. Rev. Hydrobiol., 85, 2000, 56, .687-696.
457.
Leito A.A. 1999. Status of the Dark-bellied Brent Goose Branta b. bernicla in the Baltic states. In: International
Scientific Workshop "Towards European Management of the Dark-bellied Brent Goose Branta b. bernicla as a
Game Species". Paris. P. 26-30.
458.
Leont'yev I.O. Modeling the morphological response in a coastal zone for different temporal scales. // Advances
in Coastal Modeling. Ed. Lakhan, V.C. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Elsevier Science Publishers, 2003,
pp.299-335.
459.
Luyten P.J., Deleersnijder E., Ozer J., Ruddick K.G. Presentation of a family of turbulence closure models for
stratified shallow water flows and preliminary application to the Rhine outflow region.// Continental shelf
Research, 1996, Vol. 16, No 1, 101-130.
460.
MacKenzie, B. R. and Koster, F.W., 2004. Fish production and climate: sprat in the Baltic Sea. Ecology, 85:
784-794.
461.
Matsumoto, K., M. Ooe, T. Sato, and J. Segawa, Ocean tide model obtained from TOPEX/POSEIDON altimetry
data, J. Geophys. Res., 100, C12, 25,319-25,330, 1995.
462.
Matthaus W. Climatic and seasonal variability of oceanological parameters in the Baltic Sea//Beitr.
Meereskunde.-1984-H.51.-s.29-49.
463.
Maunula P. Baltic Sea Portal. FIMR, 2005 (http://www.balticseaportal.fi.)
464.
Maxey W.F. Fracture arrest behavior of underwater pipe line // Pipe Line Indust. V.67. No 4. Pp.32-34.
465.
May, E.B., Effects on water quality when dredging a polluted harbor using confined spoil disposal, Ala. Mar.
Resour. Bull., 10, 1, 1974
466.
May, E.B., Environmental effects of hydraulic dredging in estuaries, Ala. Mar. Resour. Bull., 9,1,1973.
467.
Melvassalo T., Niemi A., Niemisto L., Rinne L. 1985 . Nitrogen fixation by planktonic blue-green algae and
nutrient balance in the Gulf of Finland. - Problems Concerning Bioindication of the Ecological Condition of the
Gulf of Finland. Tallin: 68-75.
Moore G.M., Bett B.J. The use of meiofauna in marine pollution impact assessment // Zoological Journal of the
Linnean Society. 1989. V.96. P.263-280.
468.
469.
Mundheim O., Fannelop T.K. Studies of Oil Spills from Blowouts and Broken Underwater Pipelines // Offshore
North Sea Technology Conference/ Stavanger. Paper ONS-S-III/3.

Page 417

470.
N.Wasmund, J.Alheit, F.Pollehne, H.Siegel, M.L.Zettler Der biologische Zustand der Ostsee im Jahre 1998 auf
der Basis von Phytoplankton-, Zooplankton- und Zoobenthosuntersuchungen. Meereswissenschaftliche Berichte.
Mar. Sci. Rep. 37. 1999. 75p.
471.
Niemela E. 1973. Merialueittemmehylkeet // Suome luonto. Vol.32. 6. P.249-278.
472.
Nikulina V.N. Seasonal dynamics of phytoplankton in the inner Neva Estuary in the 1980s and 1990s //
Oceanologia. 2003. V. 45 (1). P. 25-39.
473.
Noskov G., Gaginskaya A., Sagitov R., Fedorov V. 1993. Rediscovered islands in urgent need of protection//
WWF Baltic Bulletin. 1. P. 4-6.
474.
Noskov G.A. 2002. The main results of bird migration studies in the North-West Region of Russia // Study of
the Status and Trends of Migratory Bird Populations in Russia. 4th issue. St Petersburg. . 62-78.
475.
Nyberg P., Degerman E., Appelberg M. Estimating the number of species and relative abundence of fish in
oligotrophic Swedish lake using multi-mesh gill nets. // Nordic J. Freshw. Res. 1988, 4, .91-100.
476.
Ossipov D., Gaginskaya A. 1994. - // WWF

Baltic Bulletin . N 3. P. 9-11.
477.
Osterroht C. Dissolved PCBs and chlorinated hydrocarbon insecticide in the Baltic, Nature, 1972. N 251, P.369371
478.
Ostsee -Algenflora Von Helmut Pankow, Rostok unter Mitarbeit von Volkbert Kell, Norbert
479.
Parsons T.R., Strrickland J.D.H. Discussion of spectrophotometric determination of marine-plant pigments with
revised equations for ascertaining chlorophylls and carotinoides // J. Mar. Res., 1963, v. 21, p. 155-163.
480.
Pekka Alenius, Alexander Antsulevich, Svetlana Basova, Nadja Beresina, D.V Bogdanov, Jan-Erik Bruun, Vivi
Fleming, Heli Haapasaari, Seppo Kaitala, Pirkko Kauppila, Mikko Kiirikki, Ari Laine, Mirja Leivuori, Jaakko
Mannio, Aleksey Maximov, Henn Ojaveer (& al), Vadim Panov, Heikki Peltonen, Heikki Pitkanen, A.N.Popov,
Jukka Ponni, Mika Raateoja, Eija Rantajarvi, Jorma Pytkonen, Alexander S.Shurukhin, Jenni Vepsalainen &
Pentti Valipakka (2004) State of the Gulf of Finland in 2003 - MERI-Report Series of the Finnish Institute of
Marine Research .51,2004,Helsinki,Finland.
481.
Perttila M., Stenman O., Pyysalo H., Wickstrom K., 1986. Heavy Metals and Organochlorine Compounds in
Seals in the Gulf of Finland. Marine Environ. Res. 18, 43 -59. Elsevier Applied Science Publishers Ltd, England.
482.
Pettibone M.H. Revision of species referred to Antinoe, Antinoella, Antinoana, Bylgides and Harmothoe
(Polychaeta: Polynoidae: Harmothoinae) // Smithsonian Contributions to Zoology. - 1993. - 545. - P. 1-41.
483.
Pihl S., Durinck J., Skov H. Waterbird Numbers in the Baltic Sea, Winter 1993. NERI Technical Report no. 145,
1995. 60 pp.

Page 418

484.
Popovsky J., Pfister L.A. Dinophyceae (Dinoflagellata)// Subwasserflora von Mitteleuropa. Bd.6. Aufl. Jena;
Stuttgart: Fischer, 1990. 272 S.
485.
Putkonen T.A. 1938. Havaintoja Lavansaaren ja Peninsaaren Linnnnnustosta // Ornis fenn. 15: 32-46.
486.
Putkonen T.A. 1940. Valkoposki-hanhen, Branta leucopsis (Bechst.), kevatmuuto sta Viipurin seudulla // Ornis
Fennica. 17 (1). P. 14-16.
487.
Putkonen T.A. 1942. Kevatmuutosia Viipurinlahdella // Ornis fenn.19, 2: 33-44.
488.
Raffaelli D., Mason C.F. Pollution monitoring with meiofauna, using the ratio of nematodes to copepods //
Mar.Pollut.Bull. 1981. V.12. P.158-163.
489.
Red Data Book of East Fennoscandia. Helsinki. 1998
490.
Red Data Book of the Baltic Region. Uppsala, Riga, 1993. 95 p.
491.
Renk H., Bralewska J. M., Lorenz Z., Nakonieczny J., Ochocki S. Primary production of the Baltic Sea // Bull.
Sea Fish. Inst. 1992. 3 (127). P. 35-42.
492.
Renk H., Ochocki S. Primary production in the southern Baltic Sea determined from photosynthetic light curves
// Bull. Sea Fish. Inst. 1999. 3 (148). P. 23-39.
493.
Report of SCOR- UNESCO working group 17 on determination of photosynthetic pigments, June 4-6, 1964.
UNESCO, Paris, 1964. 12 p.
494.
Report of the Baltic Fisheries Assessment Working Group (WGBFAS)//ICES CM 2005/ ACFM:19.
495.
Report on Chemical Munitions Dumped in the Baltic Sea. Report to the 15th Meeting of Helsinki Commission 8
- 11 March 1994 from the Ad Hoc Working Group on Dumped Chemical Munitions (HELCOM CHEMU)
496.
Risberg L. Sveriges faglar. Stockholm, 1990. 295 pp.
497.
Roed L.P., Cooper C. Open boundary conditions in numerical ocean models, in Advanced Physical
Oceanographic Numerical Modeling, edited by J.J. O'Braien, NATO ASI Ser. C, 186, 411-436,1986.
498.
Scheffer V.B. 1958. Seal, sea lions of the Pinnipedia. Standford. 179 p.
499.
SFH 1942. - Svenska flottans historia, v.2.(1680-1814). Maln
500.
Sikorski A.V., Bick A. Revision of Marenzelleria Mesnil, 1896 (Spionidae, Polychaeta) // Sarsia. - 2004. - Vol.
89. - P. 253-275.
501.
Skidaway Institute of oceanography, Research to determine the Environmental Response to the deposition of
Spoil on salt Marshes using Diked and Undiked Techniques, Final Report under Contract DASW 21-71-C-0020,
National Technical Information Service, ADA010470, 1974.
502.
Skov H., Vaitkus G., Flensted K.N., Grishanov G., Kalamees A., Kondratyev A., Leivo M., Luigujoe L., Mayr
C., Rasmussen J.F., Raudonikis L., Scheller W., Sidlo P.O., Stipniece A., Struwe-Juhl B., Welander B. Inventory
of coastal and marine Important Bird Areas in the Baltic Sea. BirdLife International Cambridge, 2000. 287 pp.

Page 419

503.
Snow D.W., Perrins C.M. The birds of the Western Palearctic. Vol. 1. Non-Passerines. Oxford, New-York.
Oxford university press, 1998. 1008 pp.
504.
STORE Baltic Project. Environmental and fisheries influences on fish stock recruitment in the Baltic Sea. Part 1.
626 p.
505.
Summer B.M, Fredsoe J. 1990. Scour below pipelines in waves. J. Waterway Port Coastal and Ocean Eng,
ASCE, V. 116, P. 307-323.
506.
Summer B.M, Fredsoe J. 1991. Onset of scour below a pipeline exposed to waves. Int. Journ. Polar Eng., V. 1, P.
189-194.
507.
Summer B.M, Fredsoe J. 1994. Self-burial of pipeline at span shoulders. Int. Journ. Polar Eng., V. 4, P. 30-35.
508.
Summer B.M, Fredsoe J., Christensen S., Lind M.T. 1999Sinking/Flotation of pipelines and other objects in
liquefied soil under waves. Coastal Engineering. V. 38, P. 53-90.
509.
Suomalainen H. 1937. Uber die Verbreitung der marinen Scharenvohel im Finnnischen Meerbusen // Ornis fenn.
14: 18-26.
510.
Susswasserflora von Mitteleuropa Bd 2. Krammer K., Lange-Bertalot H.Bacillariophyceae.2. Teil: Bacillariacea,

Epithemiaceae, Surirellaceae.-Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer, 1988.- 596 p.
511.
vaas S., Meissner W., Serebryakov V., Kozulin A., Grishanov G. (eds.). Changes of wintering sites of
waterfowl in Central and Eastern Europe. OMPO Special Publication. Vilnius, 2001c. 152 p.
512.
The Baltic Marine Biologists Publication No.16a Intercalibration and distribution of diat om species in the Baltic
Sea Volume 1 Edited by Pauli Snoeijs 1993 Opulus Press Uppsala Snoeijs, P.& Vilbaste,S. (eds.)
Intercalibration and distribution of diatom species in the Baltic Sea. Vol.2.1994, 125 p.
513.
Tolosa I., Mora S., Sheikholeslami M.R., Villeneuve J.P. et al. Aliphatic and Aromatic Hydrocarbons in coastal
Caspian Sea sediments // Mar.Pollut.Bull. 2004.V.48. P.44-60.
514.
Topham D.R. Hydrodynamics of Oil Well Blowout // Beaufort Technical Reports. 1975. No 33.
515.
Townsend A.A. The mechanism of entrainment in free turbulent flows // Journal of Fluid Mechanics. 1966. V.
26. Pt. 4. P. 689-715.
516.
Tucker G.M. & M.F. Heafh. 1994. Bird in Europe: their conservation status. - Cambridge, U.K.: Bird Life
International. 600 p.
517.
Tucker G.M., Heath M.F. Birds in Europe: their conservation status. Cambridge, UK. BirdLife International,
1994.
518.
Vassiljeva N.A. 2001. Migration of the Barnacle Goose Branta leucopsis on the northern coast of the Gulf of
Finland in the autumn of 1992 and in the spring of 1993 // Study of the Status and Trends of Migratory Bird
Populations in Russia. 3-rd issue. St Petersburg. . 60-63.

Page 420

519.
Vernberg,W, and DeCoursey, P., The effects of dredged material on certain species of planktonic invertebrates ,
in Bioassay Studies, Charleston Harbor, South California, Section 11, Final Report to U.S. Army Corp. Of
Engineers, Charleston District, Belle W. Baruch Coastal Research Institute, University of South Carolina
Contract DACW60-71-C-0009, 1973.
520.
Vesa-Pekka Vartti, Tarja K. Ikaheimonen, Erkki Ilus, Seppo Klemonla. Monitoring of radionuclides in the Baltic
Sea in 2004 // HELCOM MORS-PRO. Document 3/4. October 2005. - Helsinki, Finland. - 6 p.
521.
Victor Tishkov, Vitali Gavrilov, Ludmila Ivanova, Yuri Panteleev, Andrey Stepanov, Alexander Rubalko.
Preliminary results of radionuclide's contents in bottom sediments of the Baltic Sea, 2003 // HELCOM MORSPRO. Document 3/13. September 2004. - Helsinki, Finland. - 6 p.
522.
Wakeman T.H. Susrar J.F., Dicson W.J. Impacts of three dredge types compared in S.F.District. World
Dredging, 1975, N 2.
523.
Wang L.K., Leonard R.P. Dredging pollution and environmental conversation in the United States. Environ.
Conserv., 1976, v.3, N 2.
524.
Warwick R.M. The nematode/copepod ratio and its use in pollution ecology // Marine Pollution Bulletin. 1981.
V.12. P.329-333.
525.
Windom, H.L. Environment aspects of dredging in estuaries, ASCE J. Waterw. Harbors Coastal Eng. Div.
98,475, 1972
526.
Windom, H.L., Processes responsible for water quality changes during pipeline dredging in marine
environments, in Proc. World Dredging Conf. V, Hamburg , Germany, Simcon, San Pedro, California, 1974,
761.
527.
Zmudzinski L. Swiat zwierzecy Baltyku. Atlas makrofauny - Warszawa: Wydawnietwa Szkolno Podagogiezno,
1990. - 196 p.
528.
V. Stefanoni et at., "Modeling sub-sea oil and gas releases from offshore pipelines", 11th International
Symposium on Loss Prev. & Safety Prom. In the Process Ind., Prague 2004
529.
P. D. Yapa and L. Zheng, "Simulation of oil spills from underwater accidents I", Journal of Hydraulic Research,
1997
530.
P. D. Yapa and L. Zheng, "Modeling of underwater oil/gas jets and plumes", Journal of Hydraulic Engineering,
1999
531.
P. D. Yapa and H. Xie, "Modeling of underwater oil/gas jets and plumes: comparison with field data", Journal of
Hydraulic Engineering, 2002
532.
G-GE-PIE-REP-102-00085201-02. Consequence Assessment Report.
533.
G-GE-PIE-REP-102-00085200-02. Frequency of Interaction Report.
534.
G-GE-PIE-REP-102-00085203-02. Risk Assessment Report Offshore.
535.
PARLOC 2001: The update of Loss of Containment Data for Offshore Pipelines, Energy Institute, London,
2003.

Page 421

APPENDICES

Page 422

APPENDIX 1

Page 423

LIST OF NORMATIVE LEGAL AND NORMATIVE TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS

Decrees of the RF President
1.
On introducing amendments and supplements to individual decrees of the RF President in connection with
adopting the Federal Law On Environmental Expert Reports of 1 March 1996. No. 302 (as amended and
supplemented on 24 April 1998).
2.
On the state strategy of the Russian Federation for the protection of the environment and securing of a
sustainable development of 04 February 1994. 236.
3.
On the concept for the transition of the Russian Federation to a sustainable development of 01 April 1996.
440.
Laws of the Russian Federation
4.
Constitution of the Russian Federation. Adopted on 12.12.93. Amendments made to the documents: Decree of
the RF President of 09.01.96 No. 20, Decree of the RF President of 10.02.96 No. 173.
5.
Water Code of the Russian Federation of 3 June 2006 No. 74-FZ (version of 14.07.2008).
6.
Civil Code of the Russian Federation (as amended on 26 January, 20 February, 12 August 1996, 24 October
1997, 8 July, 17 December 1999, 16 April, 15 May, 26 November 2001, 21 March, 14, 26 November 2002, 10
January, 26 March, 11 November, 23 December 2003, 29 June 2004, 29, 30 December 2004, 2, 21 July 2005, 3,
10 January 2006, 3, 30 June, 27 July, 3 November, 4 December, 18 December 2006, 01.12.2007).
7.
On animal life of 24 April 1995 No. 52-FZ (version of 06.12.2007 No. 333-FZ).
8.
On the continental shelf of the Russian Federation of 30.11.95 No. 187-FZ.
9.
On mineral resources of 21 February 1992 No. 2395-1 in the version of federal laws of 03.03.1995 No. 27-FZ, of
10.02.1999 No. 32-FZ, of 02.01.2000 No. 20-FZ, of 14.05.2001 No. 52-FZ, of 08.08.2001 No. 126-FZ, of
29.05.2002 No. 57-FZ, of 01.12.2007 No. 295-FZ.
10.
Tax Code (part two) of 05.08.2000 No. 117-FZ (version of 05.12.06, as amended on 30.12.06 and 06.12.2007).
11.
On introducing amendments and supplements to the federal law On the payment for using water bodies of 7
August 2001 No. 111-FZ.
12.
On the industrial safety of dangerous production facilities of 21 July 1997 No. 116-FZ.

Page 424

13.
On special protected natural areas of 14 March 1995. No. 33-FZ.
14.
On waste from production and consumption of 24 June 1998. No. 89-FZ.
15.
On the protection of atmospheric air of 04 May 1999. No. 96-FZ.
16.
On the protection of the cultural heritage (monuments of history and culture) of the nations of the Russian
Federation of 25 June 2002 No. 73-FZ of 25.06.2002.
17.
On the protection of the environment of 10 January 2002. No. 7-FZ.
18.
On environmental expert opinions of 23 November 1995. No. 174-FZ.
19.
On domestic sea areas, territorial sea and nearest sea water of the Russian Federation. Federal law of 31 July
1998 No. 155-FZ.
20.
On the federal budget for 2008 and the planned periods of 2009 and 2010. RF federal law of 24.07.2007 No.
198-FZ.
21.
On the exclusive economic zone of the Russian Federation. Federal law of 17 December 1998 No. 191-FZ (as
amended).
International treaties
22.
The United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea, Montevideo, 1982 (UNCLOS).
23.
UN Declaration on the Environment and Development, Rio de Janeiro, 1992.
24.
Convention on the Prevention of Marine Pollution by Dumping of Wastes and Other Matter, 1972.
25.
United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, Rio de Janeiro, 1992.
26.
Convention on Biological Diversity, Rio de Janeiro, 1992.
27.
Convention on the Transboundary Effects of Industrial Accidents, Helsinki, 1992.
28.
International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (MARPOL), London, 1973.
29.
Convention No. 174 of the International Labour Organisation (ILO) on the Prevention of Major Industrial
Accidents (Geneva, 1993).
30.
Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context;
31.
Convention on the Protection the Marine Environment of the Baltic Sea;
32.
Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (Espoo Convention).

Page 425

Rulings of the Governme nt of the Russian Federation

33.
On the Red Book of the Russian Federation of 19 February 1996. 158.
34.
On immediate measures for prevention and eradication of accident spills of oil and oil products of 21 August
2000 No. 613 (as amended on 15 April 2002).
35.
On the standards of paying for releases into the atmospheric air of contaminating substances from stationary and
mobile sources, dumping of contaminating substances in surface and underground water bodies, disposing of
waste from production or consumption. 12 June 2003 No. 344.
36.
On the State Committee of the Russian Federation for Fishing. Ruling of the Russian Federation of 01 November
2007 No. 733.
37.
On the classification of natural or technical emergency situations. Ruling of the RF Government of 21 May 2007
No. 304.
38.
On the measures of securing fulfillment of its obligations by the Russian Federation arising from the Convention
on Wetlands of International Importance Especially as Waterfowl Habitat of 2 February 1971. Ruling No. 1050
of the RF Government of 13.09.1994.
39.
On changing the rate to calculate the amount to be collected for damage inflicted on water biological resources
of 26 September 2000 No. 724.
40.
On the confirmation of the provisions on state control for the protection of atmospheric air of 15 January 2001
No. 31.
41.
On the confirmation of the provisions on the procedure of state environment expert reports of 14 June 1996.
698.
42.
On the confirmation of the rules of granting the use of water bodies under state ownership, establishing and
reviewing the limits of water usage, issuing of licences for water usage and an administrative licence of 03 April
1997. 383.
43.
On the confirmation of the rules of developing standards for maximum permissible concentrations of hazardous
substances and standards for maximum permissible hazardous impacts on the marine environment and natural
resources of domestic sea waters and the territorial sea of the Russian Federation of 10 March 2000. 208.
44.
On the confirmation of the rate to calculate the amount to be collected for damage inflicted through the unlawful
exploitation or destruction of fauna or flora objects of 04.05.1994. 126

Page 426

45.
On the confirmation of the requirements to prevent the death of animal life when carrying out production
processes and when using transport routes, pipelines, communication and power transmission lines of 13 August
1996. 997.
46.
On engineering research for the preparation of project documentation, construction and reconstruction of major
building facilities. Ruling of the RF Government of 19 January 2006 No. 20.
Standards
Atmospheric air
47.
General health and safety requirements for the air of working areas. GOST 12.1.005-88.
48.
Environmental protection. Atmosphere. Diesel cars. Release of hazardous substances with exhaust gas.
Measurements standards and methods. OST 37 001.234-81.
49.
Environmental protection. Atmosphere. Release classification by composition. GOST 17.2.1.01-76.
50.
Environmental protection. Atmosphere. Meteorological aspects of contamination and industrial release. Main
terms and determinations. GOST 17.2.1.04-77.
51.
Environmental protection. Atmosphere. Standards and methods of measuring the content of oxides and
hydrocarbons in exhaust gases of cars with petrol engines. Safety requirements. GOST 17.2.2.03-87.
52.
Environmental protection. Atmosphere. General requirements for the methods of determining contaminating
substances. GOST 17.2.4.02-81.
53.
Environmental protection. Atmosphere. Determination of carbon monoxide release parameters. OST 48307-87.
Hydrosphere
54.
Water supply. Terms and determinations. GOST 25151-82.
55.
Water quality. Terms and determinations. GOST 27065-86 01.01.87.
56.
Environmental protection. Hydrosphere. Water usage and protection. Main terms and determinations (as
amended on 08.83 and 01.87) GOST 17.1.1.01-77.
57.
Environmental protection. Hydrosphere. Classification of water bodies. GOST 17.1.1.02-77.
58.
Environmental protection. Hydrosphere. Classification of water usage. GOST 17.1.1.03-86 replacing GOST
17.1.1.03-78.

Page 427

59.
Environmental protection. Hydrosphere. General requirements for the methods of determining oil products in
natural and waste waters. GOST 17.1.4.01-80.
60.
Environmental protection. Hydrosphere. General requirements for the recovery of samples of bottom sediments
in water bodies for contamination analysis. GOST 17.1.5.01-80.
61.
Environmental protection. Hydrosphere. General requirements for the protection of surface and underground
waters from contamination with oil and oil products. GOST 17.1.3.05-82.
62.
Environmental protection. Hydrosphere. General requirements for the protection of surface waters from
contamination. GOST 17.1.3.13-86.
63.
Environmental protection. Hydrosphere. General requirements for the protection of underground waters. GOST
17.1.3.06-82.
64.
Environmental protection. Hydrosphere. Status parameters and taxation rules for fishing industry water bodies.
GOST 17.1.2.04-77.
65.
Environmental protection. Hydrosphere. Rules of controlling the quality of sea waters. GOST 17.1.3.08-82.
Physical impact
66.
Equipment for arched and contact electro-welding. Permissible levels of noise and measurement methods. GOST
12.1.035-81.
67.
Noise. Methods of determining noise characteristics. General requirements. GOST 23941-79.
68.
Noise. Standardisation of the noise characteristics of stationary equipment. Main provisions. GOST 27409-87.
69.
Noise. Determination of the noise characteristics of noise sources. Indicative method. GOST 12.1.020-80.
70.
Noise. Transport flows. Methods of measuring noise characteristics. GOST 20444-85.

Other
71.
Analysis of types, consequences and the criticality of failures. Main provisions. GOST R 27.310-93.
72.
Hazardous substances. Classification and general requirements for safety. GOST 12.1.007-76 SSBT.

Page 428

73.
Environmental protection. Procedures for carrying out environmental protection work in businesses. GOST
107.17.004-91.
74.
Fire safety. General requirements. GOST 12.1.004-91.
75.
Labour safety standards system. Fire safety. General requirements. GOST 12.1.004-91.
76.
System of standards in the area of environmental protection and natural resource usage improvement. GOST
17.0.0.01-76.
Standard norms and rules, maximum contamination level
77.
List of fishing industry standards: maximum permissible concentrations and approximately safe levels of
influence of hazardous substances for water bodies which are of significance for the fishing industry, confirmed
by Decree of the State Fishing Committee of Russia on 28 April 1999 No. 96.
78.
Procedures for accumulation, transporting, detoxification and dumping of toxic industrial waste (health rules).
Ministry of Health of the USSR, 1985.
79.
Maximum contamination levels and recommended permissible levels of hazardous substances in the water of
water bodies for domestic and cultural usage. Supplements 1 and 2 to the health rules and standards for the
protection of surface waters from contamination (SaNPiN of 4 July 1988 No. 4630-88).
80.
SanPiN 2.1.5.980-00. Health requirements for the protection of surface waters.
81.
SanPiN 2.1.6.1032-01 Health requirements for the protection of air quality in residential areas.
Standards and rules
82.
Protection from noise. SNiP 23-03-2003
83.
Engineering protection of territories, buildings and equipment from dangerous geological processes. Main
planning provisions. SNiP 22-02-2003.
84.
Construction work organisation. SNiP 12-01-2004.
85.
Retaining walls, shipping locks and fish protection equipment SNiP 2.06.07-87.
86.
Rules for the protection of surface waters from contamination with waste waters. .: 1991.
87.
Rules for protection from contamination of littoral sea waters. Confirmed by the USSR Ministry of Melioration
and Water Management, 25 July 1983 No. 13-5-02/850.

Page 429

88.
Rules for the protection of surface waters (typical provisions), confirmed by the USSR State Nature Committee,
21.02.91.
89.
Rules for the protection of surface waters (confirmed by the USSR State Nature Committee, 21 February 1991).
90.
Rules for the granting of permission for dumping in order to dispose of waste and other matter in the sea. - .,
Gidrometeoizdat, 1984.
91.
SP 11-102-97. Engineering and environmental exploring for construction.
92.
Practical manual for SP 11-101-95 for using the section Environmental impact assessment when substantiating
investments in the construction of businesses, buildings and equipment. Moscow, 1998.
93.
Environmental protection standards and planning rules. Reference book, M., Stroyizdat, 1990.
94.
RDS 82-202-96 Rules of developing and adopting standards labour organisation losses and material waste
during construction
95.
Health rules and standards for the protection of littoral sea waters from contamination in places of population
water usage. Confirmed by the USSR Ministry of Health, 6 July 1988, No. 4631-88.
96.
SNiP 2.01.07-85. Strain and impacts on hydrotechnical equipment (wave, ice and of vessels). ., Stroyizdat,
1986, 1989, amendment 2, 1995.
97.
VSN 014-89 Construction of main and industrial pipelines. Environmental protection. (confirmed by decree of
the Ministry of Oil and Gas Construction, 03.05.1989. 103).
Methods, instructions, recomme ndations, management
98.
Temporary methods of determining the economic effectiveness of environmental protection measures and
assessment of economic losses inflicted on water bioresources by contamination of fishing industry water bodies.
USSR Ministry of Fishing, 1989.
99.
Temporary methods of determining the economic effectiveness of environmental protection measures and
assessment of economic losses inflicted on water bioresources by contamination of fishing industry water bodies.
(USSR State Planning Committee and confirmed by the USSR Ministry of Fishing in 1988).
100.
Temporary method of assessing damage inflicted on fish stocks as a result of construction, reconstruction or
expansion of businesses, buildings and other facilities and conducting various types of work on fishing
reservoirs. (USSR State Nature Committee, USSR Ministry of Fishing, 1989).

Page 430
PITER GAS NO. 36/07-01- TEO-OOS-0801(1)-S6


Page 431
PETERGAS NO. 36/07-01- TEO-OOS-0801(1)-S6

101.
Temporary methodical manual for the calculation of releases from non-organised sources in the
construction materials industry. NPO Soyuzpromekologiya, 1985.
102.
Temporary methodical recommendations for the calculation of the volume of losses inflicted on
land plot owners, land users, land owners and land plot tenants through seizure, temporary seizure,
limiting rights or deterioration of the quality of lands as a result of the activities of other
individuals. (confirmed by the head of the Federal Real Estate Cadastre Agency on 11 March
2004).
103.
Temporary instructions for the determination of underlying concentrations of hazardous

substances in the atmosphere of the air for standardising releases and determining maximum
permissible releases. USSR State Hydrometeorology Committee, 1981.
104.
Temporary instructions for the assessment of an increase in muddiness during dredging work
conducted to ensure transit shipping in rivers and the consideration of its impact on water quality
and ecology of hydrobionts. RSFSR Ministry of the River Fleet. .: 1986.
105.
Instructive methodical guidelines for the collection of payments for the contamination of the
environment. Confirmed by the RF Ministry of Natural Resources on 26.01.93.
106.
Method of calculating releases from fire sources during the spill of oil or oil products. RF State
Environment Committee. - M., 1997.
107.
Method of calculating payments for the contamination of sea waters and surfaces of water bodies
which are in the federal ownership of the Russian Federation, when conducting work related to the
removal and harvesting of seabed soils, exploration of non-metallic materials from underwater
quarries and dumping of soils in underwater pits. RF State Committee for Environmental
Protection. Moscow, 1999.
108.
Methods of assessing the pollution and estimating the volume of damage from the destruction of
fauna and disturbance of their habitat (conf. by the RF State Environment Committee on 28 April
2000)
109.
Methodical recommendations for the classification of accidents and incidents in dangerous

productions facilities under the control of gas supervision (RD 12-378-00).
110.
Methodical instructions for the determination of the economical effectiveness of conservation

measures in the gas industry. USSR Gas Industry Ministry, 1988.
111.
Procedure manual for the environmental assessment of the impact of hydrotechnical construction
on water facilities. Kiev: AN USSR. 1990.

Volume 8. Book 1. Off-shore section. Part 1. OVOSPage 431

112.
Recommendations for the breakdown of enterprises into risk categories depending on the mass and
content type of contaminating substances released into the atmosphere. ZapsibNII, Novosibirsk,
1987.
113.
Recommendations for the preparation of the Environmental Impact Assessment. SSSR State
Nature Committee, 1990
114.
Manual for the methods of examining and calculating the removal of deposits and dynamics of the
shores during engineering research - .,: Gidrometeoizdat, 1975, 238 p.
115.
Manual for the standardisation of releases into the atmosphere by gas-developing enterprises.
VNIPIgazodobycha, 1988.
116.
Manual for the organisation of observations, conducting work and granting approvals for the
dumping of waste in the sea (temporary) (edited by I. A. Shlygin. -M: Mosk. Otd.
Gidrometeoizdata, 1984).
117.
Manual for the conducting the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) when selecting grounds,
developing technical and economic grounds and projects for the construction (reconstruction,
expansion and technical re-equipment) of commercial facilities and complexes. Conf. by the
Ministry of Natural Resources of Russia in 1992.
118.
Collection of procedures for the calculation of releasing contaminating substances from various
production facilities into the atmosphere. UNV SSSR State Hydrometeorological Committee,
1986.
119.
Collection of standard procedures and analytical materials for the development and
implementation of environmental programmes of all levels. Ministry of Natural Resources of
Russia, 1994.
120.
System of production for environmental monitoring on gas industry facilities. Planning rules.
OAO Gazprom. VRD 39-1.13-081-2003.
121.
STO Gazprom 6-2005 Procedure manual for the determination of the component composition of
natural and waste water in gas industry facilities.
122.
STO Gazprom 7-2005 Management structure. Powers and obligations in the system of managing
environmental protection.
123.
STO Gazprom 9-2005 Assessment of the environmental effectiveness in the system of managing
environmental protection.
124.
STO Gazprom 10-2005 Methodical instructions for the chemical health control of the air
environment in respect of the content of hydrocarbons in OAO Gazprom facilities, its subsidiary
companies and organisations (in replacement of RD 51-106-86).


125.
STO Gazprom 11-2005 Methodical instructions for the calculation of gross hydrocarbon releases
(summary) into the atmosphere at OAO Gazprom (in replacement of RF 51-90-84).
126.
STO Gazprom 12-2005 Catalogue of production waste and consumption of OAO Gazprom
subsidiary companies and organisations.
127.
STO Gazprom 2-1.19-074-2006 Methodical instructions for the perfection of procedure of

calculating payments for releasing contaminating substances into the atmosphere.
128.
STO Gazprom 2-1.19-075-2006 procedure manual. Chemical agents for the gas industry.
Environmental aspects of use
129.
STO Gazprom 3-2005 Register of greenhouse gas releases. General requirements for maintenance
and execution.
Instructions
130.
Instructions on the procedures of controlling the planning and construction of compensatory fishrearing improvement facilities and their use. Confirmed by joint order No. 327/130 of the Russian
Federation Committee for Fishing and the Ministry for the Protection of the Environment and
Natural Resources of 17 August 1995.
131.
Instructions on the procedures of conducting state expert opinions on construction projects. RDS
11-201-95. Ministry of Construction, ., 1995.
132.
Instructions for the standardisation of releases (dumping) of contaminating substances into the
atmosphere and water bodies. USSR State Nature Management Committee, 1989.
133.
Instructions for environmental foundations of commercial and other activities. Confirmed by

Order No. 539 of the Ministry of Natural Resources of Russia of 29.12.95.
Provisions
134.
On the annexes to the Manual for Environmental Expert Opinions for Pre-project and Project
Documentation. Letter No. 11-31216 from the Directorate-General for State Environmental
Review of 16.05.94.
135.
Provisions on assessing the impact of scheduled commercial or other activities on the environment
in the Russian Federation, Confirmed by Order No. 372 et al. of the Directorate-General for State
Environmental Review of 16 May 2000.
136.
Manual for assessing the risk connected with possible accidents during construction, storage, use
and transport of large quantities of inflammable, explosive and toxic substances, NMTs, Risk
Informatic Technology, 1992 (approved by the Department for environmental standards and
methodical implementation of State Environmental Expert Report No. 10-8-7 of 31.01.92).


Others
137.
On the annexes to the Manual for Environmental Expert Opinions for Pre-project and Project
Documentation. Letter No. 11-31216 from the Directorate-General for State Environmental
Review of 16.05.94.
138.
Collection of documents on issues of state extra-departmental expert reports in Russia.

Directorate-General for State Environmental Review of Russia, 1995.
139.
Reference materials on certain parameters of the creation of the most important types of
production and consumption waste, Moscow, 1996.
140.
Collection of certain indicators of the creation of production and consumption waste, Moscow,
1999.


APPENDIX TO SECTION 2

To the General Director of

OOO PeterGaz
A. S. Fedorov
62, Starokaluzhskoe shosse,
117630, Moscow, Russia
The Federal Service for Supervision of Natural Resource Usage Department in the Leningrad Region has
reviewed your letter No. 1456 of 20.07.2007 on the existence of Special Protected Natural Areas, which
are in the economic jurisdiction by the federal administration and managed by the federal authorities of
state power in the area of impact (500 m in both directions from the line) of the planned off-shore section
of the Nord Stream gas pipeline - from the warp of the water of Portovaya Bay to the Island of Gotland.
We hereby inform the following.
According to the draft submitted, removal of the Nord Stream gas pipeline route in the immediate
proximity of the boundaries of the sections of the planned Ingermandlandsky state natural reserve are not
intended. However, during the execution of a more detailed the route design, you must contact the
Department to confirm the routing of the gas pipeline outside the reserve, and also to obtain the
conditions for monitoring the impact of the gas pipeline during construction and use on the ecosystem of
this area of the Baltic Sea.
Acting Head of Department
M. V. Pantyukhov
S. A. Frolova 272-16-94
To the General Director

OOO PeterGaz
A. S. Fedorov
117630, Moscow, Russia.
62, Starokaluzhskoe shosse
tel./fax (495) 784-71-61, 784-71-62
Dear Aleksandr Stanislavovich

The Committee for Natural Resources and Environmental Protection of the Leningrad Region in response
to Ref. No. 1455 of 20.07.2007 hereby informs you that in the area of possible impact of the planned gas
pipeline on the relevant sections located in the area of Portovaya Bay and the Island of Gotland of the
Vyborg District, Leningrad Region, there are no Special Protected Natural Areas.
The closest special protected natural areas is the regional comprehensive reserve Beryozoviye Ostrova,
located at a distance of some 15 km to the south east of the planned gas pipeline.
I hereby also inform you that the gas pipeline route runs through the territory of the planned
Ingermanlandsky State Natural Reserve, as special protected natural area of federal status (Eastern Gulf
of Finland).
Committee Chairman
M. A. Dedov
EIS A. E. Zhukovskaya
tel.: (812)710-00-81
Meeting places of Baltic subspecies of the jar seal (Phoca hispida botnica) in the rookeries of the spring/summe r and summe r/autumn periods of the year and its
migration routes to the spring and autumn/winter periods of the year.
Map of the spread of the grey seal (Halichoerus grypus) during the spring, summe r and autumn periods of the year and its migration routes in the spring and
autumn periods of the year

NORD STREAM No. G-PE-LFR-EIA-101-0801010006
APPENDIX TO SECTION 3

Page 440

APPENDIX 3.1-1
To the section Geological and geomorphological characteristics

Page 441
Please find enclosed the conclusion stating the absence of minerals in the area requested for the
construction of the North European Gas Pipeline (SEG) (off-shore sections, Russia), which runs through
the waters of the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland.
Enclosed: Conclusion on the plan for the SEG route, scale 1:750,000 - 1 sheet
Conclusion
The area requested for the construction of the North European Gas Pipeline (SEG) (off-shore sections,
Russia), which runs through the waters of the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland, runs along the grounds
of a geological allocation granted to OOO PETROTRANS, licence for the use of mineral resources LOD
11335 TP. Under the provisions of the licence agreement, the geological examination of iron manganese
concrete in the Gulf of Finland, Southern section constitutes the purposeful objective and types of work.
No mineral reserves in the section which the gas pipeline runs through are listed on the government's
records.
Head of Sevzapnedra
A. V. Lebedev
PeterGaz
Limited Liability Company
_______ ______
For _____of_____
To the Head of the Departme nt for the Use of

Minerals in the North-Western Federal Area
A. V. Lebedev
On providing information on the existence (nonexistence) of minerals
Dear Alexey Valentinovich

OOO PeterGaz is currently developing a plan for the construction of the Russian section of the Nord
Stream offshore gas pipeline.
The Russian section of the offshore gas pipeline includes the onshore section which is adjacent to
Portovaya Bay in the Vyborg District of the Leningrad Region (1.5 km in length) and the offshore section
in the waters of the Gulf of Finland from Portovaya Bay to the border of the Russian territorial waters in
the area of the Island of Gogland (123.5 km in length) (Appendix 1).
In order to prepare the project decisions, we must enquiry on clarification of the information on the
existence (non-existence) of minerals within the corridor of the planned Nord Stream offshore gas
pipeline.
Conclusion No. 1-13/820 of 14.07.2006 on the non-existence of minerals within the area requested for the
construction of the North European Gas Pipeline section (currently the Nord Stream offshore gas
pipeline) stated that the pipeline route runs through the ground of the geological allotment granted to
OOO Petrotrans for the geological examination of iron manganese concrete in the Southern section
(Appendix 2).
62, Starokaluzhskoe shosse, 117630, Moscow, Russia,

telephone: (495) 784-71-61, fax: (495) 784-71-62
E-mail: _PeterGaz@peterqaz.com
Website: www.petergaz.com
62, Starokaluzhskoe shosse, 117630, Moscow, Russia

Phone: (007)(495) 784-71-61, Fax: (007)(495) 784-7162
E-mail: OOO_PeterGaz@petergaz.com
Internet site: www.petergaz.com
Please provide information on the current stage of this section developement as well as the time period for
which the geological allotment was granted to OOO Petrotrans under a licence for the rights of using
minerals.
Enclosed:
1. Arrangement plan for the Nord Stream gas pipeline on 1 sheet in 1 copy
2. Conclusion 01-13/820 of 14.07.2006 on the non-existence of minerals in the area requested for the
construction of the North European Gas Pipeline (SEG) section (offshore sections, Russia) on 2
sheets in 1 copy.
Deputy
General Director
A. A. Arkhipov
EIS O. A. Uvarov
Tel. (495)784-71-60
62, Starokaluzhskoe shosse, 117630, Moscow,

Russia, telephone: (495) 784-71-61, fax: (495) 78471-62 E-mail: PeterGaz@peterqaz.com
website: www.petergaz.com

Russia Phone: (007)(495) 784-71-61, Fax:
(007)(495) 784-71-62 E-mail:
OOO_PeterGaz@petergaz.com Internet site:
www.petergaz.com
Conclusion
In the section requested by OOO PeterGaz for the development of the project to construct the Russian
section of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline within the onshore section adjacent to the waters of
Portovaya Bay in the Vyborg District of the Leningrad Region (1.5 km in length), no deposits of minerals
listed in the government's records and accounted for in the State Register of Mineral Deposits (GKM)
were discovered.
Deputy Head
V. M. Lukinov

APPENDIX 3.1-2
METHOD OF CALCULATING POSSIBLE DEFORMATIONS OF THE SEABOTTOM UNDER

THE INFLUENCE OF WAVES AND CURRENTS ALONG THE NORD STREAM GAS
PIPELINE ROUTE WITHIN THE WATERS OF PORTOVAYA BAY

Page 448

1. Waves and currents

The active waves are considered as irregular with a narrow-band spectre of frequencies and directions and
are characterised as of medium-square significance in wave height H, of a period of spectral maximum tp
and general direction regarding the normal shore line . The determination of the waves in the bay
includes calculating the refraction, transformation and dissipation of the waves. The refraction is
calculated on the basis of the law of wave vectors conservation [Philips, 1980],
where the axes and

waves' phase velocity.
OY
are directed in accordance with the normal line and along the shore, C is the
The field of the medium-square heights of the waves H(y) is determined from the equation of the balance
of energy which in the conditions of stationary waves is of the type
where and Cg are the waves' energy and the speed of its transfer (group speed), is the water density, g
the gravity increase and D the energy dissipation speed connected to the proportion of waves formed in
the spectrum.
The foundation for a qualitative description of the littoral circulation is the equation of the dynamics and
continuity, as obtained by Phillips [1980] on the basis of equations of motion taking into account the
specific conditions of littoral zones:
where Qx=Uh and Qy=Vh are diametrical and lateral water rate (U and V constituent speeds averaged per
depth h), changes to the average level, which are based on wind and waves. The values F and Fy express
the impact on account of gradients of radiation strains and strains based on rollers when waves collapse,
bx, by
are the strains of seabed friction, 1 is Reynolds' turbulent strain connected to the horizontal
momentum exchange and Twx and Twy are the strains from the wind.

Page 449

2. Storm deformations
Calculations of storm deformations of the bottom and changes to the depth h of the calculation profile are
based on the integration of a mass conservation equation.
where t is the time, x the horizontal distance along the site and qx the sediment displacement on one unit of
the flow section's width. The value qx, expressed in m3m-1ch-1 is assessed on the basis of I. O.
Leont'yev's model [2001, Leont'yev, 2003]:
where = -dh/dx is the local bottom slope, h the depth, = 3600/[g(s - )(1 - )], and s is the density of water and
sediments, the leakage of the bottom, b and s the coefficient of the effectiveness of transporting be loads
and suspended deposits, F the corner of the actual bottom slope, Ws the deposit's hydraulic coarseness, Df
the thickness losses due to bottom friction, V the turbulence energy dissipation speed arising on the bottom
when waves collapse, um is the orbital ground speed, UW and UC the seabed speeds based on wave
transformation and current. The wave speed transfer at the ground Uw is determined as [Leont'yev, 2001]
where D and D*are the local dissipation speed and its medium value, X is the distance of this point from
the shore. The value Uc during a wind surge characterises the down current speed of the directed to the
sea.
The structure of storm deformation calculations is shown in Fig. 1. The cycle is repeated until the ongoing
time t matches the set disturbance length tw.
A step in time Ft has the order of dozens of wave periods, while a step in space x is measured in metres.
The two-step numerical scheme of Laks-Wendroff is used.

Page 450

ENTRY
Bottom profile
Bottom properties
Wave parameters
Disturbance duration tw
WAVES AND CURRENTS
SEDIMENT DISPLACEMENTS
t<tw
BOTTOM DEFORMATION
t=tw
EXIT
New bottom profile
Figure 1. Storm deformation calculation structure

3. Deformations connected to the displacement of underwater sand banks
The maximum deformations of this type correspond to the bank height Zbar, which is determined as the
difference of depths in the coombe ht and above the bank ridge hc, i.e. Zbar = ht - hc. If there is no
information on the underwater bank parameters, Leont'yev's [2008b] model can be used, which enables
assessing the sizes of the largest bank in hh of the internal part of the coastal zone. The depths hc and ht are
determined as
where
hB
is the collapse depth,
lB
the distance from the place of collapse to the top of the bank,
lt
the
distance from the top to the centre of the coombe,

The distances lB and lt are calculated in respect of their interrelations
where T is the waves' medium period in a characteristic storm, and the values m and n are determined
with empirical variables

Page 451

where ds is the medium sand size.

The collapse depth is assessed with the formula
where H1% is the waves' height of 1% probability in the system in deep water.
4. Long-term changes to the shore
The forecast of long-term changes to the position of the shore line is based on
a balance equation, which is linked to the speed of moving the shore line x / t with the integral parts of
the sediments' budget [Leont'ev, 2008]:
Here h* is the closure depth, which marks the conditional lower boundary of the shore area. It is
determined as h* - 2H 0.14%, where H 0.14% is the waves' significant height with an annual probability of 0.14%
(active about 12 hours per year). Zc is the rise of the top boundary of the shore area, which corresponds to
the highest level or brow of the active cliff. The values in brackets characterise the inflow or outflow of
sediments on account of the gradient along the shore flow Q (y - distance along the shore), the distances of
lateral flows at the top and bottom boundaries (qAeol and q*) as well as supplemental material sources or
drains . The value wlx expresses the range of changes of the relevant sea level (w - / t, lx is the length of
the active part of the profile between h* and Zc).
The determination of the gradient Q / y is based on sediment calculations [Leont'yev, 2001] along the
relevant section of the shore for various situations which are characteristic for the wind and wave mode.
This provides a year-average spread of the flow Q, from which the shore gradient is also determined.
The year-average lateral flow via the lower boundary
[Leont'yev, 2008a]
q*
is determined with empirical variables
where * - h* /l* is the average bottom slope (l* the distance from the shore to the depth h*); ds is the average
size of sediment particles; T4% is the period of waves with a 4% annual probability. If S2 >3.2, the flow q*
is directed towards the shore, and at lower values in direction of the sea.
The flow qAeol, based on wind-borne transport, is calculated with the formulas specified in the manual
[Coastal Engineering Manual (CEM), 2002].

Page 452

APPENDIX 3.2
To the section Climate condition and status of atmospheric air

Page 453

To the General Director of

ZAO IETs Ekoneftegaz S.
M. Oshitov
On underlying concentration levels

In response to your request, I am hereby informing you on the underlying concentration levels (mg/m3) of
contaminating substances in the atmospheric air of Bolshoy Bor (Lomonosovsky District):
suspended substances 0.17
sulphur dioxide 0,015
carbon monoxide 1.5
nitrogen dioxide 0.050
nitrogen oxide 0,021
Without taking into account the deposit of the facility

The data is valid until 2008.
Head of the Centre
Yu. D. Malashin
Petrova
(812) 328 09 19

Page 454

APPENDIX 3.3
to the section
Oceanogrophy and sea water quality

Page 455

Table P 3.3-1
Health standards for the levels of hazardous substances in water bodies which are used culturally
and generally (SanPiN 2.1.5.980-00 taking into account GN 2.1.5.1315-03, GN 2.1.5.1316-03)
Contaminating substances
(parameter)
Suspended matter
pH value
Dissolved Oxygen
BOD5
Nitrogen ammonium
Nitrites
Nitrates
oxide of silicon (for Si)
Sulphates (SO4 2-)
Hydrogen sulphide
Iron (Fe, summary)
Cadmium (Cd, summary)
Manganese (Mn, summary)
Copper (Cu, summary)
Arsene (As, summary)
Nickel (Ni, summary)
Aluminium (Al)
Mercury (Hg, summary)
Lead (Pb, summary)
Chrome (Cr+6)
Zinc (Zn)
Cobalt (Co)
Sodium (Na)
Oil products, summary
Surface actants, anionic
Hexachlorobenzene
Tetrachlorobenzene
Pentachlorobenzene
HCCH (hexachlorane)
Aldrin
DDT (isomere total)
PCB congeners
Heptachlor
Benzene
Ethylbenzene
Xylene
Measurement
units
mg/l
pH unit
mg/l
mgO2/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
Hazard indicator
org. smell
org.
sanitary-toxicological
org.
org. smell
org.
org.
org.
org. (muddy)
org.
org. area
org. foam
org. odour
org. odour
org. smell
Maximum
contamination level
in waters used
Risk category
commercially,
culturally and
generally
75
6,5-8,5
4
4
1,5
4
3.3
2
45
3
10
2
500
4
0.003
4
0.3
3
0.001
2
0.1
3
1.0
3
0.01
1
0.02
2
0.2(0.5)
3
0.0005
1
0.01
2
0.05
3
1.0
3
0.1
2
200
2
0.3
4
0.5
3
0.001
1
0.01
2
0.01
2
0.02
1
0.002
3
0.1
2
0.001
1
0.05
2
0.01
1
0.01
4
0.05
3

Page 456

Contaminating substances Measurement

(parameter)
units
Hazard indicator
Maximum
contamination
level in waters
used
commercially,
culturally and
generally
Isopropylbenzene (cumene)
Toluol
Naphthalene
Benzapyrene
Phenol
3- and 4-methyphenol
Dimethylphenol
Chlorophenol
Dichlorophenol
Trichlorophenol
Pentachlorophenol
4-nitrophenol
3-nitrophenol
2-nitrophenol
org. odour
org. smell
org. smell
org. smell
org. smell
org. smell
org. odour
0.1
0.5
0.01
0.00001
0.001 **
0.004
0.25
0.001
0.002
0.004
0.01
0.02
0.06
0.06
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
mg/l
Risk category
3
4
4
1
4
2
4
4
4
1
2
2
2
2
Notes:
The fourth column states the limiting indicator of the substances' hazardousness for
which the standard is set: s.-t. - sanitary-toxicological org. - organic with a breakdown of
the character of change of the organic properties of water (smell - changes the water's
smell; odour gives the water an odour);
**- the maximum contamination level of phenol - 0.001 mg/l - is specified for the amount
of flying phenols; the maximum contamination level refers to water bodies with the
application of chloride in the process of its cleaning on water facilities or when
determining the conditions of release of waste water exposed to decontamination with
chloride. In other circumstances, it is allowed to keep the level of flying phenols in water
bodies at concentration levels of 0.1 mg/l;

Page 457

Table P 3.3-2
Maximum contamination level values adopted for sea waters, as applied by the RF State
Committee for fishing on 28.04.1999
Contaminants
Oxygen,
mg/l
summer
Oxygen,
mg/l
winter
BOD20, mg/l
, unit
Phosphates
(phosphatephosphorus),
mkg/l
Nitrates (nitrate
nitrogen), mkg/l
Nitrites
(nitrite
nitrogen), mkg/l
Ammonium,
mkg/l
Benzene, mkg/l
Toluol, mkg/l
Ethylbenzene,
mkg/l
Para- and metaxylene total
Ortho-xylene,
mkg/l
Isopropylbenzene,
mkg/l
1,2,4trimethylbenzene,
mkg/l
Naphthalene,
mkg/l
Benzapyrene
mkg/l
Phenols, mkg/l
Detergents, mkg/l
Maximum
contamination
level
6
Risk
category
Oil
mkg/l
4
3
6,5-8,5
200 (65)
40000 (9100)
Contaminants
products,
DDT total, mkg/l
80 (20)
HCCH total, mkg/l

PCB total, mkg/l
Iron, mkg/l
Manganese, mkg/l
Chrome, mkg/l
500 (390)
Nickel, mkg/l
500
500
1
4
3
3
Zinc, mkg/l
Copper, mkg/l
Lead, mkg/l
50
Cobalt, mkg/l
50
Cadmium, mkg/l
100
Arsene, mkg/l
500
Tin, mkg/l
Mercury, mkg/l
Maximum
contamination
level
category
50
0,01
0,01
0,01
50
50
Risk
70
10
50
5
3
3
10
10
10
112
0,1
0,005
1
100
3
4

Page 458

Table P 3.3-3
Measured parameter values and measured concentration levels in maximum contamination level
units in
the waters of the entire line
Measured concentration levels
Parameters
INTERVALS
Average
Eh, mv
Suspended substances, mg/l
BOD20, mgO/l
Nitrogen ammonium, mkg/l
Nitrite nitrogen, mkg/l
Nitrate nitrogen, mkg/l
General nitrogen, mkg/l
Phosphates, mkg/l
General phosphorus, mkg/l
7.43-8.15
120-241
0.10-1.89
0.52-5.07
90.0-350
<0.5-78.0
5.00-39.0
150-584
5.00-48.0
7.00-53.0
7.86
195
0.63
1.81
176
5.71
15.9
295
20.0
25.8
Fe, mkg/l
Mn, mkg/l
Cu, mkg/l
Pb, mkg/l
Zn, mkg/l
Cd, mkg/l
Ni, mkg/l
Co, mkg/l
Cr, mkg/l
Hg, mkg/l
As, mkg/l
2.30-16.3
0.31-5.10
0.70-3.50
0.66-2.81
1.50-7.70
0.08-0.26
0.50-2.50
0.10-0.50
0.24-1.14
0.01-0.04
0.82-1.53
HU, mkg/l
Measured concentration levels in

maximum contamination level units
INTERVALS
Average
0.60
0.45
0.29
0.00
0.31
-
6.53
1.72
1.67
1.64
4.47
0.17
1.43
0.24
0.68
0.02
1.22
0.05-0.33
0.01-0.10
0.14-0.70
0.07-0.28
0.03-0.15
0.01-0.03
0.05-0.25
0.02-0.10
0.00-0.02
0.09-0.35
0.08-0.15
0.13
0.03
0.33
0.16
0.09
0.02
0.14
0.05
0.01
0.22
0.12
2.20-70.2
19.1
0.04-1.40
0.38
Benzapyrene, ng/l
Naphthalene, ng/l
<0.5
2.00-61.4
<0.5
18.2
0.00
0.00-0.02
0.00
0.00
HCCH total, ng/l

DDT total, ng/l
Chlorobenzene total, ng/l
Chlorophenol total, ng/l
PCB total, ng/l
OCP total, ng/l
PAH total, ng/l
<0.05-1.30
<0.05-0.46
<0.05-0.71
<0.05
0.21-2.00
0.12-1.83
3.40-128
0.49
0.11
0.14
<0.05
0.88
0.74
34.5
0.00-0.13
0.00-0.05
0.02-0.20
0.05
0.01
0.09
0.17-1.69
0.23-0.90
0.00-3.90
0.00
-
0.08-0.74

Page 459

Table P 3.3-4
units, section No. 1 (stations 1-6)
Parameters
INTERVALS
Average
Eh, mv
BOD20, mgO/l
Phosphates, mkg/l
7.82-7.97
183-208
0.63-1.60
0.81-3.19
96.6-135
7.00-15.0
9.00-17.0
161-226
5.00-28.0
14.0-43.0
7.90
193
1.03
2.25
118
9.42
13.1
197
14.4
23.2
Fe, mkg/l
Mn, mkg/l
Cu, mkg/l
Pb, mkg/l
Zn, mkg/l
Cd, mkg/l
Ni, mkg/l
Co, mkg/l
Cr, mkg/l
Hg, mkg/l
As, mkg/l
2.70-11.2
0.31-3.20
0.84-2.40
0.70-2.11
1.50-5.40
0.08-0.23
0.50-1.00
0.10-0.30
0.27-0.98
0.01-0.02
0.82-1.11
HU, mkg/l
Benzapyrene, ng/l
Naphthalene, ng/l
HCCH total, ng/l
DDT total, ng/l
PCB total, ng/l
OCP total, ng/l
PAH total, ng/l

INTERVALS
Average
0.75
0.30
0.47
0.00
0.22
-
4.53
1.18
1.53
1.43
3.57
0.14
0.74
0.16
0.44
0.02
0.97
0.05-0.22
0.01-0.06
0.17-0.48
0.07-0.21
0.03-0.11
0.01-0.02
0.05-0.10
0.02-0.06
0.00-0.01
0.09-0.24
0.08-0.11
0.09
0.02
0.31
0.14
0.07
0.01
0.07
0.03
0.01
0.15
0.10
2.60-70.2
21.9
0.05-1.40
0.44
<0.5
22.8-61.4
0.20-0.48
<0.05-0.35
<0.05-0.39
<0.5
0.48-1.72
0.26-1.22
53.4-128
<0.5
40.1
0.35
0.13
0.09
<0.5
1.07
0.57
92.8
0.01-0.02
0.02-0.05
0.00-0.04
0.05-0.17
0.01
0.03
0.01
0.11
0.27-1.06
0.25-0.35
0.35-0.75
0.00
-
0.08-0.43

Page 460

Table P 3.3-5
Parameters

INTERVALS
Average
INTERVALS
Average
Eh, mv
BOD20, mgO/l
Phosphates, mkg/l
7.76-7.92
182-221
0.35-1.89
0.97-5.07
90.0-216
5.00-18.0
8.00-23.0
150-361
8.00-20.0
10.0-40.0
7.88
207
0.79
1.89
153
10.7
14.1
255
12.8
23.0
0.32-1.69
0.23-0.56
0.25-0.90
0.00
0.12-0.31
-
0.63
0.39
0.53
0.00
0.20
-
Fe, mkg/l
Mn, mkg/l
Cu, mkg/l
Pb, mkg/l
Zn, mkg/l
Cd, mkg/l
Ni, mkg/l
Co, mkg/l
Cr, mkg/l
Hg, mkg/l
As, mkg/l
3.70-14.3
0.79-2.60
0.80-2.30
0.87-2.60
1.60-6.10
0.08-0.22
0.60-1.90
0.10-0.20
0.24-1.14
0.01-0.04
0.86-1.41
6.148
1.47
1.47
1.72
3.69
0.15
1.13
0.15
0.62
0.02
1.17
0.07-0.29
0.02-0.05
0.16-0.46
0.09-0.26
0.03-0.12
0.01-0.02
0.06-0.19
0.02-0.04
0.00-0.02
0.09-0.35
0.09-0.14
0.12
0.03
0.29
0.17
0.07
0.02
0.11
0.03
0.01
0.23
0.12
HU, mkg/l
2.60-43.4
<0.5
9.60-40.3
15.6
<0.5
21.8
0.05-0.87
0.00-0.01
0.31
0.01
0.29-0.66
<0.05-0.44
0.05-0.54
<0.5
0.46-1.04
0.34-1.36
28.5-86.8
0.43
0.11
0.19
<0.5
0.78
0.74
52.9
0.03-0.07
0.00-0.04
0.05-0.10
-
0.04
0.01
0.08
-
Benzapyrene, ng/l
Naphthalene, ng/l
HCCH total, ng/l
DDT total, ng/l
PCB total, ng/l
OCP total, ng/l
PAH total, ng/l

Page 461

Table P 3.3-6
Parameters

INTERVALS
Average
INTERVALS
Average
Eh, mv
BOD20, mgO/l
Phosphates, mkg/l
7.61-8.15
174-241
0.23-1.24
0.80-3.25
107-253
1.00-78.0
5.00-27.0
179-423
5.00-43.0
8.00-53.0
7.91
204
0.65
1.72
169
9.56
14.7
282
18.2
25.1
0.27-1.08
0.28-0.65
0.05-3.90
0.00
0.08-0.66
-
0.57
0.43
0.48
0.00
0.28
-
Fe, mkg/l
Mn, mkg/l
Cu, mkg/l
Pb, mkg/l
Zn, mkg/l
Cd, mkg/l
Ni, mkg/l
Co, mkg/l
Cr, mkg/l
Hg, mkg/l
As, mkg/l
3.70-12.0
0.64-4.10
0.70-2.40
1.22-2.81
2.10-7.70
0.10-0.22
0.80-1.90
0.10-0.40
0.30-1.05
0.01-0.03
1.05-1.41
7.64
1.85
1.39
1.91
4.41
0.15
1.41
0.22
0.69
0.02
1.22
0.07-0.24
0.01-0.08
0.14-0.48
0.12-0.28
0.04-0.15
0.01-0.02
0.08-0.19
0.02-0.08
0.00-0.02
0.14-0.34
0.11-0.14
0.15
0.04
0.28
0,19
0.09
0.02
0.14
0.04
0.01
0.23
0.12
HU, mkg/l
2.50-44.4
12.3
0.05-0.88
0.25
Benzapyrene, ng/l
Naphthalene, ng/l
<0.5
2.40-46.4
<0.5
15.7
0.00-0.01
0.00
HCCH total, ng/l

DDT total, ng/l
PCB total, ng/l
OCP total, ng/l
PAH total, ng/l
<0.05-0.66
<0.05-0.46
<0.05-0.71
<0.5
0.46-1.77
0.12-1.34
11.6-74.6
0.45
0.14
0.22
<0.5
0.87
0.81
33.1
0.00-0.07
0.00-0.05
0.05-0.18
0.04
0.01
0.09

Page 462

Table P 3.3-7
Parameters

INTERVALS
Average
INTERVALS
Average
Eh, mv
BOD20, mgO/l
Phosphates, mkg/l
7.43-7.99
138-233
0.11-1.13
1.07-2.74
99.6-350
<0.1-8.00
5.00-38.0
166-584
6.00-48.0
8.00-53.0
7.72
193
0.55
1.72
211
2.19
18.2
352
26.6
27.6
0.18-0.91
0.00-0.90
0.00-0.40
0.00
-
0.00-0.74
-
0.41
-
Fe, mkg/l
Mn, mkg/l
Cu, mkg/l
Pb, mkg/l
Zn, mkg/l
Cd, mkg/l
Ni, mkg/l
Co, mkg/l
Cr, mkg/l
Hg, mkg/l
As, mkg/l
3.00-10.7
0.90-5.10
0.80-2.40
0.66-2.00
2.20-6.10
0.09-0.26
1.00-2.40
0.10-0.40
0.36-1.04
0.01-0.03
1.06-1.51
6.24
2.00
1.52
1.43
4.61
0.17
1.54
0.30
0.62
0.02
1.33
0.00-0.21
0.00-0.10
0.02-0.48
0.07-0.20
0.04-0.12
0.02-0.03
0.02-0.24
0.02-0.08
0.01-0.04
0.00-0.34
0.00-0.15
0,12
0.04
0.30
0.14
0.09
0.02
0.15
0.06
0.01
0.23
0.13
HU, mkg/l
2.20-34.5
20.0
0.00-0.69
0.40
Benzapyrene, ng/l
Naphthalene, ng/l
<0.5
2.20-8.00
<0.5
4.66
0.00-0.01
0.00
HCCH total, ng/l

DDT total, ng/l
PCB total, ng/l
OCP total, ng/l
PAH total, ng/l
0.37-0.91
<0.05-0.22
<0.05-0.22
<0.5
0.63-1.68
0.47-1.21
7.80-26.3
0.57
0.10
0.10
<0.5
1.04
0.76
16.4
0.00-0.09
0.00-0.02
0.00-0.17
0.06
0.01
0.10
0.57
0.54
0.11
0.00

Page 463

Table P 3.3-8
Parameters
in maximum contamination
level units
INTERVALS
Average
0.17-0.95
0.73
0.26-0.87
0.52
0.00-0.10
0.06
0.00
0.00
0.18-0.65
0.45
-
INTERVALS
7.52-7.97
120-221
0.12-1.20
0.52-2.86
99.6-338
<0.1-2.00
5.00-39.0
166-564
12.0-42.0
7.00-52.0
Average
7.84
185
0.47
2.18
202
1.17
18.1
337
29.3
28.9
Fe, mkg/l
Mn, mkg/l
Cu, mkg/l
Pb, mkg/l
Zn, mkg/l
Cd, mkg/l
Ni, mkg/l
Co, mkg/l
Cr, mkg/l
Hg, mkg/l
As, mkg/l
2.30-16.3
0.43-4.90
1.10-2.60
0.69-2.30
3.10-6.30
0.11-0.26
1.10-2.50
0.20-0.40
0.33-1.02
0.01-0.03
0.94-1.53
6.72
1.88
1.91
1.59
4.96
0.18
1.85
0.26
0.76
0.02
1.24
0.05-0.33
0.01-0.10
0.22-0.52
0.07-0.23
0.06-0.13
0.01-0.03
0.11-0.25
0.04-0.08
0.00-0.01
0.09-0.34
0.09-0.15
0.13
0.04
0.38
0.16
0.10
0.02
0.19
0.05
0.01
0.21
0.12
HU, mkg/l
4.80-52.8
25.0
0.10-1.06
0.50
Benzapyrene, ng/l
Naphthalene, ng/l
<0.5
2.00-8.00
<0.5
4.23
0.00-0.00
0.00
HCCH total, ng/l
0.23-1.30
0.61
0.02-0.13
0.06
DDT total, ng/l

PCB total, ng/l
OCP total, ng/l
PAH total, ng/l
<0.05-0.43
<0.05-0.35
<0.5
0.21-2.00
0.31-1.83
3.40-24.5
0.08
0.06
<0.5
0.93
0.75
12.7
0.00-0.04
0.02-0.20
0.01
0.09
Eh, mv
BOD20, mgO/l
Phosphates, mkg/l

Page 464

Table P 3.3-9
Measured concentration
Parameters
levels in maximum
contamination level units
INTERVALS
Average
0.23-0.56
0.36
0.27-0.83
0.50
0.00-0.10
0.05
0.00
0.00
0.15-0.54
0.29
-
INTERVALS
7.72-8.03
148-219
0.10-1.07
0.70-1.69
105-322
<0.1-2.00
5.00-36.0
176-538
10.0-35.0
9.00-51.0
Average
7.90
186
0.32
1.07
193
1.07
17.1
321
19.1
27.2
Fe, mkg/l
Mn, mkg/l
Cu, mkg/l
Pb, mkg/l
Zn, mkg/l
Cd, mkg/l
Ni, mkg/l
Co, mkg/l
Cr, mkg/l
Hg, mkg/l
As, mkg/l
3.40-14.6
0.67-4.40
1.10-3.50
1.06-2.43
4.20-6.70
0.15-0.26
1.10-2.50
0.10-0.50
0.58-1.12
0.01-0.03
1.14-1.51
7.43
1.84
2.28
1.67
5.50
0.20
1.74
0.34
0.89
0.02
1.32
0.07-0.29
0.01-0.09
0.20-0.70
0.11-0.24
0.08-0.13
0.02-0.03
0.11-0.25
0.02-0.10
0.01-0.02
0.13-0.34
0.11-0.15
0.15
0.04
0.46
0.17
0.11
0.02
0.17
0.07
0.01
0.22
0.13
HU, mkg/l
2.30-31.5
15.4
0.05-0.63
0.31
Benzapyrene, ng/l
Naphthalene, ng/l
<0.5
2.00-2.70
<0.5
2.43
0.00-0.00
0.00
HCCH total, ng/l
0.31-0.57
0.47
0.03-0.06
DDT total, ng/l

PCB total, ng/l
OCP total, ng/l
PAH total, ng/l
<0.05-0.33
<0.05-0.39
<0.5
0.34-0.86
0.44-1.20
4.40-17.2
0.11
0.16
<0.5
0.66
0.74
11.2
0.00-0.03
0.03-0.09
-
Eh, mv
BOD20, mgO/l
Phosphates, mkg/l
0.05
0.01
0.07
-

Page 465

APPENDIX 3.4
To the section Socio-economic conditions

Page 466
PeterGaz
Limited Liability Company
_______ ______
For _____of_____
To the Head of the Federal Service Department

for Veterinary and Phytosanitary Control in St
Petersburg and the Leningrad Region
N. V. Shirokov
Enquiry on the existence of fishing and trawling

areas in the transit region of the North European
Gas Pipeline (offshore section)
Dear Nikolay Vasilievich
OOO PeterGaz is currently conducting project design work of the North European Gas Pipeline (offshore
section).
The offshore section of the North European Gas Pipeline route from Portovaya Bay to the Island of
Gotland (km 0 to km 105) runs through the waters of the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland in the Baltic
Sea within the territorial waters of the Russian Federation. The point of entry into the Gulf is in Portovaya
Bay (Vyborg District, Leningrad Region), 13 km from the state border of the Russian Federation with the
Republic of Finland. From Portovaya Bay, the route is directed towards the Island of Sommers and
further towards the Island of Gotland.
For the purposes of complying with the protection mode and to establish the limitations on exploiting the
environment during the construction of the SEG, we hereby request you to provide details on the
existence of fishing and trawling areas in the region of the gas pipeline route.
Enclosed: coordinates of the SEG route within Russia - 1 sheet
Vice President
EIS O. V. Rodivilova
Tel.: (495) 784-71-61
Russia
Phone: (495) 784-71-61, Fax: (495) 784-71-62
E-mail: 000_PeterGaz@petergaz.ru
Web site: www.petergaz.ru
A. A. Arkhipov

Russia
Phone: (007)(495) 784-71-61, Fax: (007)(495) 78471-62
E-mail: 000_PeterGaz@petergaz.ru
Web site: www.petergaz.ru
Enclosed
Coordinates of the SEG route within Russia
ID
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
Width
60 31.6544' N
60 30.3862' N
60 29.1020' N
60 28.3857' N
60 26.9935' N
60 24.9785' N
60 24.1685' N
60 22.2482' N
60 21.6039' N
60 21.2040' N
60 17.3434' N
60 16.7325' N
60 15.8989' N
60 14.6689' N
60 13.6859' N
60 12.1414' N
60 08.5917' N
60 08.6712' N
60 08.1272' N
60 08.1068' N
60 08.2195' N
60 08.1147' N
60 07.7843' N
60 07.7864' N
60 06.8849' N
60 06.7389' N
60 05.7827' N
60 05.6687' N
60 03.8324' N
60 03.6947' N
60 03.4240' N
60 02.7591' N
60 01.6136' N
60 01.3510' N
60 01.2719' N
, , 117630,
, 62
: (495) 784-71-61, : (495) 784-71-62
E-mail: OOO_PeterGaz@petergaz.ru
: www.petergaz.ru
Length
28 04.4777'
28 05.5057'
28 05.5057'
28 04.4024'
28 02.0197'
28 01.2403'
28 00.4075'
27 59.1230'
27 57.7671'
27 56.7185'
27 51.6288'
27 51.2366'
27 50.9709'
27 49.5140'
27 45.7131'
27 42.4037'
27 29.9760'
27 24.0072'
27 17.1040'
27 12.2066'
27 07.8123'
27 02.4379'
27 00.2116'
26 56.6852'
26 53.5897'
26 52.4070'
26 48.0324'
26 45.5964'
26 39.3865'
26 36.5004'
26 33.1873'
26 30.1525'
26 27.8294'
26 26.1312'
26 25.0615'

Russia Phone: (007)(495) 784-71-61, Fax:
(007)(495) 784-71-62 E-mail:
OOO_PeterGaz@petergaz.ru Internet site:
www.petergaz.ru
To Vice President
OOO Peter Gaz
A. A. Arkhipov
62, Starokaluzhskoe shosse,
117630, Moscow
In response to your enquiry No. 1796 of 15.09.06 on the existence of fishing and trawling areas in the
transit region of the North European Gas Pipeline (offshore section)
Within the boundaries of the offshore section of the North Europe Gas Pipeline route, as defined by the
coordinates stated in the enclosure to the enquiry (the entry point of the gas pipeline into the Gulf of
Finland is in Portovaya Bay), in the littoral 5-km zone a fishing industry site, OOO Primorsky Rybak, is
located, as assigned by a usage agreement, which carries out the commercial fishing of water bioresources
on the grounds of a permit for commercial activity involving water bioresources.
Section coordinates: N 6036'19" 2823'12"
N6033'10" 2826'43" ,
N6031'16" 2751'52"
N6015'45" 2854'45"
N6011'38" 2841'08"
N6026'36" 2750'09"
The remaining zone of the Gulf of Finland is used for industrial fishing, including, under the Rules for
Fishing in the Baltic Sea, at depths of more than 20 m for conducting trawling business of small herring
fish species.
To the General Director

OOO Peter Gaz
A. S. Fedorov
Russia 1
On approval of the route of the Nord Stream gas pipeline

During geophysical examinations conducted along the route of the Nord Stream section (North European
Gas Pipeline) in 2006-2007, sunken vessels were discovered which possess indications of objects of
cultural heritage:
Expert
report
numbe r
ROV code SONAR

X
Y
code,
No.
1
G 07 185 2 181
540269,1 6675575,6
2
G 07 214 2--26 537706,8 6673273,4
G 07 218 2153
537698.0 6673269,6
4
526657,0 6667321,7
G_07_308 03-S-90 526619,3 6667318,1
526626,0 6667307,7
526639,9 6667302,2
5
2153+
5 37706 6673281
6
2159+
5 37702 6673275
7
2188+
5 37694 6673268
(object Nos. 5-7 may represent the remains of a sunken vessel)
8
2208+
5 35531 66 72 031
12
G 07 el73
495992
6665344
Width (N)
Length ()
60 12' 53.95"
60 11'40.42"
60 11'40.30"
60 08*31.18"
60 08'31.07"
60 08'30.73"
60 08'30.55"
60 11.6778' N
60 11.6744' N
60 1 1.6778'N
2743' 36.07"
27 40'48.09"
27 40'47.51"
2728' 47.91"
2728'45.47"
27 28' 45.90"
27 28' 46.80"
2740.8009'
2740.7964'
2740.8009'
60" 11.0160'N
60 07'30.31"
2738.4345'
26 55'40.35"
Furthermore, during examinations in 2006 (GBO 1) several objects were detected which are also
interpreted as sunken vessels. The coordinates of these objects were not presented by the specialists of
IIMKA RAN. Judging by the diagrams, the objects specified as _2.359 and _2.360 may represent the
remains of the same vessel as object No. G_07_308, the others are not stated in the examinations of 2007:
16 (_308)
17 (_2.7.)
18 (_2.181)
19 (_3-41)
20 (_313)
21 (_3.438)
22 (_3.124)
Materials of the investigations of 2006 (GBO 1)

n/a
n/a (diagram, section )
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Please submit to the department the coordinates of the objects detected in 2006.
The remains of all vessels listed possess the indications of objects of cultural heritage. When conducting
the project work for the Nord Stream gas pipeline route, it must be foreseen that they remain unmoved.
To ensure safety, the planned gas pipeline route must not run closer than 100 m of a detected object. In
the event of an unfavourable seabed relief in the area of object No. 12 (Rov G_07_el73) near the picket of
90, the gas pipeline route can be planned at a distance of no closer than 50 m from the object.
In the area of laying the gas pipeline, there are also parts of vessels, anchors, vessel mechanisms,
construction parts, etc.
Expert report
numbe r
3
9
11
13
14
15
ROV code
SONAR
X
Y
Width (N)
code, No.
G 07 306
2146
527545,3 6667568,7 6008'38.95"
G 07_500
n/a (diagram,
section )
G_07_l 53
n/a (diagram,
section )
G 07 4022
n/a
G 07_424
n/a (diagram,
section )
G_07_400
n/a (diagram,
section )
Length ()
2729'4561"
n/a (diagram,
section )
n/a (diagram,
section )
n/a
n/a (diagram,
section )
n/a (diagram,
section )
The objects stated can be lifted to the surface under the control of specialist archaeologists on the
condition of ensuring their integrity and subsequent handing over to state museum safekeeping. If these
objects are not lifted, their integrity must be ensured.
Because during the examinations, sunken vessels were detected, which have the indications of objects of
cultural heritage, the project must foresee archaeological control of the process of the works to lay the gas
pipeline.
When complying with the conditions listed, the department agreed the presented route of the Russian
section of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline.
Head of Department
S. Vasiliev
EIS T. B. Krylova (275-56-49)

APPENDIX 3.6
To the Ornithofauna section

Figure 1.
Key ornithological territories in the Russian section of the Gulf of Finland
According to the Nature conservation atlas of the Russian part of the Gulf of Finland)
Figure 2.
Terms of migration of aquatic and semi-aquatic birds in the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland.
Notes:
Standard migration terms: spring (-----), summer (--------), autumn (--------); possible variations of terms
of beginning and ending of spring (.), summer (..) and autumn (.) migrations.
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


Page 475
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Appendix 4.1
SIMULATION OF DISTRIBUTION OF SLURRY AND BOTTOM

SEDIMENT DURING CONSTRUCTION OF THE PIPELINE.
RUSSIAN SECTOR

Page 476
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

DESCRIPTION OF CONSTRUCTION OF THE FACILITY AND THE TYPES

OF WORK
1.1.
General information
The planned offshore gas pipeline Nord Stream is a transportation system intended for the exportation of
natural gas from Russia to Germany through the Baltic Sea. The pipeline will be constructed by the
company Nord Stream G. The pipeline's route crosses the exclusive economic zones (EEZ) of 5 states:
Russia, Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Germany, and the territorial waters of Russia, Germany and
Denmark (Fig. 1.1).
Fig. 1.1. Diagram of the Nord Stream route

The EU Directorate General for Energy and Transport has designated the construction of Nord Stream a
priority project.
The shareholders of Nord Stream AG are OAO Gazprom, Wintershall AG (an associated company of
BASF) and E.ON Ruhrgas (an associated company of E.ON). The head office of Nord Stream AG is
located in Zug (Switzerland) and the company has a representative office in Moscow.
The Nord Stream project plans for the staged construction of two offshore gas pipe strings with
conditional diameters of 1200 mm. The planned productivity of the offshore pipeline (for the 2 pipe
strings) amounts to 55 billion m3 per year. The total length of the offshore section of the pipeline is 1200
km, while the length of the Russian sector of the pipeline is 125.5 km (Fig. 1.2).

Page 477
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Fig. 1.2. The route of the Nord Stream pipeline in the Russian sector
1.2.
The composition and basic specifications of the facility's construction and the
construction schedule
The section of pipeline in question extends from the isolating joint located at the onshore section of the
Russian sector of the Nord Stream pipeline, along the gas flow past the Portovaya Compression Station
safety valves to the point of intersection with the border of the Russian EEZ at the 125.5 km point. The
general direction of the pipeline route is south-east.
The isolating joint does not fall within the scope of the planned section and is under the authority of OAO
Gazprom.
The lengths of the sections for construction:
West (line I) - 124.0 km
East (line II) - 123.5 km.
Some of the technical specifications of the Nord Stream offshore pipeline (Russian section) are presented
in Table 1.1.
Table 1.1
Technical specifications of the pipeline
Value
Pipe number
SAWL 485 I DF
Wall thickness, mm
0-0.500 km
0.500-123 km
41
34,6
Corrosion tolerance, mm
0
Constant internal diameter, mm
1153
Thickness of concrete coating
Eastern line
0-79.53 km
79.53-123 km
Parameter

Page 478
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Parameter
Western line
Thickness of anti-corrosion coating, mm
Type of anti-corrosion coating
1.3.
Value
60 mm
0-78.58 km
60 mm
4
3LPP
80 mm
78.58-123 km
80 mm
Main work
The main offshore construction work includes:
pre-trenching at the landfall point and onshore section;
coastline intersection;
laying of the pipeline;
embedding intersecting cables;
installation of supports in the locations of cable intersections;
correction of long free spans;
backfilling of pipeline trenches.
The main types of constuction work to be carried out on the shore include:
pre-trenching;
backfilling over pipeline;
cleaning and hydraulic testing of the pipeline.
The schedule for completion of work is based on the following principles:
work on construction of legs at the intersection of the coastline and near-coast sections will
be carried out by one construction spread for both lines;
for completion of laying work for the legs at the coastline intersection, the near-coast
sections and the main part of the Russian section, a single, 3rd-generation pipelaying vessel
will be used, with a laying speed of 2.5 km per day and 0.5 km per day for pulling in in the
pipeline;
hydraulic testing and removal of water at the legs at the intersection of the coastline and the
near-coast sections from the Russian side will be carried out on section KP0-KP300;
all the work on transporting the pipeline through communications until mobilization will be
carried out by a 3rd or 4th-generation pipelaying vessel;
correction of long free spans will be carried out before and after laying the pipeline with the
use of a support structure made of a gravel-stone material of an appropriate fineness;

Page 479
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

1.4.
final correction of long free spans will be carried out after filling the pipeline with water.
Construction work on the section
Construction work on the leg at the intersection of the coastline (depth from +5 m to -14 m) and deepwater section (from -14 m to ~ -70 m) includes:
1.
Preparatory works:
2.
construction of embankments for ground-based pre-trenching work on the near-coast section

and to protect the trenches from wave activity;
platform facilities for installation of winches;
installation of winch for pulling in the pipeline.
Pre-trenching:
3.
pre-trenching at the landfall point;
pre-trenching in the embankment zone;
pre-trenching at the shallow near-coast section to a water depth of -14 m;
Work on laying the offshore pipeline by means of a pipelaying barge:
pulling in the pipeline onshore (1st and 2nd string);
laying the deep-water section (1st and 2nd string);
4.
Backfilling the trenches;
5.
Correction of long free spans;
6.
Intersection of underwater communications;
7.
Cleaning of chambers and testing;
8.
Completion of construction:
dismantling of embankments;
recovery of platforms and surface layer.
Below follows a brief description of the methods of execution of the construction and assembly work.
1.5.
Preparatory works
The preparatory works include the following:

1.
construction of embankments;
2.
platform facility for winch on the shore;
3.
mounting of winch for pulling in the pipeline onshore.

Page 480
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

In accordance with the schedule, the preparatory works will be carried out in May 2010.
Construction of embankments
Before beginning construction of pipelines for the shallow sections, to ensure protection from water
washing of the prepared trenches in the near-coast zone due to wave action, 2 embankments will be
constructed (one on the outer side of each string) (figure 1.3). These constructions will also be used for
excavation of the trenches for the leg at the coastline intersection with the help of ground-based
equipment (excavators on the embankments), which will enable signficant acceleration in the excavation
of trenches at the near-coast section.
Fig. 1.3. Construction of embankments at the coastline intersection

The embankments will begin at a level of +0.5 m on the shore and end at a depth of 2 m of the average
sea level. The height of the embankment above sea level will be 0.5 m.
The characteristics of the embankments are provided in Table 1.3.
Table 1.3
No.
1
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Embankme nt characteristics
Characteristic
Unit of
measure ment
2
3
Length of embankment
Total
m
including - from water edge
- from water edge to +0.5 m
Slopes
Width at apex
Total volume of soil bank for construction
of two embankments
m
m
m
thousand m3
Section
4
Western string
502
383
119
1:1,5
7
8
Page 481
Eastern
string
500
383
117
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


Page 482
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

The embankments will be filled up with a rock and gravel mixture. The planned work will be carried out
using material from the Erkilya quarry in Vyborg, located ~ 75 km from Portovaya bay. Delivery of the
material will be made by the quarry's land transport. The embankments will be filled by dumper trucks
and levelled off in layers by bulldozers.
Work off the embankments will be carried out during daylight hours during the period of white nights, so
there is no plan for the use of masts for lighting. If it becomes necessary, 2 masts with floodlights will be
set up on the embankments. Power will be provided by a 50 kW mobile diesel generator.
Platform facilities
For the installation of the winch, so that pulling in of the pipeline may be carried out close to the edge by
bulldozers, a platform is planned for the shore (a shared platform for both pipeline strings). On this, a
winch mount will be installed for each of the strings.
The mount for the winch will be constructed from 1P30.18 reinforced concrete slabs (3.0 x 1.75 x 0.17
m). The slabs will be set on the prepared platform surface by a KC-4571 crane with a carrying capacity of
25 tonnes.
The first winch mount to be set up will be that for pulling in the 2nd pipeline. After laying has been
completed, the winch and slabs will be disassembled, moved across and set up on the axis of the 1st
pipeline.
Another mount will be constructed from slabs for the power and drive unit for the winch, positioned
between the axes of the two pipeline.
The area of each winch mount will be ~450 m2 (30 x 15 m).
2 temporary floodlight masts are planned to provide lighting for the platform. Power will come from the
winch power and drive unit.
Mounting of the winch
For the onshore pulling in of the coated pipeline, equipped with pontoons, a tonnage of 212 tonnes will be
required. The project proposes the use of a KTC350 winch (made by Bezemer Dordrecht b.v.) with a
hauling capacity of 350 tonnes.
Before beginning to pull in the 2nd pipeline, the winch will be mounted on the reinforced concrete slab
mount on the axis of the 2nd pipeline. After the 2nd pipeline has been pulled in, the winch will be moved
across for the 1st pipeline to be pulled in.
1.6.
Pre-trenching
Pre-trenching must be carried out in accordance with the work execution plan, the requirements of
regulatory documents and under the immediate direction of the people responsible for execution of the
work.
In accordance with the solutions planned, the pipeline will be laid in a previously excavated trench for the
whole section into which it is being pulled in. The scope of the sections for soil excavation and the length
of the trenches are shown in Table 1.4

Page 483
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

String
Western (1st
string)
Eastern (2nd
string)
Start of section
Kilometre
Level
point
3+56
+5,0
3+56
End of section
Kilometre
Level
point
14+74
-14,0
+5,0
14+72
Trench length,
m
1826
-14,0
1828
For the two pipelines, two trenches will be excavated with a constant width at the bottom of 4.4 m along
the whole length of the buried section. The distance between the axes of the trenches will be 20 m. [1]
During execution of the groundwork, the following specifications will be controlled:
ground elevations;
measurements of the trench bottom;
width of the trench at the bottom;
slopes;
adequacy of the trench and pipeline route.
Depending on construction conditions, soil type and technical drawings, execution of the groundwork for
the string at the intersection of the coastline on the Russian side must be divided into 3 main zones:
landfall point (depth from +0.5 m to +5 m);
embankment zone (depth from 0.5 m to -2 m);
near-coast section (depth from -2 m to -14 m).
Pre-trenching at the landfall point

The minimum required depth of the pipeline for this section is no less than 1.2 m from the top of the
pipeline's concrete covering. The slopes of the trench on the shore will be at 1:1.5.
The onshore section of the trench will be excavated using ground-based equipment - excavators with
backfillers. The excavators will start work at the coastline and move back along the axis of the trench they
are working on.
The excavated soil will be loaded onto dumper trucks and transported to the storage location on the
hydrotesting platform. This soil will be used to backfill the onshore section of the trench.
The KRANEX EK 400-05 excavator for soil excavation for the onshore section is shown in Figure 1.4.

Page 484
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Figure 1.4.
Trench excavation using a ground-based excavator.
Pre-trenching in the embankment zone

The minimum required depth of the pipeline for this section is no less than 2.0 m from the top of the
pipeline's concrete covering. The slopes of the underwater trench in the embankment zone will be at
1:1.8.
Trench excavation in the embankment zone will be carried out using a combination of ground-based
equipment (excavator with an extended stick) working from the embankment and excavators working off
a floating rig (excavator on pontoon). The excavation work will be commenced by the excavators
working from the embankment. The direction of excavation will be from dry land towards the sea.
The boom reach of the excavator on the embankment will not be sufficient for excavation of the whole
width of the trench. For this reason, the central part of the trench will be reworked by excavators working
off the floating rig. The direction of excavation for excavators working off the floating rig will be from
the sea towards dry land.
The soil excavated from the land section of the embankment (kilometre point 1+19.3 - kilometre point 0
for the western pipeline and kilometre point 1+16.7 - kilometre point 0 for the eastern pipeline) will be
loaded onto dumper trucks and transported to the storage location on the hydrotesting platform. The soil
excavated from the sea section of the embankment (kilometre point 0 - kilometre point 3+83) will be
placed in a bank along the trench as follows. The soil excavated by the excavators working off the
pontoon will be placed on the embankment and from there, bulldozers will move it to the underwater soil
dump from the outer side of the embankment.
Trench excavation by means of excavators installed on a floating rig is shown in figure 1.5.

Page 485
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Figure 1.5.
Trench excavation by an excavator on a pontoon.
Trench excavation in the near-coast section

Trench excavation to the minimum required depth (not less than 2.0 m from the top of the pipeline's
concrete covering) will be carried out to a water depth of 12 m. Beyond this, there is a transition zone
(from -12 m to -14 m) with a gradual reduction of trench depth (from -3.4 m to 0 m) and the emergence of
the pipeline through the surface of the seabed. Beyond an isobath of 14 metres, the pipeline will be laid
directly on the seabed.
The slopes of the underwater trench in the near-coast section, including the transition zone, will be at 1:3.
Trench excavation in the shallow near-coast section will be carried out by means of a grab-bucket
dredger. During trench excavation, the grab-bucket dredger will move from the sea towards the
embankment.
For execution of the work, an MRTS "At Your Service" grab-bucket dredger will be used.
The "At Your Service" grab-bucket dredger (Figure 1.6) can carry out dredging work to a maximum
depth of 1.5 metres. Efficient movement of the dredger will be carried out via a hydraulic spud system.
The excavated soil will be moved to a dump heap along the trench at a distance of up to 15 m away and
will be used to backfill over the pipeline after laying.

Page 486
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Figure 1.6.
The MRTS "At Your Service" grab-bucket dredger.
Characteristics of the area, parameters for the work on excavating soil and total volumes of excavated soil
for the 1st and 2nd strings are given in Table 1.5.
Table 1.5
Division of the string at the coastline intersection into distinct zones on the basis of the parameters
of trench excavation.
Volume of
excavated Equipment for
Section
Length,
trench
Zone Kilometre
Slope
soil,
Kilometre
name
m
Location
Isobath
excavation
thousand
point
point
m3
1
2
3
4
5
6
10
9
11
12
Kilometre
point
Kilometre
Landfall
1+19
236,7
Excavators with
Zone 1
point
+5
+0,5
1:1,5
22,7
points
(kilometre
(239,2)
backfillers
3+56
point
1+16.7)
Kilometre
Excavators with
point
extended stick
Kilometre
Embankment
1+19
502,6
from the
Zone 2
1:1,8
41,1
+0,5
point
-2,0
zone
(kilometre
(500,1)
embankment and
3+83
point
excavators on
1+16.7)
the pontoon
From
To

Page 487
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

10
Volume of
excavated
soil,
thousand
m3
11
-2,0
Kilometre
point
14+70
(Kilometre
point
14+72)
-70
1826
(1828)
1:3
104,8
From
Section
name
Zone
To
Kilometre
Kilometre
Isobath
Location
point
point
1
2
3
Near-coast
section
(including
Kilometre
transition Zone 3
point
zone)
3+83
Length,
Slope
m
Equipment for
trench
excavation
12
Grab-bucket
dredger
* - soil slopes given comply with the construction standard "SNiP III-42-80".
Figures in parantheses refer to the eastern pipeline in cases where it differs from the western pipeline.
1.7.
Laying the pipeline

1.7.1.
Main provisions for laying the offshore section of the pipeline
Depending on the method used to lay the pipeline, the whole Russian offshore section may be divided
into 2 separate sections for construction, as shown in Table 1.6: the string at the coastline intersection
down to a depth of 2 m, and the deep-water section with a water depth of 2 m or more. For the string at
the coastline intersection, the pipeline will be laid by means of a crane installed on the shore dragging the
pipeline joints, these having been prepared on a pipelaying vessel. For the deep-water section, the
pipeline will be laid on the seabed by the pipelaying vessel.
Table 1.6
Division of the section strings
Section name
Start
End
Length, km
Depth range, m
1
The string at the coastline
intersection
2
Kilometre point
3+56
Kilometre point 14+7
~1,83
+5 to -14
Deep-water section
Kilometre point
14+7
1st string - Kilometre

point 123+45
2nd string - Kilometre
point 123+98
~112,2
-14 to -70
In accordance with the schedule, work on laying the pipeline in the offshore section will be carried out in
the following order:
2010 (1st and 2nd strings)

Page 488
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

pulling in the 2nd string at the coastline intersection;
laying the 2nd string to a distance of 5 km;
pulling in the 1st string at the coastline intersection;
laying the 1st string to a distance of 123.5 km;
2011 (2nd string)
raising the end of the preiously laid 2nd string of the pipeline at the 5 km point;
laying the 2nd string to a distance of 123.9 km;
Before beginning to execute the work, the pipelaying vessel must carry out testing, including testing of
the welding equipment, non-destructive control methods, equipment for isolation and butt welding repairs
to the pipe, tensioning devices, winches, control instruments and drive system enabling the vessel to
move along the route and lay the pipeline at the planned locations.
1.7.2
Coastline intersection
Production of the pipeline joints will be carried out on the pipelaying vessel. The pipeline joints are
produced and laid at the onshore section in the previously prepared trenches using a winch installed on
the shore (figure 1.7).
Figure 1.7. Illustration of the pipeline being laid at the shore from the pipelaying vessel with use of
a winch installed on the shore.
The sequence of work on laying the final section of pipeline at the shore will be as follows:
the pipelaying vessel approaches the shore and drops its anchor at the appropriate point;
relaying the end of the cable of the pull winch installed on the shore to the pipelaying vessel
and fastening it to a special hatch attached to the pipeline;
pulling in the pipeline stockpiled on the shore with use of the winch.
The pipelaying barge is positioned at a water depth of 14 m and begins production of joints, installation of
the unloading pontoon and laying the joints on the seabed. The project plans for pontoons with a tonnage
of 20 tonnes and spacing of 20 m (figure 1.8).

Page 489
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Figure 1.8.
Pulling in the pipeline from the pipelaying vessel with the pontoons installed at the
shore.
Due to their large frame and weight, the pontoons cannot be installed directly on the stinger of the
pipelaying vessel. For this reason, the pontoons' suspension work will be carried out after the pipeline has
been set down from the pipelaying vessel. To this purpose, the project plans for the additional provision
of a Bar Protector all-purpose diving boat, produced by the company Saipem (figure 1.9).
Figure 1.9.
Specialized Bar Protector diving boat.
During the pulling-in process, all workers stationed onland and at sea must have two-way communciation
with the drive station, located onboard the pipelaying vessel.
Prearranged signals must be worked out relating to moving and stopping the pipeline, which may be
transmitted from the drive station by telephone via portable radio sets.

Page 490
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

1.7.3
Laying the pipeline in the deep-water section
Work on laying the pipeline in the main section, with a water depth of over 14 m, requires the production
and laying on the seabed of 244.5 km of pipeline, including 122 km for the 1st string and 122.5 km for
the 2nd string.
In accordance with the pipeline construction, sea depths, hydrometeorological conditions and
geomorphological characteristics of the seabed for construction of the deep-water section, the pipeline
will be laid as S-curves with bending of the pipeline (figure 1.10).
Figure 1.10.
S-curve laying method
As the pipeline sections build up in length, the vessel moves forward and the pipeline comes out of the
lower end of the stinger onto the seabed. Controls on modes of deformation in the pipeline, on the section
extending between the stinger and the seabed, are carried out by creating a longtitudinal stretching force,
the magnitude of which depends on the depth being laid to and the rigidity of the pipeline.
After completion of each joint, the pipelaying vessel progresses forward by a distance equal to the length
of two pipe sections (24 m).
The project plans for the use of Castoro Sei vessel, made by the company Saipem (figure 1.11).
Figure 1.11.
Castoro Sei

Page 491
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

The "Castoro Sei" is a pipelaying barge that is semisubmerged on stabilizing posts. The "Castoro Sei" is
equipped to lay pipe of a diameter of up to 60" and has three tensioners with a tonnage of 110 tonnes.
The pipelaying line consists of a conveyor for supplying the pipe, equipment for producing the lips
(bearing faces) of the pipes by welding, facilities for aligning the pipes by use of an internal centering
skid, welding equipment, a repair station and isolating and control stations. Control of pipelaying
operations will be carried out from a central console.
The Castoro Sei is a vessel with an anchor positioning system (20-post) and for stowage of the anchors
(raising, moving and placing the anchors in the designated places) three tugboats need to be used.
Before work begins, diagrams of the layout of the anchors need to be produced.
The arrangement of the anchors will be a determining factor in terms of the direction and position of the
vessel during work on laying the pipeline. In addition, while drawing up the diagram of the layout of the
anchors, the following parameters need to be taken into account:
sea depth;
wave activity;
speed and direction of current;
wind speed and prevailing direction;
seabed characteristics.
The actual position of the anchors and the tension level of the anchor cables must be constantly controlled
duing execution of the laying work.
During the laying, the following main operations will be carried out:
unloading of the encased pipes from the transportation barges (PHV) onto skids for storage
on the pipelaying vessel;
all pipes are inspected, and damaged pipes are separated off and then repaired or returned to
the shore;
after the pipe is accepted onto the pipelaying vessel, the condition of every pipe is entered
into the log prior to it being moved onto the technical line;
after being moved to the technical line, the pipes are grooved, ensuring a clean and
geometrically straight groove under the joint weld, with each pipe receiving two types of
grooves: during welding of single pipes into two-pipe sections and during welding of twopipe sections to the joint;
grooved pipes are moved to the additional line for welding of single pipes into two-pipe
sections;
at the first welding station, seam and cap welding are carried out;

Page 492
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

at the second welding station, the backing string at the root of the joint is carried out with
the inner weld head;
after the completion of welding work, the welded joint is moved to the section for nondestructive checks, where an ultrasonic inspection is carried out;
the prepared and grooved two-pipe sections are moved to the main welding line, where
preliminary induction heating of the grooves takes place prior to welding;
at the first weld station of the main line, the alignment and welding of the root joint and 1st
hot pass take place;
the joint is moved forward along the length of the two-pipe section (24.4 m);
at the next weld station, seam and cap welding of the layers are carried out following
prepation of the joint, which is carried out at the first station;
the joint passes through 3 tensioners, between which there is an additional weld station,
which is used in cases with special welding requirements;
after the completion of welding work, the welded joint is moved to the section for nondestructive checks, where an ultrasonic inspection is carried out, as well as any repair to the
joint if necessary;
after acceptance of the joint, the vessel moves forward a further 24.2 m and the joint is
moved to the section for plating with the insulation coating, where a heat-shrinkage sleeve
is fitted to the joint;
after checks on the insulation coating and protection of the uncoated section, the vessel
moves forward further, the pipeline is lowered along the stinger into the water and is laid
onto the seabed.
Welding of the pipeline joints is carried out by specially trained welders who are certified in compliance
with the requirements of international standards.
In accordance with the schedule, work on laying the pipeline in the deep-water section will be carried out
in 2 stages (2010 and 2011).
year 2010
After pulling in the 2nd string, the pipelaying vessel continues laying the pipeline as far as the 5 km point.
When the end of the pipeline has been lowered onto the seabed, the vessel returns to string in the 1st
string.
The process of lowering the pipeline onto the seabed includes the following operations:
fitting of a temporary end wall (harness equipment) onto the last pipe of the pipeline, and
connection of a cable;
preparation of the winch for temporary lowering and raising, and transfer of the tension onto
this winch;

Page 493
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

the vessel continues moving, releasing the cable, after which the end of the pipeline is
released into the water, while the tension is supported by the pipelaying vessel's winch;
after the pipeline has been laid on the seabed, the tension on the hauling cable reduces and
the cable is released to the seabed;
the cable is detached from the end wall (harness equipment) of the pipeline and is connected
to a marker buoy.
After pulling in the 1st string, the pipelaying vessel continues to lay the pipeline until the end of the
Russian section (the EEZ border, 123.5 km for the 1st string). (And for a further 300 km beyond the
border of the Russian section).
year 2011
Work begins with the raising of the 2nd string at the 5 km point, using a winch for raising-lowering
operations. Work on raising the pipeline is carried out in a sequence to the reverse of that for lowering the
pipeline. Further laying of the 2nd string will be carried out to the end of the Russian section (the EEZ
border, 123.9 km for the 2nd string). (And for a further 300 km beyond the border of the Russian section).
Controls on the lowering of the pipeline must include the measurement and recording of the following
parameters:
1.8.
depth of sea at the location of laying;
length of the released section of pipeline from the seabed to the lower end of the stinger;
depth of submersion and angle of the stinger;
extent of tension of the pipeline.

Backfilling over the pipelines
Backfilling of the trenches at the coastline intersection will be carried out after pulling in.
The material to be used for backfilling will be the soil obtained during excavation of the trenches, which
was dumped along the length of the trenches of the onshore and offshore sections and on the soil storage
platform (placed on the platform for hydrotesting), as well as the rock-gravel mixture that was transported
and the embankment material for construction of the protective infill layer.
In the onshore section, the trench will be filled entirely with soil from the dumping area spread alongside
the trench and from the storage platform. Part of the volume will be filled by bulldozers directly from the
dumping area, while the remaining part will be delivered to the filling location by dumper trucks from the
storage area - a distance of 150 m.
Starting with the embankment zone (from the +0.5 m point), backfilling will be carried out in the
following manner. The area around the laid pipeline will be sprinkled with soil taken from the dumping
area at a distance of 30 cm from the pipeline walls. To continue, the trench will be filled will the
remaining soild from the dumping area. Then, a layer of rock-gravel mixture will be sprinkled on, up to
the top of the trench, to a depth of approximately 35 cm. A protective layer of 50 cm thickness will be
sprinkled on the top (figure 1.12).

Page 494
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Figure 1.12.
Backfilling of the trench
In the onshore section of the embankment from +0.5 m to 0 m, the trench will be backfilled with soil from
the storage platform, material from the embankments and the rock-gravel mixture that was brought in.
Soil from the storage platform and the rock-gravel mixture from the quarry will be conveyed by dumper
trucks.
In the offshore section of the embankment at a water depth from 0 to 2 m, the trench will be backfilled
with soil from the underwater dumping area and the rock-gravel mixture brought in, which will be
conveyed by dumper trucks.
Backfilling of the section at a water depth from -2 m to -14 m will be carried out with soil from the
underwater dumping area and the rock-gravel mixture brought in, which will be conveyed by 3000-tonne
pontoons.
Backfilling will be carried out in accordance with the relative division of the route section into zones
during excavation of the trench and with the same equipment that was used for excavation of the trench in
these zones. The division of the section into zones and the volume of soil for backfilling are given in
Tables 1.7-1.8.
Table 1.7
Division of the section at the coastline intersection into distinct zones depending on
Section name
1
Landfall points
From
To
Length,
Zone Kilometre
Kilometre
km
location
location
point
point
2
3
4
5
6
10
Kilometre
point
Kilometre
1+19
236,7
Zone 1
+5
+0,5
point 3+56
(kilometre
(239,2)
point
1+16.7)
Kilometre
point 1+19
Embankment zone Zone 2 (kilometre
point
1+16.7
Near-coast section
Kilometre
(including
Zone 3
point 3+83
transition zone)
Slope
Equipment for
backfilling of trench
12
1:1,5
Excavators with
backfillers,
bulldozers, dumper
trucks
+0,5
Kilometre
point
3+83
-2,0
502,6
(500,1)
1:1,8
Excavators with
extended stick from
the embankment and
excavators on the
pontoon, bulldozers,
dumper trucks
-2,0
Kilometre
point
14+70
(kilometre
point
14+72)
-70
1826
(1828)
1:3
Grab-bucket dredger,
pontoon
* - soil slopes given comply with the construction standard "SNiP III-42-80".

Page 495
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Figures in parantheses refer to the eastern string in cases where it differs from the western string.
Table 1.8
Soil volumes for backfilling per section
Parameter
Onshore section
Embankment
Near-coast section
Volume of extracted soil
22.7
41.1
104.8
Volume of returned backfill
22.7
49.7
131.6
from dumping heap
22.7
33.6
89.8
1.9.
gravel
12.3
overfill
10.1
29.6
Correction of long free spans
After the pipeline is laid in sections with an uneven seabed, long free spans will be formed. In those
cases, when the pipeline experiences excessive strain and (or) turbulent vibrations, work will be carried
out to correct the long free spans (figure 1.13).
. 1.13.
Correction of long free spans.
The project requires correction of long free spans before and after laying the pipeline.
To correct long free spans, the project proposes using a support consisting of rock-gravel material of the
determined fineness.
To implement the support equipment requires the following construction work:
Preparatory works:
preparation of a storage platform with gravel-rock material at the Customer storehouse in

the region of Vyborg;
detailed planning;

Page 496
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

preparation by the Project contractor for execution of the work, which is passed to the
Customer for approval;
acquisition of gravel-rock material for use as support equipment;
lease of transport and loading equipment for delivery of the gravel-rock materials from the
quarry;
transportation of gravel-rock materials to the Customer storehouse to ensure sufficient

supplies;
mobilization of a specialized vessel equipped with a discharge conduit.
Main work:
loading the gravel-rock materials onboard the specialized vessel, equipped with a discharge
conduit;
the specialized vessel equipped with a discharge conduit travels to the region in which the
work is to be carried out, and the preliminary investigation is carried out;
after the preliminary investigation has been carried out, arrangement of the support by
means of the specialized vessel with discharge conduit (figure 1.14). If needed, an
investigation and monitoring will be carried out during the process of the work;
to complete the work, a final investigation of the section will be carried out;
the results of the preliminary and final investigations will be given to the Customer's
representative onboard;
the specialized vessel equipped with discharge conduit travels to the next place where work
is to be carried out.
Figure 1.14.
Gravel-rock support installation
Completion of work:
after construction of the last support, the vessel equipped with discharge conduit is
demobilized;

Page 497
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

the equipment for loading and transportation of the gravel-rock materials is also
demobilized;
restoration of the storage platform for gravel-rock materials at the Customer's storehouse.
The gravel-rock materials will be delivered from the Erkilya quarry in Vyborg (management company
Vozrozhdeniye-Nerud).
The results of a mathematical simulation of the spreading of suspended material during rectification of
long free spans is given in Appendix 4.1-2.
1.10. Intersection of underwater communications

The relief of the seabed in the places where cables intersect with the pipeline is leveled, the incline of the
areas being from 0 to 2 degrees. The seabed is composed mainly of loamy silt, which is highly unstable
with a low load-bearing capacity.
According to the data from engineering investigations, it has been established that 3 cables cross the route
of the planned pipeline within the Russian section:
4.
Cable K-160, belonging to VMF MO. Crosses each string at 4 points.
5.
The Mussalo-Kolganpya cable. Crosses the route at one point.
6.
Unknown cable. Crosses the route at one point. The status, type and owner of the cable are
unknown.
In selecting the method of intersection, the following factors were taken into account: status of the
communication; geomorphological and geological characteristics of the region of intersection;
requirements of regulatory documents and of the owners of the communications. It is planned that when
the pipeline is laid, cable K-160 will be taken out of operation, cut and placed above the assembled
pipeline. The remaining cables will be buried in soil at 0.5 m at the regions where the pipeline passes
them, while the pipeline itself will be laid on a gravel-rock support on both sides of the cable being
crossed.
1.11. Cleaning of chambe rs and testing of the pipeline

The work on cleaning the chambers and testing the pipeline will be carried out after completion of all of
the contruction and assembly operations in the section of construction and will be carried out in two
stages:
First stage
eastern string (from the end of the string-in section to kilometre point 5) - drying, filling
with nitrogen;
western string (from the end of the string-in section to kilometre point 123.5) - cleaning,
testing, drying.
Second stage

Page 498
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

eastern string (from the end of the pull-in section to kilometre point 124) - cleaning, testing,
drying.
For the offshore section of the eastern string, in 2010 only drying and filling with nitrogen will be carried
out (from the end of the pull-in section to kilometre point 5). Cleaning and scouring of the section will not
take place in that stage. After filling with nitrogen, the section will be closed until the next stage of
construction.
The Russian sections of the western and eastern strings will be tested in Zone 1 across the whole pipeline
in the first stage and in the second stage thereafter. The length of the offshore section that will be tested
from the Russian shore amounts to 300 km for each string. The pipeline sections being tested in Zone 1
for both strings are fitted on both sides with temporary cameras receiving and stringning diagnostics.
In the offshore section the following types of work will be carried out on the 1st and 2nd strings:
Scouring, calibration and cleaning the inner chambers of the offshore pipeline for removal
of mechanical impurities;
Filling the offshore pipeline with water (filling is carried out during the process of scouring
and calibration);
Hydrotesting (pressure differential = 1.1 Rr);
Pressure release;
Removal of water from pipe chambers and scouring of salts;
Drying in order to remove any remaining water.
Cleaning of the inner chambers of the offshore pipe section is carried out using clean sea water with a
gate of two cleaning pistons. Cleaning starts after scouring of Zone 2-1 (kilometre point 542.5 - kilometre
point 300). Pumps are stationed on the vessel and feed the water through. The cleaning pistons arrive at a
temporary chamber at the Zone 2-1 entrance and the contaminated water passes through a bypass pipeline
from Zone 2-1 and overflows into Zone 1.
For cleaning of Zone 1, the cleaning pistons are launched from the temporary chamber for launching the
diagnostic tools arranged at the region of kilometre point 300. The pistons move in the direction of the
water, which is pumped by pumps from the vessel, located at kilometre point 300. The total volume of
wash water after scouring of Zones 2-1 and 1 at the section from kilometre point 542.5 to 0 amounts to
approximately 5000 m3 per string and is discharged at the Russian coast into a settling pit with a volume
of 6000m3.
For filling the offshore section before starting hydrotesting, filtered sea water is used. Filling is carried
out from a vessel located at kilometre point 300. Equipment will be fitted at the Russian shore to enable
air to exit the pipeline being filled. To raise the pressure prior to testing, an additional volume of water
(5000 m3) will be pumped into the pipeline from the 6000 m3 settling pit, where by that time sea wash
water will have been gathered. To raise the pressure in the offshore section there will also be the use of a
temporary pump station, which, as for the onshore side, will be located at the end of the pull-in section at
the onshore section.
The water will be driven out by compressed air, fed by the temporary pump station.

Page 499
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

1.12. Completion of construction

After pulling in the pipeline, the platform used for pulling it in is disassembled and the surface is
rehabilitated.
After backfilling the trench with soil from the dump heap, the embankments are dismantled and the top
layer is backfilled with material from the embankments.
1.
BASIC CHARACTERISTICS OF THE DATA USED FOR MODELLING

2.1.
Characteristics of seabed sediment
Appendix 4.1-3 to these materials provides detailed characteristics of the seabed sediment along the route
of the pipeline and in the region where dredging work is carried out. The characteristics of the grain-size
classification used in these calculations for the near-coast section in the region of the coastline
intersection from the Russian side are provided in Table 4 (see Appendix 4.1-3).
During excavation of the trench by the excavator and grab-bucket dredger, the soil forms particles of
siltstone and clay dimensions. These particles will then form plumes of slurry during excavation of soil
and storage of the soil near the trench. The part of the soil that is converted into a suspension state, and
used in these calculations for various procedures, is provided in Table 2.1.
This data corresponds with the basic documents [1-3] regulating the volume of soil converted into
suspension (see "Methods for calculation of charges for contamination water areas, seas and surface water
that are the federal property of the Russian Federation during the execution of work connected with the
displacement and removal of sediment, extraction of non-metallic materials from underwater quarries and
burial of soil in underwater banks. Approved by the chairman of the State Committee of the Russian
Federation for the protection of the environment. 29 April 1999").
The gravel-rock supports will have a height of from 1.5 m to 3 m, a length of 20 m and the maximum
volume for one support (height 3 m) will be 756 m3. Breakup of the gravel-rock material is from 2.5 to
13 cm (1" - 5"). The distance between gravel-rock supports will be no more than 60m (the entire length of
a long free span will be divided into equal sections of less than 60 m).
During dumping of the gravel-rock supports two sources of suspended material will arise. The first of the
materials arising will be washed out and a small fraction will return to a suspended state - that which is
always present in material from quarries. Secondly, in the location of construction of the supports, there
will be a secondary stirring up of bottom sediment, a component of the seabed. The capacities of these
sources will depend on both the breakup of the material being dumped and the breakup of the bottom
sediment. To carry out the calculations an expert evaluation was made of the average quantity of
suspended materials given up during the technical operations being examined and it amounts to 2% of the
volume of material being dumped.

Page 500
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

The number of supports that need to be installed is 2134 and their height may be from 1.5 to 3 metres, so
different quantities of material are needed for each support. Furthermore, at present the precise locations
of all the supports have not been determined. For these reasons, the following outline was used for
calculations of the parameters needed for evaluation of damage to fish stocks. A scenario was adopted in
which an erection of one support with the maximum planned height (3 m) and the average characteristics
of the grain-size classification and sea currents were used. The calculations carried out allowed to
determine parameters needed to evaluate the damage to fish stocks during the erection of one support. For
the whole series of supports, integral characteristics are determined in the form of the sums of
characteristics for separate supports (volumes of flowing water, seabed area covered with suspended
materials). Corresponding data is provided in the result tables.
Detailed characteristics of seabed sediment along the pipeline route are provided in Appendix 4.1-3 to
these materials. A summary of the data used for modelling is provided in Table 2.2.
This data corresponds with the basic documents [1-3] regulating the volume of soil converted into
suspension (see "Methods for calculation of charges for contamination water areas, seas and surface water
that are the federal property of the Russian Federation during the execution of work connected with the
displacement and removal of sediment, extraction of non-metallic materials from underwater quarries and
burial of soil in underwater banks. Approved by the chairman of the State Committee of the Russian
Federation for the protection of the environment. 29 April 1999").
2.2.
Hydrodynamic conditions.
The characteristics of the currents in the area of dredging work, received through the modelling data, are
given in Appendix 4.1-2. Appendix 4.1-2 also contains description of the mathematical models for
calculation of the flow fields both for the whole Baltic Sea and for the immediate construction work
sections.
The resultant input data for modelling the distribution of slurry during construction work on the different
sections of the pipeline route is provided in Tables 2.1-2.2.

Page 501
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Table 2.1
Input data for modelling the distribution of slurry during excavation and backfilling of trenches at the near-coast section in the area of the coastline intersection on
the Russian side
Installation/
section/
operation
KP KP start, m end, m
Volume of soil
handled, cubic m
Volume of
water used,
cubic m
Duration
Productivity, cubic
of work,
m/hour
days
Output of Output of Mass of the soil

Part of the soil
source
converted to a
source
Productivity, cubic converted to a
during
suspended
during
m/day
suspended
condition,
excavation, excavation,
condition
kg/day
tones
m3/hour
Trench excavation
Construction of
embankments
Trench
excavation
at
Section 1
Trench
excavation
at
Section 2
Dumping
of
extracted
soil
from Section 1
onto
dump
heaps
Dumping
of
extracted
soil
from Section 2
onto
dump
heaps
383
8 180
25,0
13,6
0,004
0,9%
0,061
0,037
81
383
41 100
61 650
31,0
55,2
0,015
2,5%
0,69
0,42
1130
383
1 470
104 800
157 200
30,0
145,6
0,040
2,5%
1,82
1,11
2882
383
41 100
31,0
55,2
0,015
2,5%
0,69
0,42
1130
383
1 470
104 800
30,0
145,6
0,040
2,5%
1,82
1,11
2882
0,020
0,9%
0,32
0,19
81
Backfilling of the trench

Embankment
distribution
383
8 180
12 270
4,8
70,8

Page 501
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Installation/
section/
operation
Extracted soil
in dump area
for backfilling
of section 1
Extracted soil
in dump area
for backfilling
of section 2
Backfilling of
Section 1 with
soil from dump
area
Backfilling of
Section 2 with
soil from dump
area
Backfilling of
Section 1 trench
with gravel
Backfilling of
Section 2 trench
with gravel
KP KP start, m end, m
Volume of soil
handled, cubic m
Volume of
water used,
cubic m
Duration
Productivity, cubic
of work,
m/hour
days
Output of Output of Mass of the

Part of the soil
source
soil converted
source
Productivity, cubic converted to a
during
to a suspended
during
m/day
suspended
condition,
condition
kg/day
tonnes
m3/hour
0,020
2,5%
0,89
0,54
960
383
34 900
52 350
20,5
70,8
383
1 470
89 000
133 500
20,4
181,8
0,051
2,5%
2,27
1,4
2448
383
34 900
20,5
70,8
0,020
2,5%
0,89
0,54
960
383
1 470
89 000
20,4
181,8
0,051
2,5%
2,3
1,4
2448
383
16 100
9,5
70,8
0,020
0,9%
0,32
0,19
159
383
1 470
41 900
9,6
181,8
0,051
0,9%
0,82
0,50
415

Page 502
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Installation/
KP KP section/
end,
start, m
operation
m
Volume of soil
handled, cubic m
Total
Volume of
water used,
cubic m
Duration
of work,
days
Productivity, cubic
m/hour
416 970
Productivity, cubic
m/day
Output of Output of Mass of the

Part of the soil
source
soil converted
source
converted to a
during
to a suspended
during
suspended
condition,
condition
kg/day
tonnes
m3/hour
15 575

Page 503
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Table 2.2
Input data for modelling the distribution of slurry during construction of gravel-rock supports
Volume of
soil, cubic
m
Duration
of work,
days
Productivity, cubic
m/day
Installation of one support
756
0,375
0,0233
Quantity of soil
converted to a
suspended
condition
2,0%
Installation of all supports
1 613 304
800
0,0233
2,0%
Installation/ section/
operation
2.
Capacity of
source,
kg/day
0,618
0,618
MODELLING OF PARAMETERS
A list of the modelling of parameters for evaluation of the effect on the marine environment and biota due
to the trench excavation work for laying the pipelines and backfilling of the trenches is presented in Table
3.1.
Table 3.1
Modelling of parameters for evaluation of the effect of the offshore construction work on the
marine environment and biota
Parameters defined
Method of definition and presentation

Values for evaluation of scales of influence
Momentary location of plume of

contaminated water at different
moments in time and the maximum
distance from the source to the edge of
the zone with concentrations and
excesses for the given value
here
- position of the point with the specified concentration
- position of the source,
M (t) - set of points P (cf) with the specified concentration. Calculated
value, colour map, contour map
Range of maximum allowable

concentration for the period of work of
concentration and maximum distances Calculated value, colour map, contour map
of distribution of concentrations from
source or edge of area for the whole
period of work
Range of depth of settlements laid and
maximum distances from source or
edge of area to the edge of the zone
with depth of settlement, exceeding the
given value

Page 504
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Parameters defined
Method of definition and presentation

Calculated value, colour map, contour map
Values for calculation of damage to fish stocks
Maximum values for period of
work of momentary volumes
(plume areas) contaminated in
access of given concentrations
(MMV)
Calculated value
Average value of momentary
volumes contaminated in access
of given concentrations for the
Calculated value
work period (AMV)
Term of existence of plumes with
the concentrations exceeding the
Calculated value
given value
Volumes of clean uncontaminated
water flowing through the regions
of the slurry plumes with the
given concentration for the work u - current speed
Acr - area of section of tail squared by current speed
period
Calculated value
Average time of flow throw
volumes of slurry plumes with the
concentrations exceeding the
given value
Lc - length of the path of liquid particles through the plume along the
current speed.
Calculated value
Areas of settlement with
thickness exceeding the given
value outside the the dredging
zone
Volume of water required during
the works
Area of disturbed seabed
3.
Calculated value
Defined according to slurry characteristics and project data
According to project data
RESULTS OF MODELLING
Modelling of the distribution of suspended materials in the marine environment in the process of dredging
works during excavation and backfilling of trenches was carried out according to the certified "AKS-EKO
Shelf" mathematical models developed by VT RAN and MTEA Ecocentre. Certificate of compliance
with Russian State Standards: ROSS RU.SP05.P00217; Ecological certificate of compliance with the
Ministry of Natural Resources of the Russian Federation: SER(351)-G-11/OC- 20. A description of
the mathematical models is provided in Appendix 4.1-1 to these materials.

Page 505
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Modelling of the distribution of slurry in the water and sediment deposited on the seabed was carried out
for all operations accompanied by a change to the suspended materials of soil in the marine environment.
Calculations were carried out for the offshore near-coast section in the coastline intersection area on the
Russian side and for work on construction of gravel-rock supports.
Work for which modelling was carried out on the distribution of suspended materials and evaluation of
the thickness of the layer deposited when slurry falls to the seabed, includes the following operations:
1.
construction of embankments,
2.
trench excavation at the section with a sea depth of up to 2 m,
3.
trench excavation at the section with a sea depth of 2 m to 14 m,
4.
discharge of extracted soil onto a dump heap at the section with a sea depth of up to 2 m,
5.
discharge of extracted soil onto a dump heap at the section with a sea depth of 2 m to 14 m,
6.
intake of previously extracted soil from dump heap at the section with a sea depth of up to 2 m,
7.
backfilling of trench with previously extracted soil at the section with a sea depth of up to 2 m,
8.
intake of previously extracted soil from dump heap at the section with a sea depth of 2 m to 14 m,
9.
backfilling of trench with previously extracted soil at the section with a sea depth of 2 m to 14 m,
10.
embankment distribution,
11.
backfilling of trench with gravel at the section with a sea depth of up to 2 m,
12.
backfilling of trench with gravel at the section with a sea depth of 2 m to 14 m,
13.
construction of gravel-rock support.

4.1.
Parameters of effect on marine environme nt, determined according to projected data
Areas of damaged seabed, volumes of sea water required for dredging work ("damaging") and volumes of
water for scouring and hydrotesting of the pipelines are provided in Table 4.1.1.
Table 4.1
Parameters of impact on marine environme nt, determined according to projected data.
Section of route
Near-coast section in
the area of the
coastline intersection
on the Russian side
Length, km
1470,5
Water volume, m3
Area of damaged seabed

under pipeline and in area
with buried pipeline, m2
dredging work
79 255*
416 970
scouring and
hydrotesting
22 000
*The area of calculation includes the trenches of both strings and the embankments with slopes in the
offshore section (sea depth from 0 m).

Page 506
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

4.2.
Near-coast section in the area of the coastline intersection on the Russian side
Figure 4.2.1 shows the dredging zone, including the embankments and depths in the area of the work.
The main results of the modelling required for calculation of the damage to biological resources during
construction of the embankments, excavation and backfilling of trenches at the offshore section in the
area of the coastline intersection on the Russian side are provided in Tables 4.2.1-4.2.3 and in figure
4.2.24.2.4.
A cloud that is formed during the works and contaminated with suspended materials drifts in accordance
with the direction and speed of wind currents. The range of maximum concentrations for the whole period
of work (maximum allowable concentration) is provided in figure 4.2.2. Figure 4.2.3. shows the plume of
suspended materials during dredging. These diagrams allow to evaluate the scales of distribution of
suspended materials. The distances from the edge of the trench to the position of the contour line with a
slurry concentration of 100 mg/l do not exceed 31 m, with a concentration of 50 mg/l - 83 m, with a
concentration of 20 mg/l - 275 m, and with a concentration of 10 mg/l - 765 m.
The range of thickness of deposits from sediment slurry is provided in figure 4.2.4. The maximum
distance from the edge of the trench to the edge of a zone with a sediment thickness of over 100 mm does
not exceed 45m, over 50 mm - 69 m, over 20 mm - 135 m, over 10 mm - 210 m, over 5 mm - 300 m, and
over 1 mm - 815 m.

Page 507
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Figure 4.2.1.
Depths (a) and dredging zones in the region of the coastline intersection on the
Russian side

Page 508
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Figure 4.2.2.
The range of maximum admissible concentrations (mg/l) during dredging work in
the region of the coastline intersection on the Russian side after completion of all works

Page 509
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


Page 510
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Figure 4.2.3.
The plume of suspended materials during dredging works on separate sections at

different mome nts in time
Figure 4.2.4.
The range of depths sedime nt layer (mm) during dredging works in the region of
the coastline intersection on the Russian side after completion of all works

Page 511
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Table 4.2
Volumes (m3) and times of existence (min, hours) of water volumes contaminated by slurry with
different concentrations during dredging work in the region of the coastline intersection on the
Russian side after the completion of all works.
Parameters defined
Flowing water
volumes through the
the plume of slurry
area with the
concentrations
exceeding the given
value, m3
Average time of water
flow through slurry
plume region with the
concentrations
exceeding the given
value, hours (Taverage)
Maximum values of
momentary volumes
of plume areas, m3
Concentration of slurry in the water, mg/l*

1
10
20
50
100
4 835 889 470
503 012 313
235 124 239
81 111 325
21 514 043
0,7
0,3
0,1
0,05
7 153 330
447 083
140 972
36 250
18 750
1 991 302
98 239
33 760
7 158
1 369
90,9
77,1
73,5
51,7
27,6
(MM V)
Maximum values of
momentary volumes
of plume areas
(AMV), m3
Time of existence of
plumes with the
concentrations
exceeding the given
value, days (Texistence)

Page 512
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Table 4.3
The area of the seabed (m2) covered with a layer of sediment of different depths during the release
of slurry, during dredging works in the area of the coastline intersection on the Russian side after
completion of all works
Thickness of sediment layer*, mm
Depth of sea, m
1
5
10
20
50
100
0-20
377 776 172 444 121 474
83 258
50 970
39 841
* Outside the zone of dredging work (see Figure 4.2.1 and Table 4.1.1)
Table 4.4
The area of seabed (m2), exposed to the effect of slurry of various concentrations during dredging
work in the region of the coastline intersection on the Russian side after completion of all works
(calculated from average volumes of plumes)
Concentration of slurry in the water, mg/l*
Depth of sea, m
1
10
20
50
100
0-20
357 241
17 624
6 057
1 284
246

Page 513
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Literature.
1.
Hayes D.F., Crocket T.R., T.J. Ward., D. Averret. Sediment resuspension during cutterhead
dredging operations. Journal of Waterway, Port, Coastal, and Ocean Engineering, 2000. Vol.
126. P.153-161.
2.
Goncharov A.A., Lyashenko A.F., Shlygin I.A. Research and modelling of the processes of
dispersion of various substances during the burial of waste in seas and oceans. Review of
information. - Obninsk: VNIIGMI/MTsD (-). Oceanology series, 1982. 30pp.
3.
Methods for calculation of charges for contamination water areas, seas and surface water that are
the federal property of the Russian Federation during the execution of work connected with the
displacement and removal of sediment, extraction of non-metallic materials from underwater
quarries and burial of soil in underwater banks. Approved by the chairman of the State
Committee of the Russian Federation for the protection of the environment. 29 April 1999.

Page 514
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

APPENDIX 4.1-1
Mathematical model for forecasting the distribution of suspended materials in plumes
The mathematical model described here was developed by a team of authors from the RAN[1]
Computational centre and is intended for forecasting the distribution of suspended materials in shelf
regions of the ocean. The model takes account of the following existing features of the examined matter:
1.
GENERAL CONCEPTS ON WHICH THE MODEL IS BASED
In describing the distribution of suspended materials two qualitatively different regions may be
distinguished: the near zone, the dimensions of which are defined by the characteristics of the slurry
source, and a far zone. In the near zone, concentrations of suspended materials are great and modelling of
the transfer of contamination requires detailed information about the arrangement of equipment,
constituting a highly complex task. In the far zone, concentrations of suspended materials are
considerably fewer, due to the process of turbulent exchange and as a result of the deposition of particles
of solids. Transportation of each of the solids at the same time occurs independently from the others, with
the speed of horizontal transportation of all solids being determined only by the speed of the current and
intensity of eddy diffusion in the body of water. The only differences are in their speed of settling.
Consequently, in the far zone the applicable diffusion and drift approaches are connected with disregard
for lags in relation to movements of the contaminating component in the environment and also with
interdependence with these components.
In the event of small volumes of concentration of suspended materials (in the far zone), distribution of
contamination may occur in the form of movement of an aggregate of separate, non-interacting eddies.
These eddies move through the water column under the influence of local currents and, possibly, are
deposited on the seabed. In the process of movement, they increase in size due to turbulent diffusion and
the concentrations of suspended materials they contain drop.

Page 515
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Concentration of slurry at an arbitrary point meanwhile presents itself in the form of concentrations of
suspended materials in separate eddies including the given point at the moment in time in which they are
examined.
The size of the area of contamination turns out to be considerably greater than the depth of the body of
water. For this reason we may use a two-dimensional (considering an average depth) model of
transportation of suspended materials. At the same time, the horizontal sizes of the area, in which the
transportation of suspended materials is being studied, are as a rule small in comparison to the scales of
space in which the components U and V of speed and current (and also parameters of horizontal
turbulence) undergo changes in existence. As a result of this, we will assume that the components of
speed and current do not depend on the point in the water being examined but exist as functions of time t.
In this case, the concentration i of the particle of the contaminant Ci in a separate eddy and the mass mi of
this particle being deposited per unit of seabed surface will satisfy the equations
in which K - coefficient of horizontal turbulent diffusion, H - local water depth, Wi - terminal velocity of
the particles taking into account differences in speed of deposit of slurry in flowing water compared to
still water [8,9].
In accordance with the "4/3" law detected by Richardson on the basis of processing experimental data on
the dispersion of smoke in the atmosphere and theoretically substantiated by Kolmogorov and Obukhov
(see [2-4]), the coefficient of turbulent diffusion depends on the linear expansion s of the diffusing eddy
and may be described as
where B - structural parameter of turbulence.

Law (1.2) is justified even in the event of disperson of additives in the ocean [5]. According to size in
shelf regions B10-210-4 m2/3/c. In several studies (see [6]) for constant B the value 4.5-10-4 m2/3/c is
used.
We also highlight that the solution to the equation (1.1) for any i particle from a separate eddy of
suspended materials may be presented in the form
Here Mi - initial mass of i particle in eddy, while the function G, which does not depend on the number of
particles, describes the conventional distribution of the eddy with a single mass. This satisfies the
equation

Page 516
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

with the condition of normalization
2.
CALCULATION OF MULTIDISPERSION OF THE COMPOSITION OF

THE SLURRY DEPOSIT
Multidispersion of the composition of suspended materials is shown in the differential character of the
deposition of the different particles of the contaminant. In the event of dumping of a contaminant with a
complex particle structure, the overall concentration of suspended materials will be equal to
where Ci satisfies the equation (1.1). Taking the summation (1.1) for all particles, we find that the overall
concentration C will also satisfy the equation (1.1) if the effective terminal velocity W is determined in
the following way:

(1.3).
As
. We also note that each of the Ci values satisfies correlation

result
we
find:
Consequently, the task of modelling the distribution of an eddy of multidispersed slurry in a twodimensional arrangement results in the calculation of the distribution of a single-dispersed suspended
material, but with the speed of deposition depending on time according to formula (2.1).
3.
CALCULATION OF DISTRIBUTION OF A SEPARATE EDDY OF

CONTAMINATION
The time-space evolution of the concentration of multidispersed slurry in an individual eddy, the mass m
of the slurry which is being deposited onto a unit of area on the seabed, and the thickness of the sediment
h can clearly be described in the following way (see point 1):
Here t0 - the moment of "birth" of the eddy, M - initial mass of the substance in the eddy, H0 - depth of
the water at the point of "birth" of the eddy, e - coefficient of porosity of the sediment, r - mineral density
of the slurry, while function G answers equation (1.4) and normalization (1.5).
The two-dimensional Gauss distribution provides the precise solution to task (1.4) and (1.5).

Page 517
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

in which the paramaters Xc and Yc, giving the position of the gravity centre of the eddy, and the values
x, y, Dxy satisfies the equation
The isolines of function (3.1) appear as ellipses turning a corner but relatively to the selected system of
coordinates (x,y). If a=0, then sx and sy represent typical values of the axis of the ellipse, while Dxy=0.
The diffusion coefficient K in (3.2) is defined by the horizontal turbulent movement of the water. In the
event of homogenous and isotropic (at the horizontal level) turbulence with the Kolmogorovs spectrum
of pulsations, as was already observed in point 1,
Equation (3.2) is not difficult to integrate if we know the initial position of the centre of the eddy Xc, Yc,
and the initial values of the parameters sx, sy, Dxy, which determine the size of the eddy and its
orientation in the selected fixed system of coordinates.
4.
FORMATION OF EDDIES OF CONTAMINATION
An algorithm is used for the formation of individual eddies of suspended materials in the model
described, which is based on the following conditions.
During the execution of works with current equipment of typical size used for dredging works is followed
bz turbulent wake , containing mineral slurry (see figure 4.1. Beyond the initial section of the wake, in
the section that remains at the approximate distance x'0>10a from the equipment (see for example [7]),
the lateral section of the distribution of the contaminated material is close to a Gauss curve. Also in
agreement with [7] is the parameter c0.5.

Page 518
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Figure 4.1.
Diagram explaining the algorithm for formation of eddies of contamination
Let Q [kg/c] - flow rate of slurry entering the water environment as a result of works. Then by the law of
preservation of mass
where u - speed of movement of water in relation to the dredging equipment.

Let us give a fairly small interval of time tc, through which the eddies of additives will be formed
accordingly. Then the mass of the slurry that is first contained in the eddy must give M=Qtc. We will
choose a typical eddy size sx in the direction of the speed vector u and consequently, the maximum
concentration of slurry within it equals C0:
From (4.2), (4.3) we will now get:
To conclude, we will quote the formula that should be used to convert parameters that are typical
parameters for an eddy when transferring from a local system of coordinates (x,y) to the basic system
of coordinates (x,y), in which the joint evolution of the system of eddies is calculated:
Here a - angle between axes x and x (see figure 4.1), while the values of sy and sx are determined by
the formulas (4.1b) and (4.4).

Page 519
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Literature.
1.
Arkhipov B.V., Koterov V.N., Solbakov V.V. The AKS model for forecasting distribution after
industrial dumping from offshore drilling platforms. Information on applied mathematics M.:
RAN computing centre, 2000. 71 c.
2.
Ozmidov R.V. Diffusion of additives in the ocean. - L.: Gidrometeoizdat, 1986.
3.
Kolmogorov A.N. Local turbulence structure in incompressible liquid with very large Reynolds
figures // DAN USSR, 1941 T.30 No.4 C. 299.

Page 520
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

APPENDIX 4.1-2
3.1.
Description of hydrodynamic conditions and modelling of hydrodynamic processes in areas

of dredging work for construction of the pipeline
1.
HYDRODYNAMIC CONDITIONS
The main hydrodynamic characteristics along the Nord Stream route for purposes of planning were
obtained in the scientific research report "Hydrodynamic and probabilistic modelling, formation of a
corpus of hydrometeorological calculation data along route of the North European gas pipeline (Baltic
Sea) and preparation of recommendations future hydrometeorological engineering research" (2005,
Infomar). An overall diagram of the route with indications of calculated points is provided in figure 1.1.
Geographical coordinates of the calculated points of the route of the Nord Stream gas pipeline are
provided in Table 1.1. The calculated maximum overall flow speed, gained from this report, is provided
in Tables 1.2-1.4.
Figure 1.1.
Overall diagram of the route of the North European gas pipeline from Portovaya
Bay to Greifswald with indication of turning points (numbe red from Portovaya Bay)

Page 521
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Table 1.1
Geographical coordinates (S.S.; V.D.) of calculated points on the route of the North European gas
pipeline
Point no.
Northern latitude
Eastern longitude
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
60
59
59
59
31
30
24
14
8
7
4
0
59
56
53
36
6,4
50,6
12,1
42,7
48,1
11,7
14,9
30
12,1
29,9
28
28
28
27
27
26
26
26
26
25
25
4
5
3
48
28
57
40
17
7
58
21
24
23,3
16,7
11,4
41,7
11,4
22,8
30
29,9
11,9
59,9
12
13
14
15
16
16a
16b
17
18
19
19a
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
59
59
59
59
58
58
57
56
56
56
56
55
55
55
54
54
54
54
54
54
54
39
23
13
49
04
13
31
20
14
04
39
35
5
49
28
16
11
9
8
0,1
48
53,1
0
39,6
01,2
58,8
26,7
18,1
59,9
01,2
60
35,9
11,7
0,1
29,8
34,1
55,6
42,6
48,3
25
24
22
21
20
20
19
18
18
18
17
16
16
15
14
14
13
13
13
13
1
2
10
12
25
00
23
47
34
6
28
28
27
55
56
5
48
37
37
38
60
0,1
1,9
00
36,8
00
02,4
36,8
12
48,1
01,2
18
47,9
29,7
17,8
0,2
8,4
50,4
17
23,3

Page 522
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Table 1.2
Calculated maximum speed of overall currents (cm/c) considering distribution of directions
possible per year, per 10 years and per 100 years. Point no.3
Surface
Bottom
Sector, degree
1 year
10 years
100 years
1 year
10 years
100 years
7.5<22.5
3
4
4
7
12
18
22.5<37.5
3
4
7
9
14
25
37.5<52.5
4
6
8
9
14
32
52.5<67.5
5
8
9
5
9
21
67.5<82.5
10
16
27
3
5
7
82.5<97.5
26
42
62
2
4
4
97.5<112.5
25
34
40
2
4
4
112.5<127.5
13
19
23
1
4
5
127.5<142.5
8
12
18
1
3
4
142.5<157.5
5
7
11
2
4
5
157.5<172.5
172.5<187.5
187.5<202.5
202.5<217.5
217.5<232.5
232.5<247.5
247.5<262.5
262.5<277.5
277.5<292.5
292.5<307.5
307.5<322.5
322.5<337.5
337.5<352.5
352.5<7.5
4
4
4
4
5
8
12
28
23
9
5
3
3
3
7
6
7
8
9
11
24
43
29
12
6
5
4
4
9
9
9
10
21
22
29
52
32
13
7
6
6
6
2
3
5
7
8
8
7
6
5
4
4
4
4
5
4
5
8
12
12
12
11
10
8
8
8
8
8
10
6
7
11
13
14
14
13
12
11
11
11
11
11
15

Page 523
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Table 1.3
Calculated maximum speed of overall currents (cm/c) considering distributions of directions
Surface
Bottom
Sector, degrees
Periodicity (years)
Periodicity (years)
1 year
10 years
100 years
1 year
10 years
100 years
7.5<22.5
14
22
30
7
11
16
22.5<37.5
13
22
35
8
11
17
37.5<52.5
11
19
23
7
12
14
52.5<67.5
11
21
26
7
13
18
67.5<82.5
12
27
67
7
20
36
82.5<97.5
16
41
95
9
23
46
97.5<112.5
20
42
74
9
25
48
112.5<127.5
27
43
53
11
20
43
127.5<142.5
32
49
83
11
19
24
142.5<157.5
157.5<172.5
172.5<187.5
187.5<202.5
202.5<217.5
217.5<232.5
232.5<247.5
247.5<262.5
262.5<277.5
277.5<292.5
292.5<307.5
307.5<322.5
322.5<337.5
337.5<352.5
352.5<7.5
33
35
31
18
12
9
8
7
7
9
13
19
22
21
17
49
53
62
39
30
26
19
12
15
17
23
27
29
28
24
66
75
99
50
68
69
36
17
31
24
36
31
34
34
31
12
13
14
14
12
11
10
8
7
7
7
8
8
8
7
19
21
23
25
22
18
20
12
9
14
15
14
12
11
11
29
23
34
37
27
32
51
16
12
25
21
17
15
12
12

Page 524
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Table 1.4
Calculated maximum speed of overall currents (cm/c) considering distribution of directions
Surface
Sector, degrees
Periodicity (years)
1 year
10 years
100 years
7.5<22.5
7
9
11
22.5<37.5
8
10
14
37.5<52.5
10
13
16
52.5<67.5
12
15
21
67.5<82.5
18
26
35
82.5<97.5
29
46
67
97.5<112.5
32
46
56
112.5<127.5
23
35
53
127.5<142.5
14
28
48
142.5<157.5
157.5<172.5
172.5<187.5
187.5<202.5
202.5<217.5
217.5<232.5
232.5<247.5
247.5<262.5
262.5<277.5
277.5<292.5
292.5<307.5
307.5<322.5
322.5<337.5
337.5<352.5
352.5<7.5
2.
10
8
8
7
7
8
9
12
18
20
15
11
9
8
7
15
14
15
15
15
16
13
18
24
27
21
13
12
9
9
21
22
18
19
21
30
21
24
34
29
23
19
15
12
10
MATHEMATICAL FORMULATION OF MODEL
This section describes the method and the given calculations according to models of hydrometeorological
processes and surface wind for purposes of solving ecological tasks connected to the distribution of
suspended materials during dredging work and oil flow in the Baltic Sea. Calculations were carried out
for 1 year of modelling time. using data for 2005. In addition, an examination of the corpus of
information, calculations used and the results of calculations of hydrodynamic processes was carried out.
For descriptions of the wind and sea currents and variations in the level of the Baltic Sea, use the
following system of equations [Gill. 1986]:

Page 525
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

The start of the coordinates is located on the non-turbulent sea surface, the length, width and axis z
directed vertically upwards. The following symbols are used: f = 2sin - the coriolis parameter, u - the
zonal speed component (positive to the east), v - the meridian speed component (positive to the north), w
- the vertical speed component (positive upwards), - digression of free surface from non-turbulent
position, g - gravity acceleration, - rotational speed of land, Az, Kz - vertical turbulent viscosity
coefficient.
Wind turbulence forms on the sea surface:
kinematical condition:
The quadratic friction law is formed on the ground:
On the hard side boundary the non-leakage condition for complete flows is formed:
On the open sea border, seal level turbulence is created which is determined by the tidal oscillations.
Depending on the position, tasks can be the different variants of the border condition on the open
boundary, which are considered below.

Page 526
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

For a description of the processes of the turbulent exchange, a series of approaches is considered. The
models, in which the vertical viscosity and diffusion coefficients are entered as algebraic expressions,
follow from L. Prandtl's expression for the turbulent viscosity coefficient the boundary layer of the
following type [L. Prandtl, 1949]:
where l is the length of mixing route and ur the speed of turbulent pulsation. Such an expression is
introduced for the analogy with the molecular viscosity/diffusion coefficient, and in turbulence theory a
heuristic expression is used for the parametrisation of turbulent processes under specific conditions.
Scale l in the area of wall-adjacent boundary layer is directly proportional to the distance of zd to the
wall:
l = k zd,
k = 0.4 is the permanent pouch. In this instance, we have a logarithmic speed profile around the wall.
For seas, the scale is often taken in the form of the parabolic formula
l = kH (zd /H). It is at its maximum near the middle line at the maximum distances from the ground and
surface of the sea and tends towards k kz closer to the borders. The most simple example of such a
function is:
Here H = +h is the full depth, h is the depth from the undisturbed level, as shown in Figure 1. =(z+h)/(
+h). zs , z0 and [m] are the ruggedness parameters on the surface and ground, respectively.
Fig. 2.1.1.
Configuration of the ground and free surface

Page 527
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Aiming
for
the
surface
formula
gives:
(2)
with
an
expression
for
the
scale
(3)
the friction speed.
Model with one transfer equation (for k). Over the past years, in three-dimensional field forecast models
of littoral circulation, models based on equations for turbulence energy and dissipation (or scale) speed
have been used most frequently. We are considering the variants of such models [Davies A.M., Lawrence
J., 1994]. The equation for turbulence has the following type
Here
E - turbulence energy, [E]=dzh/kg=m2/s2,
E - dissipation speed, [e]=dzh/kg=m2/s3,
l - mixing length, [m],
b = -g(- o)/ o buoyancy,
N2= b/ z Vaysyal frequency
For the mixing length, an expression slightly different from (2.1.7) can be taken, as is the case in the work
of Davies [Davies A.M., Lawrence J.,1994]:
The model described is determined by the following selection of permanent empirical coefficients.
Table 2.1
Value of invariables in the model with one transfer equation
[Davies A.M., 1993] [Luyten P.J. at all,1966]
C1
C0
0.73
(Co)3=0.099
C 1/4=0.46
1.0
0.166
0.548

Page 528
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

k
1
z0
zs
0.046
0.4
-2
0.001-0.01m
0.001-1m
permanent pouch
coefficient in the exponent for the scale
ruggedness parameter on the ground
ruggedness parameter on the surface
The formula (3) is the result of equations (4) in approximation of local balance (generation = dissipation).
Model with two transfer equations (for k and e). In this variant, a transfer equation of dissipation speed is
added. We receive the following setting:
Boundary conditions for turbulent values. When approaching surfaces, the free surface or ground, the
conditions of local balance are fulfilled, from which follows
In the model with two transfer equations, the following invariable values are used (, C1., C2, C3,
k, ) =(0.091,1.51,1.92,1.0,1.3).
Description of bottom logarithmic boundary layer. In the bottom layer, a change of speed can be
described with sufficient precision with the logarithmic law [Monin A. S., Yaglom, A. M. 1965]:

Page 529
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

u = u*/k ln(z/z0) (8)

where z0 is the ruggedness parameter, u* = Vtb the friction speed and k=0.4 the pouch invariable. When
using the quadratic friction law as the friction coefficient, C100 is often used, i.e. its value at a distance of
measurement point equal 100 m from the ground. In the execution suggested (5), we have:
u = u100 /k ln(z/z0), (9)
Therefore, if we assume the last calculation point of the grid at a distance of 1 m from the ground, the
speed at smaller distances can be determined with the formula (4), taking as a the value C100, which is
known from experiments. At the same time (2.1.13) serves as a link of the friction coefficient and
ruggedness parameter z0:
= [k/ ln(z/z0)]2.
(10)
We note that the ruggedness parameter is linked to a medium height of ruggedness elements for the
conditions of the boundary layer in pipes or above plane plates with the expression z0 = h0/30. When
taking z0 = 0.3 cm [Davies A.M., Lawrence J., 1994], then = 0.005.
For an approximation of the equation system (1) as regards time, a differential scheme is used which is
hidden and bilayer in terms of time. In this scheme, members of the vertical viscosity are deemed hidden,
and the other members open. For an approximation in terms of space, the C grid with differential points is
used. In the centre of this grid's cell, the non-vector variables are determined and on the boundaries the
vector variables. A more detailed description of the calculation scheme can, for instance, be found in
(Arkhipov B.V., 1989).
3.
INITIAL DATA AND CALCULATION RESULTS
The calculations are made under the influence of tidal, wind and density impacts (forcing). On the open
boundary (Fig. 2.1) tidal disturbances of the sea level are created.
An adequate setting of the configuration in the calculation area (ground relief and shore line) has great
significance, on the one hand, for a correct creation of the main physical (hydro- and litodynamic)
processes forming the spread and changeability of sea currents, temperature and salt levels of sea water,
seabed sediments, etc., and, on the other hand, for a correct geographical calibration of the results
obtained from model calculations. The latter is particularly important during construction engineering and
using hydrotechnical facilities.
To calculate the flow fields in the Baltic Sea, use was made of bathometry, the construction on the basis
of
the
bodies
of
ETOPO5,
iowtopo2,
ETOPOREF.IAX2
(http://www.iowarnemuende.de/en_iowtopo.html, UNEP/GRID Documentation Summary for Data Set: 'ETOPO-5'
Elevation) and bathometrical maps of the waters for the pipeline course presented by Petergaz. This body
was drafted at the U. S. National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) in Boulder, Colorado (USA). It is the
best of existing numerical bodies of the relief which was obtained on the basis of a grid with a 5-minute
resolution (approximately 9 km by 9 km). Outline intervals are every 1 m. This body includes
bathometrical characteristics of 10000 m and more. The relief, which is higher than the sea level, reaches
in this body 8000 m. The ETOPO5 body includes the body of the Carthographic Agency of the U. S.
Ministry of Defence for the territory surrounding the US, Western Europe and Japan, the body of the
Australian Mineral Resources Department as well as the New Zealand Department of Science and
Industrial Research.

Page 530
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

The ETOPO5 body has 2160 entries, consisting of 8640 bytes each. The dimension of the body is
21604320 two-byte elements. It spreads from 90N to 90S and from 180E to 180W. The volume of the
entire body is 18.66 MB. A more detailed description of the body can be found in [Edwards, M.H.,1986,
Haxby, W.F. et al., 1983]. To make calculations on the basis of the ETOPO5 body, a grid area was set up
on the grid with a spacing of Dl = 0.109457132, Dj = 0.054079296 (area size 11001100 km). An
image of the calculation area is specified in Fig. 3.1.
Fig. 3.1. Waters of the Baltic Sea and grid area, for which are calculated the hydrodynamic
processes () and position of local areas (b) where the currents area calculated for a calculation of
the spread of suspended substances

Page 531
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Boundary impact is implemented via the emission conditions (Roed L.P., Cooper C.,1986) established on
the western boundary of the area considered, where tidal impact is formed:
is the local speed of gravitational waves.

Via the top boundary of reservoirs, mechanical and heat impact from the atmosphere is passed on.
The mechanical impact occurs as wind loads established by the value and direction of wind speed at a
height of 10 m.
Here ra is the air density, rw the water density, and a the corner between the direction to the north and
wind speed.
When using formulas (11), the question arises on determining the wind speed V10 . Several approaches are
currently being applied for the calculation of wind fields.
The first method involves the direct development of wind fields for full-scale measurements of the speed
and direction of wind conducted from passing and exploration vessels, with ABS and on coastal weather
stations. The drawback of this method is the low level of precision in the wind speed measurements, the
mean-square error around 2.5 m/s as well as the imprecision of observations and their inequality in terms
of space and time.
In the second variant the wind speed field can be determined in accordance with the global atmosphere
circulation model. Such models are used in major meteorological centres.
It has recently been very promising to use satellite information. In particular, methods are being
developed which are based on a back scatter signal analysis and wind speed reconstruction using special
methods. This will be discussed in detail in a section by describing the information.
In the fourth variant, the pressure fields can be repelled, which are reconstructed above the areas
considered, with the use of some procedure.
In order to conduct numerical calculations of the Baltic Sea's current and spread of oil, the wind data of
an entire year were prepared. The following was used as the initial information: reanalysis archive of the
NCEP/NCARfor 2005 with a spatial resolution of 2.5 degrees. Furthermore, data available on the
following CD ROM collection was used: NSCAT OCEAN WINDS CD-ROM, (volume Ocean_wind01Ocean_wind01, spatial resolution: grid with a spacing of 25 km). These discs are circulated by the
organisation: PO.DAAC (Physical Oceanography Distributed Archive Center) JPL Physical
Oceanography DAAC, Jet Propulsion Laboratory, USA.

Page 532
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

As an illustration in Fig. 3.2. the wind field according to the data of an NCEP/NCAR reanalysis are
specified.
Fig. 3.2. Wind fields as per the data of an NCEP/NCAR reanalysis at the start of 2005
To create the tidal impact on the boundary of the region (Fig. 5.2), use was made of cotidal maps of the
main tidal waves in the area considered, which are created on the basis of the global ocean tide model
ORI.96, as developed at Tokyo University (Ocean Research Institute). In this model, the tides are
calculated on a 0.50 grid with involvement of satellite data (NASA TOPEX/POSEIDON MGDR). This
ensures harmonic invariables for 8 constituents (M2, S2, N2, K2, K1, O1, P1, Q1).
Examples of the calculated momentary summary currents in the surface layer are specified in Fig. 3.3.

Page 533
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


Page 534
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Fig. 3.3. Currents field according to data from the calculations of various times of the year from the
start of 2005
To describe the currents directly in the area of conducting dredging work as specified in Fig. 3.4.(b)
mathematical modelling was conducted with the use of the following system of equating shallow water
[Gill, 1986]:
x,y
length and width. The following symbols are used: f =2 sin Coriolis parameter, u zonal
speed component (positive, eastern direction) v meridional speed component (positive, northern
direction), H, h complete depth and mark fo the day, g gravity acceleration, earth angular
velocity.

Page 535
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Data on currents obtained from the global model was used as boundary conditions. A grid (100*100 cells)
was used for the calculations.
x = 247.16m, y = 247.67m for the northern part and x = 462.86 m, y = 449.05m for the southern
part.
Fig. 3.4 shows the results of calculation the currents in the areas of the littoral section in the area of
crossing the shore line on the Russian side.

Page 536
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


Page 537
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Fig. 3.4. Current fields calculated with the model at various times for the area of lines in the region
of the littoral area near the crossing of the shore line on the Russian side

Page 538
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Literature
Arkhipov B.V. About some properties of geophysical hydrodynamic equations on the staggered grid//
Journal Oceanology, v.29, N5, p.723-729,1989
Davies A.M. A bottom boundary layer-resolving three-dimensional tidal model: a sensitivity study of
viscosity formulation // Journal of physical oceanography. 1993, vol. 23, D92, p. 1437 - 1453.
Davies A.M., Jones J.E. Application of a three-dimensional turbulence energy model to the determination
of tidal currents on the northwest European shelf // Journal of Geophysical Res.. 1990, vol. 95, p. 18143 18162.
Davies A.M., Lawrence J. The response of the Irish Sea to boundary and wind forcing: Results from a
three -dimensional hydrodynamic model// Journal of geophysical research. 1994, vol. 99, C11, p. 22,66522,687.
Luyten P.J., Deleersnijder E., Ozer J., Ruddick K.G. Presentation of a family of turbulence closure
models for stratified shallow water flows and preliminary application to the Rhine outflow region.//
Continental shelf Research, 1996, Vol. 16, No 1, 101-130.
Roed L.P., Cooper C. Open boundary conditions in numerical ocean models, in Advanced Physical
Oceanographic Numerical Modelling, edited by J.J. O'Braien, NATO ASI Ser. C, 186, 411-436,1986.
A. Gill, Dynamics of the atmosphere and ocean. Vol. 2. .: Mir. 1986, 415 p.
V. I. Makarova, Calculation of wind fields in accordance with fields of atmospheric pressure over the sea
// Background information, Issue No. 4. Hydrometeorology, Hydrometeorology series, 1989.
A. S. Monin, A. M. Yaglom, Statistical hydromechanics, Part 1.//. Nauka, 1965, 639 p.
L. Prandtl, Hydromechanics, M.: Publishing house for foreign literature, 1949. 520 p.
J. Khaltiner, F. Martin, Dynamic and physical meteorology.\\ Publishing house Foreign Literature,
Moscow, 1960.
Edwards, M.H., 1986. Digital Image Processing of Local and Global Bathymetric Data. Master's Thesis.
Department of Earth and Planetary Sciences, Washington Univ., St. Louis, Missouri, USA, 106 p."
Haxby, W.F. et al., 1983. Digital Images of Combined Oceanic and Continental Data Sets and their Use
in Tectonic Studies. EOS Trans actions of the American Physical Union, vol. 64, no. 52, pp. 995-1004."
Matsumoto, K., M. Ooe, T. Sato, and J. Segawa, Ocean tide model obtained from TOPEX/POSEIDON
altimetry data, J. Geophys. Res., 100, C12, 25,319-25,330, 1995.

Page 539
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

ANNEX 4.1-3
Seabed sediment characteristics along the Nord Stream line
This section provides characteristics of the seabed sediments along the gas pipeline according to
engineering and environmental research (Part 1. 1st stage Book 5. Final report):
Section 1. Exclusive economic zone and territorial waters of Russia (OOO Piter Gaz
(archive No. OAO Giprospetsgaz 6545.152.010.21.14.03.01.05);
Section 2. Exclusive economic zones of Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Germany (OOO
Piter Gaz archive No. OAO Giprospetsgaz 6545.152.010.21.14.03.01.05);
Materials specified in Volume 7. Book 1 Project Plan for Organising the Construction of the Off-Shore
Section of the Gas Pipeline were also used, which state the results of a geological survey along the
pipeline route.
The seabed sediment characteristics were obtained at the stations specified in Table 1 and Fig. 1. The
following abbreviations are used in the table: GR gravel, SA sand, VFS - very fine sand, FS - fine
sand, SCS - sand and clay spiniforms, CS clay spiniforms, CB - clay bands, CM - clay morainics.
Table 1
Station coordinates and sediment type
Station No.
Length
Width
Sediment type
Station identifier
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
7
7
8
9
26.9903
26.79703333
26.5838
26.37366667
26.36866667
26.14908333
25.977
25.9742
25.9715
25.78538333
25.57276667
60.1289
60.09135
60.05125
60.06842
60.0315
59.98953
59.93483
59.9345
59.934
59.9184
59.90437
VFS
SA
SCS
CS
CS
GR
CS
CS
SCS
SA
SA
1.2.zdo
2.2.zdo
3.2.b2
4.2.zdo
5.2.zdo
6.2.b1
7.1.b2
7.2.b2
7.3.b2
8.2.zdo
9.1.b2

Page 540
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Station No.
Length
Width
Sediment type
Station identifier
9
9
10
10
10
11
11
11
12
12
12
13
25.5699
25.56756667
25.3735
25.3737
25.37446667
25.15891667
25.15956667
25.15978333
24.97508333
24.97503333
24.97488333
24.832
59.90377
59.90312
59.8897
59.88773
59.88603
59.89308
59.89162
59.88927
59.8857
59.88373
59.88775
59.8365
SCS
SCS
CB
SCS
SCS
CB
FS
SA
FS
CB
VFS
CS
9.2.b2
9.3.b2
10.1.b2
10.2.b2
10.3.b2
11.1.b2
11.2.b2
11.3.b2
12.1.b2
12.2.b2
12.3.b2
13.1.b2
13
13
14
14
14
15
15
15
16
16
16
17
17
17
18
18
18
19
19
24.8275
24.83533333
24.61613333
24.61803333
24.61983333
24.4344
24.4382
24.4414
24.25255
24.25576667
24.25963333
24.07338333
24.07553333
24.07663333
23.89103333
23.89216667
23.89405
23.70758333
23.70896667
59.83783
59.833
59.80418
59.80123
59.79825
59.75777
59.75612
59.75378
59.72678
59.72428
59.72178
59.67472
59.6716
59.66862
59.64303
59.64013
59.63758
59.6319
59.62832
CS
SCS
CB
CB
CB
CS
CS
CB
FS
SCS
SA
CB
FS
CB
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
13.2.b2
13.3.b2
14.1.b1
14.2.b1
14.3.b1
15.1.b2
15.2.b2
15.3.b2
16.1.b2
16.2.b2
16.3.b2
17.1.b1
17.2.b1
17.3.b1
18.1.b2
18.2.b2
18.3.b2
19.1.b2
19.2.b2

Page 541
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Station No.
Length
Width
Sediment type
Station identifier
19
20
20
20
21
21
21
22
22
22
23
23
23.7106
23.52433333
23.52583333
23.528
23.34133333
23.3425
23.344
23.15966667
23.16033333
23.16383333
22.97463333
22.97783333
59.62532
59.5915
59.58883
59.58633
59.56267
59.56
59.55717
59.54147
59.53802
59.53522
59.51175
59.50852
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
19.3.b2
20.1.b2
20.2.b2
20.3.b2
21.1.b2
21.2.b2
21.3.b2
22.1.b2
22.2.b2
22.3.b2
23.1.b2
23.2.b2
23
24
24
24
25
25
25
26
26
26
27
27
27
28
28
28
29
29
29
22.97798333
22.85721667
22.85963333
22.86103333
22.65771667
22.65901667
22.66126667
22.46146667
22.46316667
22.46574
22.25783333
22.25966667
22.261
22.06166667
22.06636667
22.06533333
21.856
21.85633333
21.85866667
59.50572
59.50428
59.50197
59.4996
59.4715
59.46903
59.46627
59.44077
59.43783
59.43498
59.41067
59.408
59.40533
59.37867
59.376
59.37367
59.342
59.33817
59.33583
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
SCS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
23.3.b2
24.1.b2
24.2.b2
24.3.b2
25.1.b2
25.2.b2
25.3.b2
26.1.b2
26.2.b2
26.3.b2
27.1.b2
27.2.b2
27.3.b2
28.1.b2
28.2.b2
28.3.b2
29.1.b2
29.2.b2
29.3.b2

Page 542
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Station No.
Length
Width
Sediment type
Station identifier
30
30
30
31
31
31
32
32
32
33
33
33
21.67233333
21.67415
21.6759
21.48796667
21.48846667
21.48935
21.31543333
21.32025
21.32468333
21.12533333
21.13013333
21.1345
59.30658
59.30343
59.30158
59.27288
59.27015
59.2679
59.23965
59.23695
59.23502
59.17452
59.17207
59.16973
CS
CS
CS
CB
CS
CS
CB
CS
CS
CB
CS
CS
30.1.b2
30.2.b2
30.3.b2
31.1.b2
31.2.b2
31.3.b2
32.1.b2
32.2.b2
32.3.b2
33.1.b2
33.2.b2
33.3.b2
34
34
34
35
35
35
36
36
36
37
37
37
38
38
38
39
39
39
40
20.95153333
20.95533333
20.96033333
20.78386667
20.78668333
20.7898
20.59805
20.601
20.60525
20.41565
20.42
20.42303333
20.33311667
20.33633333
20.34575
20.23911667
20.24333333
20.24833333
20.32868333
59.09253
59.09048
59.08785
59.00733
59.00545
59.00313
58.91153
58.91002
58.907
58.81887
58.81713
58.81517
58.70342
58.70192
58.70053
58.57463
58.57365
58.5723
58.44067
CB
CB
CB
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CB
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
FS
FS
SCS
CS
34.1.b2
34.2.b2
34.3.b2
35.1.b2
35.2.b2
35.3.b2
36.1.b2
36.2.b2
36.3.b2
37.1.b2
37.2.b2
37.3.b2
38.1.b2
38.2.b2
38.3.b2
39.1.b2
39.2.b2
39.3.b2
40.1.b2

Page 543
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Station No.
Length
Width
Sediment type
Station identifier
40
40
41
41
41
42
42
42
43
43
43
44
20.33348333
20.33758333
20.12165
20.1271
20.13096667
20.0149
20.02033333
20.02516667
19.92068333
19.92563333
19.93078333
19.89776667
58.44012
58.4385
58.39425
58.39333
58.39185
58.25797
58.25747
58.25575
58.12028
58.11942
58.11882
57.99255
CS
CS
SA
SA
SA
CM
SA
VFS
CS
CS
CS
CS
40.2.b2
40.3.b2
41.1.b2
41.2.b2
41.3.b2
42.1.b2
42.2.b2
42.3.b2
43.1.b2
43.2.b2
43.3.b2
44.1.b2
44
44
45
45
45
46
46
46
47
47
47
48
48
48
49
49
49
50
50
19.90313333
19.90803333
19.75285
19.757
19.76095
19.66795
19.67286667
19.6774
19.58783333
19.59223333
19.59678333
19.50425
19.50946667
19.5146
19.43243333
19.4378
19.44216667
19.34693333
19.351
57.99225
57.99212
57.89117
57.88903
57.88705
57.77247
57.77173
57.77077
57.65512
57.65415
57.65298
57.53995
57.53867
57.53793
57.42735
57.42617
57.42487
57.30685
57.30617
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
SCS
SA
VFS
SA
FS
SCS
SA
SA
CM
SCS
SCS
SCS
CS
CS
44.2.b2
44.3.b2
45.1.b2
45.2.b2
45.3.b2
46.1.b2
46.2.b2
46.3.b2
47.1.b2
47.2.b2
47.3.b2
48.1.b2
48.2.b2
48.3.b2
49.1.b2
49.2.b2
49.3.b2
50.1.b2
50.2.b2

Page 544
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Station No.
Length
Width
Sediment type
Station identifier
50
51
51
51
52
52
52
53
53
53
54
54
19.3566
19.26956667
19.27346667
19.27666667
19.17201667
19.17501667
19.17788333
19.10025
19.10433333
19.11006667
19.0215
19.0262
57.30497
57.18932
57.18797
57.18647
57.07358
57.07133
57.0695
56.95702
56.95637
56.9555
56.8527
56.85162
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
50.3.b2
51.1.b2
51.2.b2
51.3.b2
52.1.b2
52.2.b2
52.3.b2
53.1.b2
53.2.b2
53.3.b2
54.1.b2
54.2.b2
54
55
55
55
56
56
56
57
57
57
58
58
58
59
59
59
60
60
60
19.0316
18.93333333
18.93866667
18.94293333
18.84808333
18.85293333
18.85835
18.73361667
18.73715
18.7421
18.59973333
18.60431667
18.60833333
18.43073333
18.43316667
18.4365
18.25663333
18.25825
18.25986667
56.85068
56.72553
56.7245
56.72343
56.60575
56.60472
56.60367
56.47715
56.47637
56.47533
56.36143
56.35927
56.35862
56.30937
56.30642
56.3044
56.2755
56.27298
56.27062
CS
SCS
SCS
CS
SA
FS
FS
VFS
FS
VFS
FS
FS
FS
VFS
VFS
VFS
SA
SA
SA
54.3.b2
55.1.b2
55.2.b2
55.3.b2
56.1.b1
56.2.b1
56.3.b1
57.1.b2
57.2.b2
57.3.b2
58.1.b2
58.2.b2
58.3.b2
59.1.b1
59.2.b1
59.3.b1
60.1.b1
60.2.b1
60.3.b1

Page 545
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Station No.
Length
Width
Sediment type
Station identifier
61
61
61
62
62
62
63
63
63
64
64
64
18.06773333
18.07023333
18.07225
17.88895
17.89213333
17.89481667
17.71563333
17.7191
17.72176667
17.539
17.54188333
17.54386667
56.2378
56.23533
56.2329
56.17348
56.17088
56.16873
56.10977
56.10727
56.10525
56.05405
56.05182
56.0493
SA
SA
GR
VFS
SA
SA
VFS
VFS
VFS
SA
SA
GR
61.1.b2
61.2.b2
61.3.b2
62.1.b2
62.2.b2
62.3.b2
63.1.b2
63.2.b2
63.3.b2
64.1.b1
64.2.b1
64.3.b1
65
65
65
66
66
66
67
67
67
68
68
68
69
69
69
70
70
70
71
17.36783333
17.37033333
17.37333333
17.18906667
17.19226667
17.19481667
17.01813333
17.02053333
17.02415
16.8417
16.84243333
16.845
16.66811667
16.67266667
16.67608333
16.50033333
16.50273333
16.50556667
16.3973
55.9886
55.986
55.98382
55.9246
55.92225
55.91998
55.86068
55.85853
55.85593
55.8292
55.82708
55.824
55.73903
55.73713
55.73572
55.67533
55.67268
55.67067
55.5382
GR
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SCS
SA
SA
SA
VFS
VFS
VFS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
65.1.b2
65.2.b2
65.3.b2
66.1.b2
66.2.b2
66.3.b2
67.1.b2
67.2.b2
67.3.b2
68.1.b1
68.2.b1
68.3.b1
69.1.b1
69.2.b1
69.3.b1
70.1.b2
70.2.b2
70.3.b2
71.1.b2

Page 546
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Station No.
Length
Width
Sediment type
Station identifier
71
71
72
72
72
73
73
73
74
74
74
75
16.40168333
16.4068
16.26683333
16.27
16.27425
16.13171667
16.13608333
16.14028333
15.97135
15.97508333
15.97893333
16.00131667
55.53677
55.53598
55.421
55.42015
55.4183
55.28823
55.28682
55.28565
55.24467
55.24305
55.24135
55.16992
CS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
CS
SCS
SCS
SCS
CS
CS
CS
71.2.b2
71.3.b2
72.1.b2
72.2.b2
72.3.b2
73.1.b2
73.2.b2
73.3.b2
74.1.b2
74.2.b2
74.3.b2
75.1.b2
75
75
76
76
76
77
77
77
78
78
78
79
79
79
80
80
80
81
81
16.00555
16.00966667
15.8775
15.8805
15.88355
15.70063333
15.7034
15.7064
15.5371
15.54005
15.54373333
15.3733
15.376
15.37933333
15.22383333
15.22646667
15.22988333
15.03903333
15.04075
55.16817
55.16682
55.05918
55.05695
55.05472
54.98905
54.98658
54.98453
54.92223
54.91967
54.91787
54.84255
54.84033
54.83842
54.77598
54.77405
54.77175
54.73835
54.736
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
CS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
SCS
CS
SCS
SCS
75.2.b2
75.3.b2
76.1.b2
76.2.b2
76.3.b2
77.1.b2
77.2.b2
77.3.b2
78.1.b2
78.2.b2
78.3.b2
79.1.b2
79.2.b2
79.3.b2
80.1.b2
80.2.b2
80.3.b2
81.1.b2
81.2.b2

Page 547
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Station No.
Length
Width
Sediment type
Station identifier
81.3.b2
82.1.b2
82.2.b2
82.3.b2
83.1.b1
83.2.b1
83.3.b1
84.1.b1
84.2.b1
84.3.b1
85.1.b1
85.2.b1
85.3.b1
86.1.b1
86.2.b1
86.3.b1
87.1.b1
87.2.b1
87.3.b1
88.1.b1
88.2.b1
88.3.b1
89.1.b2
89.2.b2
89.3.b2
82
82
82
83
83
83
84
84
84
85
85
14.8682
14.87055
14.87196667
14.69846667
14.69976667
14.70223333
14.52023333
14.52158333
14.52308333
14.35053333
14.35208333
54.69368
54.69117
54.68877
54.65585
54.65332
54.65055
54.61017
54.60743
54.60467
54.57272
54.57017
SCS
FS
FS
FS
VFS
VFS
VFS
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
85
86
86
86
87
87
87
88
88
88
89
89
89
14.35381667
14.20166667
14.20375
14.20628333
14.08405
14.08696667
14.08931667
14.0724
14.07488333
14.07768333
16.8402
16.84316667
16.84613333
54.56762
54.52255
54.52018
54.51778
54.46883
54.46667
54.4643
54.53617
54.53393
54.53167
55.81213
55.81013
55.80778
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
SA
GR
GR
Along the North-European gas pipeline in the Baltic Sea, all seabed sediment types and late quaternary
sediments can be found (figures 1 and 2). These include morainics, clay bands of the Baltic glacial lake,
clays of the Yoldia Sea and Ancylus lake and sediments of the marine holocene, which former after an
outbreak of salty North Sea waters into the Baltics (7800 years ago) and the conversion of the Baltic
water body from a lake to a sea. Sediments of the marine holocene are presented by: pelitic
(predominantly clayey), siltstone and fine siltstone clays, very fine sands and sands. In the top layer there
are gravel and pebble sediments, as well as their mixture (pebble and gravel, gravel and sand, etc.). These
grit stone sediments were formed either during the littoral transgression or appear as residual after the
washaway of moraines and lake clay or after the rewashing (carrying-out of pelitic factures) by strong
seabed currents.

Page 548
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

In the Gulf of Finland (Fig. 2, stations 1-26, depths of 43-80 m) the following can usually be observed in
the range of types: sands - very fine sands - fine silt clay - silt-pelitic clay - pelitic clay. The first one of
these types is the most shallow-water and the last the most deep-water. However, there are also
exceptions. The first is that typically siltstone sediments (in particular, very fine sands with a fracture of
0.1-0.05 mm) either occupy a very narrow interval of depths or they disappear entirely, while sands are
gradually replaced with clays. This results in mixed sediments, which are frequently called by numerous
explorers clayey sands or sandy clays. The second exception refers to sands and pelitic clays: in some
(highly hydrodynamically active) areas, the sands drop to such depths as do clays (50-60 m), while pelitic
clays in quiet (small hydrodynamic activity) areas rise to levels where sands usually spread (2740 m).
Given that the relief of the ground of the Gulf of Finland is very rugged and characterised by many semiisolated excavations, islets and elevations, the spreading of clayey sediment types of, predominantly,
pelitic clays, is very mosaic. Over the process of the entire marine (littoral) stage of the development of
the Baltic Sea, these excavations are places where pelitic clays amass.

Page 549
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Fig. 1.
Spread of seabed sedime nt types according to depth in the Baltic Sea, data of 46 trips of
STM AtlantNIRO, 2005
The sands contain from 49.0 to 96.1% of fracture > 0.1 mm or from 45.4 to 91.2% of sandy (1.0- 0.1 mm)
fractures. Only sand samples have a significant addition of gravel materials (up to 26.9% of fracture > 1.0
mm), the others have a significant addition of pelitic material (up to 20.4% of fracture < 0.01 mm). These
are usually coarse-grained or fine-grained sands.

Page 550
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Very fine sands are found at a depth of 47 m. They contain 54.4 66.4% of siltstone material or 32.1
53.0% of fracture of 0.1 0.05 mm. In one case, very fine sands are presented as a unimodal histogram
and well assorted, in the other case as a bimodal histogram and badly assorted.

Page 551

Fig. 2.
Spread of sedime nt types in seabed deposits (layer of 0-5 cm) in the Baltic Sea along the pipeline and station numbe r (1-89) on 3 sheets. The columns
represent the structure of the strata where there are layers of coarse-grain sedime nts on the ground surface

Volume 8. Book 1. Off-shore section. Part 1. OVOS
Page 552


Volume 8. Book 1. Off-shore section. Part 1. OVOS
Page 553
PETER GAZ 36/07-01- Feasibility study - EIA - 0801(1)-C6

Fig. 2.3. Areas where post-trenching is arranged during different stages of the works
With a view to performing a simulation, all forms of work are classified. Detailed information regarding
this classification is provided in Appendix 1. The results of this classification are given in Tables 2.1 - 2.2
and in fig. 2.3. As can be seen from these tables, during the first three stages, the average amount of posttrenching is relatively small although the work is carried out in sections situated very near to the coast
(control point -4760.0) as well as at the western end (control point -120341.0).
During the final stage, the volumes of post-trenching increase significantly, being arranged practically
along the entire length of the pipeline from control point - 2003 to control point - 119523. During the
work stages as a whole, 328 post-trenches will be realised with a total volume of 1 391 769 m3. In
accordance with the design data, the productivity of the equipment used in the post-trenching is equal to
84 m3/hour.
Table 2.1.
Aggregate data according to the volume of post-trenching during the different stages of the work
From the
As far as the
Number of Average volume Length (m)
Breadth (m)
control point
control point post-trenches during the stage
(m3)
First stage. Gravel support fortification for ensuring static stability until the eastern pipelines are laid
15066
39662
3
317
5
12
62632
90917
15
936
5
12
110088
120341
5
3132
5
12

Vol. 8. Book 1. Offshore section. Part 1. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
Page 575

First stage. Gravel support fortification for ensuring static stability until the western pipelines are laid
31504
39347
5
878
5
12
80792
93972
7
2 244
5
12
102045
120327
11
908
5
12
Second stage. Gravel-filled post trench for static stability after the eastern pipelines have been laid
14678
21810
19
465
11
3
31547
43055
19
389
8
3
62364
120666
31
861
14
3
Second stage. Gravel-filled post trench for static stability after the western pipelines have been laid
9124.5
21466.24
14
404
10
3
31181.9
43374.41
17
329
10
3
62353.09
120228.3
30
618
12
3
Third stage. Gravel-filled post trench for dynamic stability after the eastern pipelines have been laid
4760
9658
4
110
13
3
15443
39415
10
93
8.3
3
60827
119811
14
396
7.5
3
Third stage. Gravel-filled post trench for dynamic stability after the western pipelines have been laid
15544
33968
5
23.2
5
3
86077
119426
13
388
6.3
3
Fourth stage. Gravel-filled post trench for reducing buckling and vertical twisting after the eastern
pipelines have been laid
2003
29132
22
17351
602
2.9
30461
59078
22
9019
310
2.9
60377
119523
8
11035
391
2.7
Fourth stage. Gravel-filled post trench for reducing buckling and vertical twisting after the western
pipelines have been laid
2003
29023
25
14563
517
3
31207
59186
23
9949
323
3
60174
119194
6
14841
504
3
Adding up the data for the eastern and western pipelines provides us with basic modelling options. These
options are referred to below in the "Calculation results" section.
Table 2.2.
Aggregate data according to the volume of post-trenching during the different stages of the work
for the eastern and western pipelines and modelling option numbe rs
From the control As far as the control Number of post
point
point
trenches
First stage
15066
39347
8
Average volume
(m3)
Option numbe r
667.6

Page 576

62632
110088
93972
120327
9124.5
31547
62364
21466.24
43374.41
120228.3
4760
15443
60827
9658
33968
119426
2003
30461
60377
29023
59186
119194
22
16
Second stage
33
36
61
Third stage
4
15
27
Fourth stage
47
45
14
1352.2
1603.0
2
3
439.1
360.7
741.5
4
5
6
110.0
69.7
392.1
7
8
9
15651.0
9494.3
12666.1
10
11
12

Page 577

2.2.
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
In Appendix 2, a detailed analysis is performed of the soils in the region in question. Table 2.2. provides
aggregate data on soils.
Table 2.2.
Aggregate data on soils
Control point
0 - 5016
5016 - 10332
10332 - 16474
16474 - 23860
23860 - 32930
32930 - 42260
42260 - 52504
52504 - 78235
52504 - 78235
78235 - 122358
2.3.
G1
G2
G3
G4
G5
G6
G7
G8
G9
G10
Gravel, sand
>10.0 - 0.1
89
13.1
3.8
20.4
21.3
2.1
17.2
15
33
20.7
Silt
0.1 - 0.01
11
66.7
32
29.3
32.8
28.7
36.6
48.5
8.8
29.5
Mudstone
0.01 - 0.0001
0
20.2
64.2
50.3
45.9
69.2
46.2
36.5
58.2
49.8
Characteristics of the currents
In Appendix 3, a detailed analysis is performed of the currents in the region in question. Using the data
provided as a basis gives us the direction and a value for the speed of the current (cm/s) which are
accepted in calculations concerned with the diffusion of suspended matter (Table 2.3.). It follows from
points 3-6 of this table (see Fig. 1 of Appendix 3) that the most likely directions are NNE-NE, while in
points 7-9, the most likely directions are W-SW. It follows from Section 2.1 that the amount of posttrenching during the first three stages is relatively small and does not last for more than twenty-four
hours. For this reason, as regards modelling in relation to these stages, the average speeds given in Table
2.3. were used. In the case of calculations during the fourth stage, in light of the large volume of work and
its duration (up to 6 days), variable current speeds obtained during the simulation (Appendix 3) were used
every so often.

Page 578

Table 2.3.
Direction and a value for the speed of the currents (cm/s) which are accepted in calculations
concerned with the diffusion of suspended matter when carrying out work concerned with
guaranteeing stability of the pipelines
Point number
Control point
Control point
Direction of the speed
Speed (cm/s)
Point 3
Point 4
Point 5
Point 6
Point 7
Point 8
Point 9
14300
26310
47200
71000
95000
113000
128000
26310
47200
71000
95000
113000
128000
138000
37,5<52,5
22,5<37,5
22,5<37,5
22,5<37,5
262,5<277,5
217,5<232,5
217,5<232,5
9
8
10
7
10
8
9
2.4.
DEFINED PARAMETERS
An evaluation of the scales of impact on the marine environment when carrying out dredging work must
provide a set of parameters on which basis further evaluations of the resulting damage to the bioresources
may be carried out. This evaluation includes a set of values determined directly in accordance with the
design data (see Table 3.1.) and values determined on the basis of modelling the diffusion of the
suspended matter and the silting up of the bottom during the post-trenching process (see Table 3.2.).
Table 3.1.
Parameters for evaluating the impact of offshore construction work on the marine environme nt
which are obtained on the basis of design data
Defined parameters
Method of determination and presentation
Total mass of all the post

Design data
trenches cleared away during the
stage (t)
Total mass passing into the
Determined in accordance with the regulatory document entitled
suspended state during the
"Methodology for calculating the charge for contamination of sea
interval (t)
areas and surface bodies of water which are the Federal property of the
Russian Federation during execution of the work associated with
displacement and removal of ground soils, the extraction of nonmetallic materials from underwater quarries and the deposition of soils
in underwater dumps. Ratified by the Chairman of the State
Committee of the Russian Federation on Environmental Protection. 29
April 1999".
Area of backfilled land according
Design data
to design data (m2)

Page 579

Table 3.2.
Model parameters for evaluating the impact of offshore construction work on the marine
environme nt and regional fauna and flora
Defined parameters
Method of determination and presentation

Values for assessing the levels of impact
Momentary position of the location of

Based on modelling. Calculated value, colour chart, isoline
the plume of contaminated water at
map.
different points in time and the
maximum distance from the source to
the boundaries of the areas which have
concentrations in excess of the target
value
Area of maximum allowable
concentration (MAC) during the work
map.
period and the maximum diffusion
distances of the concentrations from the
source or boundary of the area for the
entire period of the work
Area of thickness of the deposited
sediments and the maximum distances
map.
from the source or boundary of the area
to the boundaries of the areas where the
sediment thickness exceeds the design
value
Values for calculating the damage to fish stocks
Maximum values during the work period
for the momentary extent (of the plume
areas) with pollution levels above the
stipulated concentration (m3)
Average values during the work period
for the momentary extent of pollution
levels above the stipulated concentration
(m3)
Period of plume occurrence with
concentrations in excess of target levels
(hours)
Volumes of freshly contaminated water
flowing past the area of plumes of
suspended matter with a stipulated
concentration during the period of the
work (m3)
Average flow time through volumes of
suspended matter plumes with
concentrations in excess of target levels
(minutes)
Areas of sedimentation with thicknesses
in excess of the target value beyond the
boundaries of the dredging area (m2)
Based on modelling. Calculated value.

Page 580

3.
CALCULATION RESULTS
3.1
OPTIONS 1-9
Table 3.1. provides environmental impact design parameters.

Page 581

Table 3.1.
Influencing parameters defined according to design data for all options.
Option
number
Length
Width
Number of
Average
Mass of a
Mass passing Duration of a Duration of Yield of the Total mass of
Total mass
Area of
post
volume of a single post
into the
single post a single post source of the all the post passing into the backfilled
trenches
single post trench which suspended state
trench
trench
suspended
trenches
suspended state
land
trench (m3)
has been
for a single post
(seconds)
(hours)
matter (kg/s) cleared away
during the
according to
cleared away
trench (kg)
during the
interval (t)
design data
(kg)
stage (t)
(m2)
8
667
1021199
20424
28 605
8
0,714
8 169,6
163,4
480
5,0
12,0
5,0
12,0
22
1352
2069116
41382
57 958
16
0,714
45 520,6
910,4
1320
5,0
12,0
16
1603
2452590
49052
68 700
19
0,714
39 241,4
784,8
960
10,0
3,0
33
439
671855
13437
18 819
0,714
22 171,2
443,4
990
9,6
3,0
36
361
551990
11040
15 462
0,714
19 871,6
397,4
1036
11,5
3,0
61
741
1134051
22681
31 766
0,714
69 177,1
1 383,5
2105
13,0
3,0
110
167918
3358
4 704
0,714
671,7
13,4
156
8,3
3,0
15
69
106182
2124
2 974
0,714
1 592,7
31,9
374
6,3
3,0
27
392
599703
11994
16 798
0,714
16 192,0
323,8
511

Page 582

Option
number
Length
Width
10
516,9
2,9
11
323,0
2,9
45
9494
14526534
290531
406 906
113
0,714
653 694,0
13 073,9
42341
12
504,2
2,9
14
12666
19378980
387580
542 829
151
0,714
271 305,7
5 426,1
20561
2 129 407
42588
131870
Total
Number of
Average
Mass of a
Mass passing Duration of a Duration of Yield of the Total mass of
Total mass
Area of
post
volume of a single post
into the
single post a single post source of the all the post passing into the backfilled
trenches
single post trench which suspended state
trench
trench
suspended
trenches
suspended state
land
trench (m3)
has been
for a single post
(seconds)
(hours)
matter (kg/s) cleared away
during the
according to
cleared away
trench (kg)
during the
interval (t)
design data
(kg)
stage (t)
(m2)
47
15651
23946318
478926
670 765
186
0,714
981 799,1
19 636,0
61038
328

Page 583

Tables 3.1 - 3.9 provide calculations of the volumes of contaminated water for options 1 - 9 (see Table
2.1). In these options, the amounts of post-trenching are relatively small and the working time for each
option does not exceed twenty-four hours. Table 3.10. provides areas of the sea floor (m2) which are
covered in a layer of sediment of varying thickness when carrying out post-trenching for the options
under consideration. Table 3.11. gives areas of the sea floor (m2) which are subject to influence by
suspended matter of varying concentrations (calculated using average plume volumes).
Table 3.1.
Volumes (m3) and the period of occurrence (minutes, hours) of volumes of water which are
contaminated with varying concentration levels of suspended matter when carrying out work
concerned with guaranteeing stability of the pipeline. Calculation option 1
Defined parameters
Volumes of water flowing through areas of
concentrations in excess of target levels,
m3 (flow volumes) (FV)
Average flow time of the water through
areas of suspended matter plumes with
minutes (Taverage)
Maximum values for the momentary
extent of the plume areas, m3 (maximum
momentary volume) (MMV)
Average values for the momentary extent
of the plume areas, m3 (average
momentary volume) (AMV)
hours (Toccurrence)
Aqueous suspended matter concentration, mg/l*

10
487 711
20
326 108
50
173 815
100
0
18
0.0
19 557
6 503
1 243
10 634
3 302
457
8.2
8.0
7.9
0.0
Table 3.2.
Defined parameters
suspended matter plumes with concentrations in
excess of target levels, m3 (flow volumes)
Average flow time of the water through areas of
suspended matter plumes with concentrations in
excess of target levels, minutes (Taverage)
Maximum values for the momentary extent of the
plume areas, m3 (maximum momentary volume)
Average values for the momentary extent of the
plume areas, m3 (average momentary volume)
10
982 436
20
661 704
50
370 428
100
0
21
11
0.0
19 605
6 503
1 387
13 322
4 179
636

Page 584

Defined parameters

10
16.4

concentrations in excess of target levels, hours
(T)
20
16.2
50
16.1
100
Table 3.3.
Defined parameters
m3 (flow volumes)
minutes (Taverage)
momentary volume)
momentary volume)
hours (Toccurrence)

10
20
50
100
1 124 798
744 750
416 771
22
11
0.0
19 701
6 360
1 435
13 921
4 204
631
19.4
19.2
19.1
0.0
Table 3.4.
Defined parameters
m3 (flow volumes)
minutes (Taverage)
Maximum values for the momentary extent
of the plume areas, m3 (maximum
momentary volume)
momentary volume)

10
20
50
100
314 569
204 596
99 675
14
19 701
6 360
1 435
8 080
2 404
309

Page 585


hours (Toccurrence)
5.5
5.3
5.2
0.0

Page 586

Table 3.5.
Defined parameters
m3 (flow volumes)
minutes (Taverage)
momentary volume)
momentary volume)
hours (Toccurrence)

10
20
50
100
262 109
169 623
93 263
13
19 605
6 312
1 387
7 327
2 219
330
4.6
4.4
4.3
0.0
Table 3.6
Defined parameters
m3 (flow volumes)
minutes (Taverage)
momentary volume)
momentary volume)
hours (Toccurrence)

10
20
50
100
541 985
362 939
193 607
19
19 605
6 503
1 339
11 067
3 436
476
9.1
8.9
8.8
0.0

Page 587

Table 3.7.
Defined parameters
Volumes of water flowing through areas

of suspended matter plumes with
m3 (flow volumes)
minutes (Taverage)
momentary volume)
momentary volume)
hours (Toccurrence)

10
20
50
100
87 240
53 044
29 145
0.0
19 701
6 360
1 435
2 992
941
166
1.6
1.4
1.3
0.0
Table 3.8.
Defined parameters
Volumes of water flowing through areas

of suspended matter plumes with
m3 (flow volumes)
minutes (Taverage)
momentary volume)
momentary volume)
hours (Toccurrence)

10
20
50
100
57 901
33 614
17 293
0.0
19 175
6 216
1 387
2 017
628
92
1.1
0.9
0.8
0.0

Page 588

Table 3.9.
Defined parameters

m3 (flow volumes)
minutes (Taverage)
momentary volume)
Average values for the momentary extent of
the plume areas, m3 (average momentary
volume)
hours (Toccurrence)

10
20
50
294 669
195 130
99 273
13
19 605
6 551
1 387
7 941
2 445
297
5.0
4.8
4.7
100

Page 589

Table 3.10.
Areas of the sea floor (m2) covered in a layer of sediment of varying thickness when carrying out
work concerned with guaranteeing stability of the pipeline
Operation
Calculation option 1
Thickness of the layer of sediment, mm

1
2008.3
2939.2
3257.9
1613
1472.8
2135.8
631.2
388.9
1517.4
5
758.7
1224.1
1351.6
535.6
439.9
828.8
0
0
484.5
10
408
765.1
860.7
210.4
127.5
452.7
0
0
165.8
50
0
19.1
89.3
0
0
0
0
0
0
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0

Page 590

Table 3.11.
Areas of the sea floor (m2) which are subject to influence by suspende d matter of varying
concentrations during dredging whe n carrying out work concerned with guaranteeing stability of
the pipeline (calculated on the basis of average plume volumes)
Operation
10
1 418
1 776
1 856
1 077
977
1 476
399
269
1 059
20
440
557
561
321
296
458
125
84
326
50
61
85
84
41
44
64
22
12
40
100
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Table 3.12. provides specific distances for the diffusion of the suspended matter and the silting up of the
bottom.
Table 3.12.
Specific distances (m) for the diffusion of the suspended matter and the silting up of the bottom
Option
numbe r
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
1 mg/l
10 mg/l
20 mg/l
50 mg/l
1 mm
5 mm
10 mm
50 mm
409
462
481
325
298
422
177
194
353
77
88
92
60
54
79
30
34
54
34
45
45
29
27
36
15
8
27
12
16
17
11
10
13
6
3
10
72,2
89,1
95,3
63,2
59,6
74,4
38,2
31,1
60,9
42,9
54,1
56,4
34,7
32,8
43,9
0
0
34,9
31,6
42,9
45,4
24
20,5
33,9
0
0
23,6
0
14,7
18,5
0
0
0
0
0
0
Figs. 3.1 - 3.9 provide contaminated water plumes for options 1 - 9 (see Table 2.1). Inasmuch as the
amounts of post-trenching in these options are relatively small and the working time for each option does
not exceed 12 hours, the calculations are performed at constant flow speeds described in Appendix 3.

Page 591

Fig. 4.1.
Contaminated water plumes (a, g/m3) and sedime nt thickness (b, mm) (option 1)

Page 592

Fig. 4.2.

Page 593

Fig. 4.3.

Page 594

Fig. 4.4.

Page 595

Fig. 4.5.

Page 596

Fig. 4.6.

Page 597

Fig. 4.7.

Page 598

Fig. 4.8.

Page 599

Fig. 4.9.

Page 600

3.2
Gravel-filled post trench for reducing buckling and vertical twisting after
laying the pipeline (options 10 - 12)
In so far as the duration of the work in the options under consideration is significant, amounting to 8 days,
the calculations were performed under variable velocity profiles.
Any (vapour) plume forming during the work which is contaminated with suspended matter shall drift in
accordance with the direction and speed of the currents. The principal results are given in Tables 3.13 4.17. The area of maximum concentration throughout the entire work period (maximum allowable
concentrations) are given in fig. 3.10. This diagram allows an assessment to be made of the scale of
diffusion of the suspended matter.
In option 10 (fig. 10), the distance from the point of the source of the suspended matter up to the
location of isolines with a suspended matter concentration of 100 mg/l does not exceed 86 m, while
distances of 391 m, 1,245 m and 2,305 m are not exceeded with concentrations of 50 mg/l, 20 mg/l and
10 mg/l respectively.
In option 11 (fig. 10b), the distance from the point of the source of the suspended matter up to the
distances of 67 m, 228 m and 727 m are not exceeded with concentrations of 50 mg/l, 20 mg/l and 10
mg/l respectively.
In option 12 (fig. 10c), the distance from the point of the source of the suspended matter up to the
distances of 172 m, 869 m and 1,547 m are not exceeded with concentrations of 50 mg/l, 20 mg/l and 10
mg/l respectively.
The area of thickness of the sediments deposited from the suspended matter is given in fig. 3.11.
In option 10 (fig. 11 ), the maximum distance from the centre of the support to the boundary of the
area where the sediment is more than 100 mm thick does not exceed 4.8 m, while distances of 5.1 m, 27
m, 35 m, 47 m and 93 m are not exceeded where the sediment is more than 50 mm, 20 mm, 10 mm, 5 mm
or 1 mm thick respectively.
In option 11 (fig. 11 b), the maximum distance from the centre of the support to the boundary of the
m, 25 m, 36 m and 85 m are not exceeded where the sediment is more than 50 mm, 20 mm, 10 mm, 5 mm
or 1 mm thick respectively.
In option 12 (fig. 11 c), the maximum distance from the centre of the support to the boundary of the
m, 27 m, 35 m and 117 m are not exceeded where the sediment is more than 50 mm, 20 mm, 10 mm, 5
mm or 1 mm thick respectively.

Page 601

Fig. 3.10.
Area of maximum allowable concentration (mg/l) when carrying out work

concerned with reducing buckling and vertical twisting of the pipeline

Page 602

Fig. 3.11.
Area of thickness of the deposited sediments (mm) when carrying out work
concerned with reducing buckling and vertical twisting of the pipeline

Page 603

Table 3.13.
Volumes (m3) and the period of occurrence (minutes, days) of volumes of water which are
concerned with reducing buckling and vertical twisting of the pipeline for option 10
Defined parameters
Volumes of water flowing
through areas of suspended
matter plumes with
concentrations in excess of
target levels, m3 (flow
volumes)
Average flow time of the water
matter plumes with
target levels, minutes (Taverage)
Maximum values for the
momentary extent of the plume
areas, m3 (maximum
momentary volume)
Average values for the
areas, m3 (average momentary
volume)
Period of plume occurrence
with concentrations in excess of
target levels, days (Toccurrence)

10
20
50
100
16 889 812
6 582 805
913 880
77 944
80
34
0,8
367 513
127 059
33 633
9 384
105 324
28 025
3 287
294
7,8
7,8
7,8
7,8

Page 604

Table 3.14.
Defined parameters
matter plumes with
volumes)
matter plumes with
target levels, minutes (Taverage)
areas, m3 (maximum
momentary volume)
volume)

10
20
50
100
6 954 617
2 806 380
570 584
10 086
67
26
0,4
225 000
66 583
13 167
4 500
86 988
22 465
2 456
49
4,7
4,7
4,7
4,7

Page 605

Table 3.15.
Defined parameters
matter plumes with
volumes)
matter plumes with
target levels, minutes (average)
areas, m3 (maximum
momentary volume)
volume)

10
20
50
100
9 476 200
4 429 536
486 277
25 471
91
34
0,4
371 351
126 697
25 223
5 577
104 087
25 540
1 977
100
6,3
6,3
6,3
6,3

Page 606

Table 3.16.
Areas of the sea floor (m2) covered in a layer of sediment of varying thickness when the suspended
matter separates out and when carrying out work concerned with reducing buckling and vertical
twisting of the pipeline
Technological operation
Option 10
Option 11
Option 12

1
42 390
30 082
42 552
5
21 721
14 179
18 999
10
14 131
8 522
11 840
20
6 828
3 520
5 090
50
4 661
2 870
4 215
100
4 026
2 483
3 608
Table 3.17.
Areas of the sea floor (m2) which are subject to influence by suspende d matter of varying
concentrations when carrying out work concerned with reducing buckling of the pipeline
(calculated using average plume volumes, average mome ntary volume)
Option 10
Option 11
Option 12

> 10
14 043
11 598
13 878
> 20
3 737
2 995
3 405
> 50
438
328
264
> 100
39
6
13
Table 3.18.
Maximum distances (m) for the diffusion of the suspended matter and the silting up of the bottom
Option number
Option 10
Option 11
Option 12
4.
Concentration values
10 mg/l 20 mg/l
50
100
mg/l
mg/l
2 305
1 245
391
86
727
228
67
22
1 547
869
172
39
Sediment thickness values

1 mm 5 mm 10 mm 10 mm 50 mm
93
85
117
47
36
35
35
25
27
27
13
15
5,1
4,9
4,5
100
mm
4,8
4,2
3,8
CONCLUSIONS
328 post trenches with a total volume of 1 391 769 m3 or 2 129 407 tonnes will be realised during work
involved with post-trenching soils for guaranteeing stability of the gas pipeline system. 42 588 tonnes of
soil passes into the suspended state during the work process. Total backfilled area according to the design
data with a thickness of 1 m and more directly on post-trenching areas is 131 870 m2. In addition, the sea
floor will be backfilled with soil which has been suspended and settled to the bottom around the work
area (Table 3.19). The total amount of "fresh" water flowing through the contaminated area up to a
concentration of 10 mg/l is 37 474 047 m3. (see Table 3.20).

Page 607

Maximum dispersion distances of the suspended matter when carrying out post-trenching work will be
observed when performing large-scale post-trenching work during the fourth stage. At particular
moments, concentrations of the suspended matter which has been added of 10 mg/l can be observed at
distances of up to 2 km from the point of the source. The prevailing direction of the diffusion of the
suspended matter is along the route of the pipelines inasmuch as it coincides with the prevailing direction
of the currents in the region. Therefore, transverse to the route, the extent of diffusion of the isoline with a
concentration of 10 mg/l does not exceed 300 - 500 m. The specific extent of the diffusion of the
suspended matter in the area of Gogland island is shown in fig. 3.12. It follows from this that the waters
in the northern part of this island will be exposed to the impact of concentrations right up to 5 - 10 mg/l.
Table 3.19.
Sea floor areas (m2) covered in a layer of sediment of varying thickness when the suspended matter
separates out, when performing all types of work
All operations

1
130 988
5
60 522
10
37 483
50
11 854
100
10 117
Table 3.20.
Volumes of water flowing through areas of suspended matter plumes with concentrations in excess
of target levels, m3
Aqueous suspended matter concentration, mg/l
10
37 474 047
20
16 570 229
50
3 464 011
100
113 501

Page 608

Fig. 3.12.
Area of specific concentrations of the suspended matter in the area of Gogland

island ( - far view, b - near view)

Page 609

APPENDIX 1.
REFERENCE DATA ON BACKFILLING FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF WORK
Table 1.
Work number
KP
Length
Width
Height
Bearing volume
(m3)
Additional
volume (m3)
Total volume
(m3)
Type of earth
Eastern
coordinate
Northern
coordinate
UTM [Universal
Transverse
Mercator] zone
Gravel support fortification for ensuring static stability until the eastern pipelines are laid
E001
E002
E003
E004
E005
15066
31705
39662
62632
62691
5
5
5
5
5
12
12
12
12
12
1.5
2.4
1.7
2.0
1.8
179.9
549.2
221.5
308.8
246.4
0
0
0
476
0
179.9
549.2
221.5
784
246
U3 C1
U1_S3
U3_C1
U2_C2
U2_C2
556600
547333
542666
522892
522833
6696730
6683081
6677297
6667511
6667514
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
E006
E007
E008
E009
E010
E011
E012
E013
E014
E023
E015
E016
E017
E018
E019
E020
E021
E022
TOTAL
85205
85352
89366
89411
89481
89584
89771
89849
90077
90225
90277
90390
90917
110088
110248
119756
119786
120341
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
6
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
1.6
2.5
3.0
3.5
4.7
2.5
4.0
3.5
3.3
3.0
2.5
1.0
3.9
4.2
4.0
4.8
3.0
2.0
127.1
600.2
969.9
2182
1743.7
609.8
1573.8
1203.8
995.1
854.9
596.5
116.3
1437.8
1107.3
1006.6
2052.2
930.9
363.9
19977.6
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
4918
4628
0
0
652
10673
127
600
970
2182
1744
610
1574
1204
995
855
597
116
1438
6025
5635
2052
931
1016
30650.6
U2_C2
U1_S3
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U2_C2
U2_C2
U1_R
U1_R
U2_C2
500698
500555
496590
496549
496485
496393
496230
496164
495976
495854
495811
495719
495286
477661
477502
469155
469125
468587
6665598
6665632
6665624
6665606
6665576
6665531
6665439
6665398
6665269
6665184
6665154
6665090
6664789
6658173
6658153
6654179
6654172
6654040
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35

Page 610

Table 2.
1.5
2.0
2.7
2.7
3.5
6.6
1.0
3.8
267
396
671
714
715
4411
95
925
W007
W008
W009
W010
W011
W012
W013
W014
W015
W016
W017
W018
W019
W020
W021
TOTAL
89297
90518
90645
93972
102045
102100
104620
104683
109780
109892
112609
113536
119327
119453
120327
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
6
6
5
5
5
5
5
5
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
6.4
3.6
4.7
3.4
1.5
2.4
1.8
2.4
2.8
2.4
1.4
1.8
4.7
4.0
2.2
4223
1103
1399
1229
241
564
295
477
616
538
186
237
2141
1409
349
23200
1626
1117
1209
950
1437
622
6961
UTM [Universal
Transverse
Mercator] zone
Bearing volume
(m3)
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
12
Northern
coordinate
Height
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
Eastern
coordinate
Width
31504
31601
38412
38545
39347
80792
80909
89110
Type of earth
Length
W001
W022
W023
W002
W003
W004
W005
W006
Total volume
(m3)
KP
Additional
volume (m3)
Work number
Gravel support fortification for ensuring static stability until the western pipelines are laid
267
396
671
714
2341
4411
95
2041
U1_S3
U1_S3
U1_S3
U1_S3
U3_C1
U1_R
U2_C2
U2_C2
547269
547252
543531
543411
542687
504601
504483
496548
6683143
6683047
6677866
6677809
6677463
6666534
6666528
6665669
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
4223
1103
2608
1229
241
564
222
1427
2053
538
186
237
2141
1409
971
30088
U1_R
U1_R
U2_C2
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U2_C2
U2_C2
U2_C2
U1_R
U1_S3
U2_C2
U1_R
U1_R
U2_C2
496375
495326
495220
492221
484726
484679
482521
482467
477610
477498
474827
473973
469227
469104
468250
6665596
6664978
6664906
6663517
6660856
6660827
6659526
6659494
6658239
6658225
6657782
6657419
6654252
6654222
6654038
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35

Page 611

Table 3.
Work number
KP
Length
Width
Clearance
Height
Bearing volume
(m3)
Additional
volume (m3)
Total volume
(m3)
Type of earth
Eastern
coordinate
Northern
coordinate
UTM [Universal
Transverse
Mercator] zone
Gravel-filled post trench for static stability after the eastern pipelines have been laid
E004
E018
E019
E022
E347
E348
E349
E350
62629
110088
110248
120338
14678
14988
15098
15533
8
15
15
9
29
24
26
5
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2.0
4.2
4.0
2.0
0.4
1.2
0.7
1.9
2.4
4.6
4.4
2.4
0.8
1.6
1.1
2.3
39.4
78.5
70.7
16.2
102
269
164
164
0
0
0
0
506
680
658
0
39.4
78.5
70.7
16.2
608
949
822
164
U2 C2
U2 C2
U2_C2
U2 C2
U3 C1
U3 C1
U3 C1
U1 R
522895
477661
477502
468589
556769
556638
556584
556338
6667511
6658173
6658153
6654041
6697078
6696797
6696701
6696343
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
E351
E352
E353
E301
E302
E303
E354
E355
E356
E357
E304
E358
E359
E360
E305
E361
E306
E362
E307
E363
E308
E364
E365
E309
E366
15783
15893
16375
16475
16735
16957
18520
20527
20717
21117
21205
21230
21557
21677
21810
31547
31790
32202
32346
32524
32556
32831
32931
33021
33051
5
5
5
5
5
15
29
27
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
32
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.5
0.4
0.6
1.2
1.0
1.3
0.7
0.5
0.3
0.6
1.1
0.7
0.3
1.5
3.2
0.6
0.8
0.5
1.2
0.9
2.0
0.2
0.5
1.8
0.8
0.9
0.8
1.0
1.6
1.4
1.7
1.1
0.9
0.7
1.0
1.5
1.1
0.7
1.9
3.6
1.0
1.2
0.9
1.6
1.3
2.4
0.6
0.9
2.2
1.2
28
26
37
117
91
204
188
126
22
37
110
42
20
116
433
34
68
150
121
54
285
15
27
231
49
0
0
0
0
0
675
971
546
0
0
0
0
0
0
2500
0
0
924
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
28
26
37
117
91
880
1159
672
22
37
110
42
20
116
2933
34
68
1074
121
54
285
15
27
231
49
U1_R
U1 R
U1 R
U1_R
U1 R
U2 C2
U3 C1
U3 C1
U1_R
U1 R
U1 R
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U2_C2
U1_S3
U1_S3
U2_C2
U1_S3
U1_S3
U1_S3
U1_S3
U1_S3
U1_S3
U1_S3
556174
556097
555748
555676
555487
555326
554517
553512
553373
553080
553016
552997
552757
552669
552572
547377
547312
547228
547206
547179
547174
547132
547117
547103
547099
6696154
6696076
6695743
6695674
6695495
6695342
6694023
6692312
6692183
6691911
6691851
6691834
6691611
6691530
6691439
6683232
6682998
6682595
6682452
6682277
6682245
6681973
6681874
6681785
6681755
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35

Page 612
Work number
KP
Length
Width
Clearance
Height
Bearing volume
(m3)
Additional
volume (m3)
Total volume
(m3)
Type of earth
Eastern
coordinate
Northern
coordinate
UTM [Universal
Transverse
Mercator] zone

E367
E368
E369
E370
E371
E372
E310
E311
E312
E319
E320
33166
33309
34074
38520
39075
39530
42976
43017
43055
62364
81055
5
5
5
5
5
32
11
6
5
19
23
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
5
3
3
3
0.4
0.4
0.3
1.3
0.2
0.3
2.0
2.0
3.2
1.4
1.3
0.8
0.8
0.7
1.7
0.6
0.7
2.4
2.4
3.6
1.8
1.7
24
23
20
93
16
100
303
209
463
265
379
0
0
0
0
0
610
1195
889
1490
1052
1602
24
23
20
93
16
710
1498
1098
1953
1317
1981
U1_S3
U1_S3
U1_R
U1_S3
U1_S3
U2_C2
U2-C2
U2-C2
U2-C2
U2-C2
U3-C1
547081
547059
546836
543682
543188
542784
540324
540307
540290
523159
504696
6681642
6681501
6680771
6677821
6677567
6677358
6675100
6675062
6675028
6667499
6666267
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
E321
E322
E323
E324
E325
E326
E328
E329
E330
E331
E332
E333
E334
E335
E336
E337
E338
E339
E340
E341
81092
81499
81670
86851
86951
88769
90540
90800
91165
91282
91452
92125
94169
94297
100763
102271
106630
106732
113387
114409
12
15
15
16
23
18
5
5
15
5
5
15
15
15
13
28
15
20
5
14
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
2.9
3.4
1.5
0.7
0.9
1.4
2.0
2.0
1.5
1.0
1.2
1.8
2.2
1.6
1.6
0.6
0.8
0.8
1.1
1.1
3.3
3.8
1.9
1.1
1.3
1.8
2.4
2.4
1.9
1.4
1.6
2.2
2.6
2.0
2.0
1.0
1.2
1.2
1.5
1.5
560
696
211
119
177
273
273
299
248
97
118
293
393
237
249
152
109
153
99
132
1223
4606
572
206
816
1033
0
0
551
0
0
1045
942
1371
612
350
258
347
0
362
1783
5302
783
325
994
1306
273
299
799
97
118
1338
1335
1608
861
502
367
501
99
495
U3_C1
U2_C2
U2-C2
U2-C2
U3-C1
U3-C1
U1_R
U1_R
U2-C2
U1_R
U1_R
U2-C2
U2-C2
U2-C2
U2_C2
U2-C2
U2-C2
U2-C2
U1_S3
U2-C2
504662
504298
504146
499075
498975
497161
495596
495382
495083
494986
494847
494295
492535
492411
486134
484841
481079
480982
474610
473824
6666251
6666069
6665993
6665827
6665828
6665797
6665005
6664856
6664648
6664581
6664483
6664099
6663083
6663050
6661640
6660863
6658670
6658637
6657134
6656481
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35

Page 613
Northern
coordinate
UTM [Universal
Transverse
Mercator] zone
5.1
1.8
3.0
1.2
1.6
Eastern
coordinate
4.7
1.4
2.6
0.8
1.2
Type of earth
3
3
3
3
3
Total volume
(m3)
Height
5
5
10
26
11
Additional
volume (m3)
Clearance
119704
119964
120446
120556
120666
Bearing volume
(m3)
Width
E342
E343
E344
E345
E346
TOTAL
KP
Length
Work number

1524
148
403
177
135
12708
0
0
999
402
202
30196
1524
148
1403
580
337
42903
U1_R
U1_R
U2-C2
U2-C2
U2-C2
469205
468953
468484
468375
468267
6654192
6654128
6654020
6654001
6653985
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35

Page 614

Table 3.
Work number
KP
Length
Width
Clearance
Height
Bearing volume
(m3)
Additional
volume (m3)
Total volume
(m3)
Type of earth
Eastern
coordinate
Northern
coordinate
UTM [Universal
Transverse
Mercator] zone
Gravel-filled post trench for static stability after the western pipelines have been laid
W0003
W0006
W0009
W0014
W0015
W342
W343
W301
39347.954
89110.498
90645.619
104683.238
109780.204
9124.553
9434.553
14992.241
10
9
7
7
9
30
31
14
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3.5
3.8
2.4
2.8
2.2
0.4
0.3
1.8
3.9
4.2
2.8
3.2
2.6
0.8
0.7
2.2
53.4
67.5
12.9
13.6
18.9
123
93
246
675
517
555
53
68
13
14
19
798
610
801
U3_C1
U2_C2
U2_C2
U2_C2
U2_C2
U3_C1
U3_C1
U3_C1
542687.182
496547.702
495220.146
482467.311
477609.583
557152.205
556986.234
556107.372
6677462.903
6665668.813
6664905.935
6659493.575
6658238.652
6702499.569
6702237.905
6696789.680
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
W344
W341
W354
W302
W355
W303
W304
W305
W306
W345
W307
W346
W347
W308
W309
W356
W348
W310
W349
W350
15177.241
15627.241
15722.241
20611.242
20751.242
20881.242
21048.742
21088.742
21161.242
21271.242
21466.242
31181.895
31439.382
31646.882
32039.382
32204.382
32349.382
32411.882
32496.882
32809.382
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
9
5
11
5
5
5
19
5
5
5
5
5
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.7
0.8
0.6
1.4
0.5
2.8
1.4
1.0
2.0
0.3
2.3
0.2
0.9
1.0
1.5
1.3
0.5
1.1
0.7
0.6
1.1
1.2
1.0
1.8
0.9
3.2
1.8
1.4
2.4
0.7
2.7
0.6
1.3
1.4
1.9
1.7
0.9
1.5
1.1
1.0
39
66
33
148
30
597
143
86
252
18
354
15
57
95
309
90
27
100
44
33
39
66
33
148
30
597
143
86
576 827
18
1108 1462
15
57
95
988 1297
90
27
100
44
33
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U2_C2
U1_R
U3_C1
U1_S3
U1_S3
U1_S3
U2_C2
U1_S3
U1_S3
U1_S3
U1_S3
U1_S3
556030.173
555800.428
555744.676
553058.788
552964.069
552876.116
552762.791
552735.729
552686.678
552612.256
552480.326
547323.945
547280.185
547244.576
547177.220
547148.904
547124.021
547113.296
547098.709
547045.081
6696621.590
6696235.147
6696158.232
6692154.818
6692051.724
6691955.994
6691832.650
6691803.195
6691749.807
6691668.805
6691525.210
6683458.482
6683207.265
6683002.843
6682616.165
6682453.613
6682310.764
6682249.191
6682165.452
6681857.588
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35

Page 615
KP
Length
Width
Clearance
Height
Bearing volume
(m3)
Additional
volume (m3)
Type of earth
Eastern
coordinate
Northern
coordinate
UTM [Universal
Transverse
Mercator] zone
W351
W352
W339
W311
W312
W340
W353
W313
W314
W315
W316
32944.382
33638.920
38202.954
39252.954
42879.408
42929.408
43374.408
62353.085
80749.610
85131.550
85554.050
5
31
5
16
5
5
27
18
28
22
15
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.4
0.1
0.7
1.4
2.7
2.1
0.8
0.9
2.3
0.7
0.7
0.8
0.5
1.1
1.8
3.1
2.5
1.2
1.3
2.7
1.1
1.1
25
70
59
234
484
326
199
157
978
137
101
25
393 463
59
1137 1370
484
326
858 1057
448 605
3930 4908
328 465
238 340
U1_S3
U2_C2
U1_S3
U2_C2
U1_S3
U1_S3
U3_C1
U2_C2
U3_C1
U2_C2
U2_C2
547021.914
546858.044
543720.095
542772.882
539924.636
539897.946
539660.400
522843.145
504642.996
500313.278
499900.376
6681724.591
6681050.855
6677956.983
6677503.897
6675361.386
6675319.106
6674942.812
6667568.909
6666536.451
6666942.748
6666854.861
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
W317
W318
W319
W320
W321
W322
W323
W324
W325
W326
W327
W328
W329
W330
W331
W332
W333
W334
W335
W336
86244.745
88519.745
89150.498
89347.998
89935.498
90320.619
90415.619
91115.619
91151.496
91288.996
93315.735
93884.954
94014.954
98384.704
98477.204
106314.175
112756.590
113716.590
113816.590
119563.903
5
18
5
5
5
5
5
5
18
5
5
5
5
21
22
23
5
37
5
5
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
1.9
0.8
3.4
3.6
1.8
1.9
1.2
1.1
1.7
1.6
0.7
3.8
1.8
0.6
1.7
0.8
2.3
0.6
0.6
2.1
2.3
1.2
3.8
4.0
2.2
2.3
1.6
1.5
2.1
2.0
1.1
4.2
2.2
1.0
2.1
1.2
2.7
1.0
1.0
2.5
272
132
865
1000
236
254
110
115
330
200
56
1094
273
109
396
150
247
150
51
306
272
495
865
1000
236
254
110
115
1290
200
56
1094
273
389
1185
494
1144
536
51
306
U1_S3
U2_C2
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U2_C2
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U2_C2
U2_C2
U2_C2
U2_C2
U2_C2
U1_S3
U1_R
499247.592
497103.107
496510.635
496329.447
495810.718
495488.766
495410.246
494831.680
494802.027
494686.584
492799.161
492298.414
492184.058
488078.732
487986.649
481039.007
474691.351
473807.794
473715.757
468997.184
6666629.446
6665869.969
6665653.777
6665575.216
6665300.116
6665088.878
6665035.403
6664641.370
6664621.176
6664546.504
6663829.083
6663558.413
6663496.584
6662157.876
6662149.098
6658713.567
6657724.169
6657348.767
6657309.662
6654194.711
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
363
960
280
789
344
897
386
Total volume
(m3)
Work number


Page 616
[Universal
Transverse
Northern
coordinate
Eastern
coordinate
3.2
1.5
Type of earth
Height
2.8
1.1
Total volume
(m3)
Clearance
3
3
Additional
volume (m3)
Width
W337 119628.903 5
W338 120228.299 16
TOTAL
KP
Bearing volume
(m3)
Length
Work number

247 834 1081 U2_C2 468934.143 6654178.874 Z35

178 478 656 U2_C2 468348.684 6654051.893 Z35
12701 7082 29783
Table 5.
Work number
KP
Length
Width
Clearance
Height
Bearing
volume (m3)
Additional
volume (m3)
Total volume
(m3)
Type of earth
Eastern
coordinate
Northern
coordinate
[Universal
Transverse
Mercator]
Gravel-filled post trench for dynamic stability after the eastern pipelines have been laid
E615
E616
E617
E618
E619
E620
E621
E622
E623
E624
E625
E626
E627
E628
E601
E602
E603
E604
E605
E606
4760
4813
9068
9658
15443
18017
21452
31627
31882
32261
33236
38820
38985
39415
60827
62559
85297
85652
85956
89886
5
5
21
21
23
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
20
5
5
5
5
5
5
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.2
0.4
0.3
0.5
0.3
0.1
0.5
0.4
0.6
0.7
0.1
1.2
0.8
0.5
0.7
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.5
1.2
0.6
0.8
0.7
0.9
0.7
0.5
0.9
0.8
1.0
1.1
0.5
1.6
1.2
0.9
3.1
3.3
3.3
1.3
0.9
1.6
17
22
67
91
82
13
31
25
33
43
12
85
46
89
316
369
377
52
32
77
0
0
120
122
419
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
47
0
0
0
0
0
0
17
22
187
213
501
13
31
25
33
43
12
85
46
136
316
369
377
52
32
77
U1_S3
U1_S3
U3_C1
U3_C1
U3_C1
U3_C1
U1_R
U1_S3
U1_S3
U1_S3
U1_S3
U1_S3
U1_S3
U2_C2
U1_R
U1_R
U1_S3
U1_S3
U1_S3
U1_R
559641
559632
557250
556959
556393
554709
552834
547354
547290
547219
547071
543415
543268
542886
524695
522965
500608
500263
499966
496133
6706010
6705958
6702528
6702015
6696414
6694488
6691683
6683155
6682908
6682536
6681573
6677684
6677608
6677411
6667426
6667508
6665620
6665702
6665769
6665377
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35

Page 617
Clearance
Height
Bearing volume
(m3)
Additional
volume (m3)
Total volume
(m3)
5
5
5
5
22
5
23
5
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3.8
0.8
0.3
0.4
0.7
0.2
0.7
2.1
6.2
3.2
0.7
2.8
1.1
2.6
1.1
4.4
1679
357
20
255
133
223
137
749
0
0
0
0
333
0
431
0
1679 U1_R 495179 6664715

357 U1_R 485653 6661352
20
U1_R 482753 6659606
255 U1_S3 482252 6659304
466 U2_C2 477966 6658211
223 U1_R 477592 6658164
567 U3_C1 474965 6657424
749 U1_R 469101 6654166
UTM [Universal
Transverse
Mercator] zone
Width
91047
101324
104709
105294
109780
110158
112929
119811
Northern
coordinate
Length
E607
E608
E609
E610
E611
E612
E613
E614
Eastern
coordinate
KP
Type of earth
Work number

Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Table 6.
Work number
KP
Length
Width
Clearance
Height
Bearing volume
(m3)
Additional
volume (m3)
Total volume (m3)
Type of earth
Eastern
coordinate
Northern
coordinate
UTM [Universal
Transverse
Mercator] zone
Gravel-filled post trench for dynamic stability after the western pipelines have been laid
W614
W615
W616
W617
W618
W601
W602
W603
W604
W605
W606
W607
W608
15544
31171
31776
33133
33968
86077
89212
89830
90165
90563
90950
91726
93255
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
5
22
5
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
3
0.2
0.1
0.8
0.1
0.5
1.7
0.6
1.2
0.8
0.7
1.4
1.3
0.7
0.6
0.5
1.2
0.5
0.9
2.1
3.0
1.6
1.2
3.1
1.8
1.7
3.0
15
13
46
11
31
217
431
234
193
328
274
282
312
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
668
0
15
13
46
11
31
217
431
234
193
328
274
949
312
U1 R
U1_S3
U1_S3
U1_S3
U1_R
U1_S3
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U1_R
U2_C2
U1_R
555847
547326
547222
546989
546729
499405
496453
495901
495617
495288
494968
494299
492852
6696303
6683471
6682875
6681538
6680747
6666685
6665630
6665354
6665176
6664952
6664734
6664345
6663857
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35

Page 618
Northern
coordinate
[Universal
Transverse
1.2
0.8
1.0
3.0
5.5
Eastern
coordinate
0.8
0.4
0.6
0.6
3.1
Type of earth
3
3
3
3
3
Total volume
(m3)
Height
5
5
5
5
5
Additional
volume (m3)
Clearance
102135
104935
105580
114326
119426
Bearing volume
(m3)
Width
W609
W610
W611
W612
W613
TOTAL
KP
Length
Work number

153
89
147
431
1286
4375
0
0
0
0
0
668
153
89
147
431
1286
5043
U1 R
U1_S3
U1_S3
U1 R
U1 R
484649
482251
481699
473246
469131
6660809
6659363
6659030
6657110
6654228
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Z35
Table 7.
Volume
(m)
(m)
670766 1
sand
2.7
670606 3
sand
3.0
670474 2
clay
2.7
670258 8
clay
2.7
670235 2
clay
3.0
670207 2
clay
3.0
670024 3
clay
2.7
669716 7
clay
2.7
669664 4 clay/rock 3.0
669601 8
rock
3.0
669579 9 rock/clay 3.0
Height
(m)
55975 3
55962 9
55915 2
55721 7
55705 4
55689 9
55654 5
55623 8
55604 1
55563 2
55542 8
Incline
(m)
3093
4699
6114
9014
9301
9621
11498
14592
15152
15902
16201
Length
East Z35
(m)
670873 2
670655 7
670572 6
670334 1
670243 6
670217 9
6701238
669813 8
669705 2
669633 9
669594 2
Width at the top
As far as the control

point
(m)
55956 0
55970 6
55956 2
55791 7
55710 8
55695 4
55663 7
55636 8
55620 4
55587 0
55556 7
Type of earth
North Z35
(m)
2003
4200
5044
7986
9201
9501
10499
13611
14712
15502
16002
North Z35
East Z35
E Lat 1
E_up_1
E Lat 2
E Lat 3
E_up_2
E_up_3
E Lat 4
E Lat 5
E_up_4
E_up_5
E_up_6
From the control

point
Work number
Gravel-filled post trench for reducing buckling and vertical twisting after the eastern pipelines
have been laid
(m)
109 3
500
106 7
102 8
100
120
100 0
980
440
400
200
1:3
1:2
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:2
1:4
(m)
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
(m3)
2520 4
9046
3062 9
2950 8
2833
3371
2871 2
2814 3
1743 3
9223
6087

Page 619


Page 620
E Lat 10
E up 13
E up 14
E up 15
E Lat 11
E up 16
E up 17
E Lat 12
E up 18
E up 19
E up 20
28265
30461
31651
32001
32304
34086
36351
37019
38480
38585
38850
54831 6
54744 8
54724 4
54718 4
54713 2
54667 6
54534 2
54478 5
54347 0
54337 5
54313 6
668616 0
668417 0
668299 8
668265 3
668235 5
668064 3
667884 0
667847 3
667783 7
667779 2
667767 8
29132
30571
31851
32121
33096
34226
36476
37782
38540
38720
38950
54784 7
54742 9
54720 9
54716 3
54699 6
54661 2
54524 2
54409 9
54341 6
54325 3
54304 6
668543 2
clay
2.7 867 1:4 1.0 2493 6
668406 2
clay
3.0 110 1:4 1.0 2968
668280 1
sand
3.0 200 1:2 1.0 6948
668253 5
sand
3.0 120 1:2 1.0 2760
668157 4
sand
2.7 793 1:3 1.0 1833 4
668051 8 rock/clay 3.0 140 1:4 1.0 5013
667876 4
clay
3.0 125 1:4 1.0 3701
667813 8
clay
2.7 764 1:4 1.0 2200 7
667781 1
sand
3.0 60 1:2 1.0 1791
667773 4
sand
3.0 135 1:2 2.0 6834
667763 4
sand
3.0 100 1:2 1.0 2043
Volume
(m)
(m) (m)
(m) (m3)
669524 3 clay/rock 3.0 625 1:4 1.0 2568 7
669433 8
clay
2.7 920 1:4 1.0 2643 7
669377 6
clay
3.0 450 1:4 1.0 1467 9
669242 0
clay
2.7 903 1:4 1.0 2596 5
669205 2
rock
3.0 150 1:2 1.0 3301
669169 8
rock
3.0 170 1:2 1.0 4489
669131 5
rock
3.0 235 1:2 1.0 6132
669109 4 rock/clay 3.0 250 1:4 1.0 9672
669005 4
clay
2.7 880 1:4 1.0 2530 0
668844 6
clay
2.7 867 1:4 1.0 2493 6
Height
(m)
55492 7
55448 9
55430 7
55330 2
55296 4
55263 9
55228 8
55208 5
55116 5
54998 8
Incline
(m)
16951
17961
18552
20251
20751
21231
21751
22051
23440
25433
Length
East Z35
(m)
669571 1
669516 9
669420 2
669309 0
669216 2
669182 3
669148 8
669127 9
669071 9
668914 6
Width at the top
As far as the
control point
(m)
55533 9
55487 6
55445 0
55390 5
55306 6
55275 4
55244 6
55225 4
55173 9
55050 0
Type of earth
North Z35
(m)
16326
17041
18102
19349
20601
21061
21516
21801
22561
24565
North Z35
East Z35
E_up_7
E Lat 6
E_up_8
E Lat 7
E_up_9
E up 10
E up 11
E up 12
E Lat 8
E Lat 9
Work number
From the control

point


Page 621
E up
21
E Lat
13
E up
22
E up
23
E up
24
E up
25
E up
26
E Lat
14
E Lat
15
E up
27
E up
28
E Lat
16
E up
29
E up
30
E up
31
E up
32
E Lat
17
E Lat
18
E Lat
19
E up
33
(m)
(m)
39500 54255
0
41183 54108
4
42142 54034
8
42701 54001
9
43101 53980
6
43361 53966
7
43641 53951
8
46695 53714
8
52357 53221
5
56005 52907
1
56805 52833
8
58420 52677
2
60377 52481
7
60877 52431
8
61952 52324
3
62804 52239
1
64966 52025
6
72001 51328
6
79417 50597
4
11907 46946
4
8
(m)
667739
7
667657
1
667596
3
667551
1
667517
3
667495
3
667471
7
667287
0
667009
1
666824
1
666792
2
666754
2
666751
6
666753
0
666755
8
666757
4
666725
2
666657
1
666660
7
665432
6
(m)
(m)
39640 54242
3
41917 54050
3
42182 54032
2
42871 53992
9
43201 53975
2
43601 53953
9
43840 53941
1
47405 53652
8
53040 53162
9
56403 52871
1
57005 52814
9
59078 52611
7
60577 52461
8
61097 52409
8
62247 52294
8
63007 52218
9
65601 51963
1
72616 51268
5
79927 50546
4
11952 46903
3
6
(m)
(m) (m)
667733
sand
3.0 142
7
667612
clay
2.7 735
7
667593
clay
3.0 40
3
667536
clay
3.0 170
8
667508
clay
3.0 100
9
667475 clay/sand 3.0 240
0
667454
clay
3.0 200
8
667252
clay
2.7 709
5
666974
clay
2.7 683
2
666807
clay
2.7 398
2
666785
clay
2.7 200
6
666749
clay
2.7 657
3
666752
clay
2.7 200
2
666753
clay
2.7 220
6
666756
clay
2.7 295
6
666756
clay
2.7 203
4
666714
clay
2.7 635
2
666669
clay
2.7 614
9
666658 clay/rock 2.7 509
0
665420 clay/rock 2.8 450
4
Volume
Height
Incline
Width at the
top
Length
Type of earth
North Z35
East Z35
As far as the
control point
North Z35
East Z35
From the
control point
Work number

1:2
(m) (m3)
1.0 5247
1:4
1.0 2117 4
1:4
1.0
1630
1:4
1.0
5264
1:4
1.0
2897
1:4
1.0
7483
1:4
1.0
5687
1:4
1.0 2044 0
1:4
1.0 1969 8
1:4
1.0 1158 0
1:4
1.0
1:4
1.0 1895 9
1:4
1.0
5964
1:4
1.0
6533
1:4
1.0
8665
1:4
1.0
6035
1:4
1.0 1832 8
1:4
1.0 1773 3
1:4
1.0 1145 5
1:4
1.0 1356 4
Total
volume
5964
66842
4

Page 622
(m)
(m)
(m)
Volume
North Z35
(m)
Height
East Z35
(m)
Incline
As far as the
control point
(m)
Length
North Z35
(m)
Width at the
top
East Z35
(m)
Type of
earth
From the
control point
Work
number

(-)
(m) (m3)
Volume
(m3)
Table 8.
Volume
(m)
(m) (m)
6707665 sand
2.7 1093
6706069 sand
3.0 535
6704737 clay
2.7 1067
6704034 clay
3.0 150
6702685 clay
2.7 1028
6702352 clay
3.0 405
6702106 clay
3.0 100
6700015 clay
2.7 983
6697743 clay
2.7 960
6697527 clay
3.0 200
6696773 clay/rock 3.0 60
6696444 rock
3.0 330
6696211 rock
3.0 150
6695652 clay
3.0 250
6694879 clay
2.7 920
6692654 clay
2.7 903
6692326 rock
3.0 150
6692200 rock
3.0 100
6691850 rock
3.0 400
6691713 rock
3.0 200
Height
(m)
559773
559650
559195
558655
557369
557135
557001
556780
556956
556913
556624
556416
556227
555652
554935
553833
553527
553391
553014
552867
Incline
(m)
3096
4700
6118
7006
8870
9278
9558
11698
13986
14206
15016
15406
15706
16508
17565
20059
20507
20692
21207
21407
Length
East Z35
(m)
6708738
6706597
6705727
6704142
6703432
6702683
6702195
6700994
6698699
6697723
6696826
6696721
6696325
6695824
6695557
6693432
6692431
6692268
6692122
6691850
Width at the top
As far as the
control point
(m)
559579
559733
559588
558757
558073
557367
557046
556708
556955
556952
556653
556595
556324
555833
555552
554284
553635
553464
553307
553014
Type of earth
North Z35
(m)
2003
4166
5048
6858
7844
8873
9458
10715
13026
14006
14956
15076
15556
16258
16645
19155
20356
20592
20807
21207
North Z35
East Z35
W_Lat_1
W_up_1
W_Lat_2
W_up_2
W_Lat_3
W_up_3
W_up_4
W_Lat_4
W_Lat_5
W_up_5
W_up_6
W_up_7
W_up_8
W_up_9
W_Lat_6
W_Lat_7
W_up_10
W_up_11
W_up_12
W_up_13
From the control

point
Work number
Gravel-filled post trench for reducing buckling and vertical twisting after the western pipelines
have been laid
1:3
1:2
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:2
1:2
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:2
1:2
1:2
1:2
(m)
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
2.0
(m3)
25204
9635
30629
4262
29508
12063
2944
28223
27575
5766
3126
7690
3566
7201
26437
25965
2874
3122
13340
7481

Page 623
North Z35
(m)
6691577
6690870
6687605
6687218
6685440
6683327
6683098
6682639
6682492
6681704
W_up_20
W_up_21
W_up_22
W_Lat_12
W_up_23
W_up_24
W_up_25
W_up_26
W_Lat_13
W_up_27
W_up_28
W_up_29
W_up_30
W_up_31
W_Lat_14
W_Lat_15
W_up_32
W_Lat_16
W_up_33
W_Lat_17
33852
36036
36881
37024
38157
38317
38957
39207
41740
42981
43257
43542
43907
44337
47152
52766
56018
58528
60174
64974
546920
545776
545126
545006
544004
543862
543293
543071
540945
540322
540195
540041
539812
539501
537051
532134
529351
526989
525347
520574
6680977
6679130
6678593
6678516
6677987
6677914
6677621
6677506
6676162
6675095
6674850
6674610
6674326
6674030
6672651
6669944
6668261
6667454
6667396
6667225
33952
36281
37006
37787
38207
38607
39107
39407
42475
43107
43447
43662
44007
44437
47859
53448
56631
59186
60712
65606
546884
545599
545021
544333
543959
543604
543160
542893
540539
540267
540095
539970
539744
539423
536428
531551
528804
526335
524810
519952
6680884 rock
3.0 100
6678961 clay
3.0 245
6678526 clay
3.0 125
6678157 clay
2.7 764
6677964 sand
3.0 50
6677781 sand
3.0 290
6677552 sand
3.0 150
6677414 sand/clay 3.0 200
6675552 clay
2.7 735
6674981 clay
3.0 125
6674688 rock/clay 3.0 190
6674513 clay
3.0 120
6674253 clay
3.0 100
6673968 clay
3.0 100
6672316 clay
2.7 709
6669590 clay
2.7 683
6667987 clay
2.8 613
6667386 clay
2.7 657
6667421 clay/sand 2.8 537
6667112 clay
2.7 635
clay
clay
clay
clay
clay
clay
sand
sand
sand
sand
(m)
3.0
2.7
2.7
3.0
2.7
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
2.7
(m)
160
880
867
200
832
240
240
150
50
793
Volume
East Z35
(m)
552721
552109
549986
549734
548578
547407
547338
547236
547212
547091
Height
As far as the
control point
(m)
21607
22545
26440
26903
29023
31447
31687
32157
32306
33104
Incline
North Z35
(m)
6691686
6691538
6688333
6687385
6686138
6683554
6683327
6682786
6682540
6682489
Length
East Z35
(m)
552838
552678
550459
549843
549032
547486
547407
547264
547219
547212
Width at the
top
From the
control point
W_up_14
W_Lat_8
W_Lat_9
W_up_15
W_Lat_10
W_up_16
W_up_17
W_up_18
W_up_19
W_Lat_11
(m)
21447
21665
25573
26703
28190
31207
31447
32007
32257
32309
Type of earth
Work number

1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:2
1:2
1:2
1:3
(m)
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
2.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
(m3)
7558
25300
24936
5736
23941
7566
12823
4640
1082
18334
1:2
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:2
1:2
1:2
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
2239
7518
3889
22007
1109
11590
3123
13771
21174
3823
7403
3493
2932
2860
20440
19698
18356
18959
16130
18328

Page 624
(m)
6666509 clay
6666540 clay
6665771 clay
6654318 clay/rock
(m)
2.7
2.7
2.8
2.8
(m)
614
509
280
450
1:4
1:4
1:4
1:4
Total
Volume
(m3)
Volume
(m)
512996
505778
497041
469700
Height
(m)
72620
79932
88891
119194
Incline
East Z35
(m)
6666461
6666566
6665822
6654430
Width at the
top
Length
As far as the
control point
(m)
513607
506286
497316
470136
Type of
earth
North Z35
(m)
72007
79424
88611
118744
North Z35
East Z35
W_Lat_18
W_Lat_19
W_up_34
W_up_35
From the
control point
Work
number

(m) (m3)
1.0 17733
1.0 14742
1.0 8550
1.0 13564
681959

Page 625

APPENDIX 2.
SOIL CHARACTERISTICS
Soil characteristics which are necessary for modelling the diffusion of the suspended matter and the
silting up of the bottom are given in Table 1. (Environmental engineering surveys, Part 1. Ist STAGE,
Book 5. Section 1. Exclusive economic zone and Russian territorial waters, Peter Gaz. Document
6545-10-0-environmental engineering surveys-0501-1). Sampling point locations are shown in fig. 1.
Table 2 provides aggregate data on soils. It follows from this table that sands are encountered in the
coastal area (G1, G11-G12), sludges in the transition area and clays far out.
Fig. 1.
Location of soil sampling points (G1, G2, G10)

Page 626
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Table 2.2.4.1
Table 1. Granulometric composition (%) of the soils
Number of
stations
G1
G11
G12
G13
G14
G15
G2
G17
G3
G4
G5
G18
G6
G7
G8
G9
G16
G10
G19
>10
10-5
5-2
2-1
1-0.5
0.5-0.25
0.25-0.1
0.1-0.05 (<0.1)
0.8
6.0
1.3
5.5
3.8
1.5
1.5
1.0
1.0
31.8
6.3
7.0
2.2
1.3
1.0
12.5
2.5
7.3
3.3
1.8
1.5
0.7
1.2
0.4
3.4
0.5
0.6
0.6
2.7
2.2
10.5
4.4
8.0
1.0
3.5
7.0
0.5
1.0
1.5
1.8
0.3
0.5
3.0
9.5
6.0
1.0
2.5
2.0
11.5
13.5
3.0
47.0
1.2
3.2
7.7
0.5
4.4
6.5
5.3
0.3
4.2
3.5
7.0
8.5
6.0
1.5
33.7
62.7
55.7
52.6
38.4
56.5
5.7
29.5
2.8
15.0
13.3
12.8
1.5
12.5
8.5
12.7
32.0
13.7
63.0
11.0
5.0
3.2
24.5
2.5
31.7
36.2
18.8
10.5
16.8
18.0
15.0
9.7
19.3
27.0
5.0
15.5
15.5
16.5
0.3

Page 625
0.05-0.01
0.01-0.002
<0.002
4.5
2.0
2.0
0.8
30.5
15.0
21.5
12.5
14.8
8.0
19.0
17.3
21.5
3.8
10.8
14.0
4.3
2.7
14.2
16.8
44.0
35.5
30.4
40.5
48.5
30.0
28.0
20.5
23.0
34.0
6.0
2.6
6.0
4.0
20.2
14.8
15.5
16.6
20.7
16.2
8.5
37.7
3.7
15.8
4.7
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Fig. 2. Sands in the coastal section (G1, G11-G12)
Fig. 3.
Types of silt in the transitional region (G2, G8)

Page 626
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Fig. 4.
Types of clay (G3, G4, G5, G6, G7, G9-G10)

Page 627
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

APPENDIX 3.
CHARACTERISTICS OF HYDRODYNAMIC PROCESSES
Results of observations and calculations. An analysis of the recurrence interval of the speed and direction
of the overall flow was carried out in accordance with data from the report entitled "Hydrodynamic and
probabilistic modelling, the formation of a data file containing hydrometeorological calculation data
pertaining to the route of the North European gas pipeline (Baltic Sea) and the preparation of
recommendations on future hydrometeorological engineering research, 2005".
A particular aspect of this report was the performance of statistical processing concerning the
observations relating to the currents. Series of observations carried out at a distance not exceeding 20
miles from the route amount to 605. However, the majority of these observations were conducted in the
coastal areas. Consequently, for statistical analysis purposes, only those stations of sufficient duration
were selected where measurements were carried out at distances not exceeding 2.5 miles from the route.
In total, 29 series of observations were picked out in connection with the currents in the various water
lines situated closest to the route taken by the pipeline relating to points 8, 9, 10, 12, 18 and 22. For
calculation of the diffusion of suspended matter during post-trenching work, points of focus are located in
the Gulf of Finland within the works area. Points 8 and 9 of fig. 1 included in them.
Table 1.
The location of calculation and observation points in connection with the currents
Point number
Eastern longitude
Northern latitude
Depth
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
16
28.05464
27.80317
27.47825
26.95317
26.673
26.29167
26.12497
25.96997
25.36664
25.03333
20.42689
60.41406
60.23669
60.14519
60.13003
60.06992
60.00414
59.99167
59.93669
59.89164
59.90003
58.82767
31.7
49.2
56.1
47.2
52.5
65.3
59.6
48.9
52.6
56.9
The results of the statistical processing of these observations are given in tables 2 - 3, while the current
conditions constructed using this data can be found in figs. 2. - 3.

Page 628
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Fig. 1.
The location of calculation and observation points in connection with the currents
Table 2.
Current speed distribution according to compass points and repeatability (%), point numbe r 8
Gradation
s (cm/s)
NN NO
O
<5
1
0,1
11
1,0
11
1,0
22
2,0
2
0,2
0
0,0
47
4,2
1
0,1
3
0,3
5
0,4
8
0,7
0
0,0
0
0,0
17
1,5
5,1-10
10,1-15
15,1-20
20,1-25
25,1-30
Max.
Mean
4
0,4
12
1,1
7
0,6
5
0,4
0
0,0
0
0,0
28
2,5
7
0,6
13
1,2
11
1,0
0
0,0
0
0,0
0
0,0
31
2,8
7
0,6
39
3,5
38
3,4
7
0,6
1
0,1
0
0,0
92
8,2
SO
8
0,7
48
4,3
23
2,1
16
1,4
4
0,4
0
0,0
99
8,8
SS S
O
Bed - 36 m
5
3
0
0,4 0,3 0,0
21
7
3
1,9 0,6 0,3
32 20 25
2,9 1,8 2,2
15
8 23
1,3 0,7 2,1
4
1
0
0,4 0,1 0,0
0
0
0
0,0 0,0 0,0
77 39 51
6,9 3,5 4,6
SS SW WS W WN NW NN
W
W
W
W
2
6
4
0,2 0,5 0,4
10 49 36
0,9 4,4 3,2
18 44 29
1,6 3,9 2,6
47 31 16
4,2 2,8 1,4
3
18 8
0,3 1,6 0,7
0
0
1
0,0 0,0 0,1
80 148 94
7,1 13, 8,4
2
21, 19,0 19, 15, 21, 23, 24, 21,0 20, 23,0 25, 26,
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
14, 14,1 10, 9,0 10, 11, 12, 12,4 15, 15,5 13, 12,
3
6
5
1
5
1
2
7
10
0,9
39
3,5
36
3,2
13
1,2
7
0,6
0
0,0
105
9,4
2
0,2
19
1,7
20
1,8
17
1,5
3
0,3
0
0,0
61
5,5
6
0,5
19
1,7
28
2,5
37
3,3
6
0,5
0
0,0
96
8,6
5
0,4
9
0,8
16
1,4
20
1,8
4
0,4
0
0,0
54
4,8
71
6,3
338
30,2
363
32,4
285
25,5
61
5,5
1
0,1
1119
100,
0
23, 21, 24, 21, 26,0
0
0
0
0
11, 13, 14, 13,
7
4
0
9

Page 629
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


Page 630
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Note: In the table, the top figure represents the number of occurrences, the bottom figure - repeatability in
a percentage.
Table 3.
Current speed distribution according to compass points and repeatability (%). Subsea crossing
route in the Baltic Sea, area of point numbe r 9
Gradation
s (cm/s)
NN NO ON
O
O
<5
53
1,4
33
0,9
73
1,9
33
0,9
37
1,0
26
0,7
38
1,0
62
1,6
26
0,7
43
1,1
62
1,6
40
1,0
47 34
1,2 0,9
136 96
3,5 2,5
82 64
2,1 1,7
41
1,1
2
0,1
0
0,0
202
5,2
18
0,5
0
0,0
0
0,0
114
3,0
11
0,3
0
0,0
0
0,0
137
3,6
5
0,1
1
0,0
0
0,0
151
3,9
19
0,5
1
0,0
0
0,0
285
7,4
5,1-10
10,1-15
15,1-20
20,1-25
25,1-30
Max.
Mean
OS SO SS
O
O
36
0,9
7
0,2
0
0,0
237
6,1
SS SW WS W
W
W
W
N
W
N NN
W W
Bed - 35 m
44 33 55
1,1 0,9 1,4
82 38 47
2,1 1,0 1,2
71 51 98
1,8 1,3 2,5
43 28 30 38
1,1 0,7 0,8 1,0
66 122 118 157
1,7 3,2 3,1 4,1
66 129 67 99
1,7 3,3 1,7 2,6
28
0,7
103
2,7
73
1,9
36
0,9
117
3,0
118
3,1
53
1,4
65
1,7
89
2,3
37
1,0
6
0,2
0
0,0
240
6,2
78
2,0
6
0,2
0
0,0
259
6,7
42
1,1
6
0,2
0
0,0
252
6,5
61
1,6
13
0,3
0
0,0
345
8,9
45
1,2
8
0,2
0
0,0
260
6,7
34
0,9
1
0,0
0
0,0
157
4,1
53
1,4
4
0,1
0
0,0
257
6,7
68
1,8
18
0,5
0
0,0
365
9,5
37
1,0
10
0,3
1
0,0
263
6,8
32
0,8
8
0,2
0
0,0
334
8,7
636
16,5
1341
34,8
1172
30,4
617
16,0
91
2,4
1
0,0
3858
100,
0
21, 20,0 20, 21,0 21, 23,0 24, 21,0 22, 23,0 25, 26, 23, 23, 24, 25, 26,0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
10, 9,3 8,5 8,4 9,4 10,5 10, 10,6 11, 11,8 12, 11, 10, 11, 11, 10,
5
5
1
0
0
3
1
5
8
Note: In the table, the top figure represents the number of occurrences, the bottom figure, repeatability as
a percentage.
Point 8, bed - 36 m
Fig. 2.
Current conditions (cm/s) at the bed - 36 m.

Page 631
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Relative provision ("cumulative percentage" (%)) is plotted on the vertical axis while the scales for the
speed of the currents are indicated in colour (cm/s). Subsea crossing route in the Baltic Sea, area of point
number 8.

Page 632
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Point 9, bed - 35 m
Fig. 3. Current conditions (cm/s) at the bed - 35 m. Relative provision ("cumulative percentage"
(%)) is plotted on the vertical axis while the scales for the speed of the currents are indicated in
colour (cm/s). Subsea crossing route in the Baltic Sea, area of point number 9.
Maximum calculated speeds for the currents as a whole, with an indication of the directions possible
every year, every 10 years and every 100 years, at various beds, calculated using hydrodynamic and
probabilistic modelling according to data contained in the report "Hydrodynamic and probabilistic
modelling, 2005" which is provided in Tables 3 - 10, with the current conditions constructed using this
data given in figs. 3 - 9.
Table 4.
Maximum calculated speeds for the currents as a whole (cm/s), considering their distribution based
on directions which are possible every year, every 10 years and every 100 years. Point no. 3
Sector, degrees
7,5<22,5
22,5<<37,5
37,5<52,5
52,5<67,5
67,5<82,5
82,5<97,5
97,5<112,5
112,5<127,5
127,5<142,5
142,5<157,5
157,5<172,5
1 year
Benthic
10 years
100 years
7
9
9
5
3
2
2
1
1
2
2
12
14
14
9
5
4
4
4
3
4
4
18
25
32
21
7
4
4
5
4
5
6

Page 633
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

172,5<187,5
187,5<202,5
202,5<217,5
217,5<232,5
232,5<247,5
247,5<262,5
262,5<277,5
277,5<292,5
292,5<307,5
307,5<322,5
322,5<337,5
337,5<352,5
352,5<7,5
3
5
7
8
8
7
6
5
4
4
4
4
5
5
8
12
12
12
11
10
8
8
8
8
8
10
7
11
13
14
14
13
12
11
11
11
11
11
15

Page 634
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Table 5.
1 year
Benthic
Recurrence interval (years)
10 years
100 years
7,5<22,5
22,5<37,5
37,5<52,5
52,5<67,5
67,5<82,5
82,5<97,5
97,5<112,5
112,5<127,5
6
8
10
9
7
6
5
5
12
18
17
16
11
9
8
7
19
31
19
21
13
13
10
8
127,5<142,5
142,5<157,5
157,5<172,5
172,5<187,5
187,5<202,5
202,5<217,5
217,5<232,5
232,5<247,5
247,5<262,5
262,5<277,5
277,5<292,5
292,5<307,5
307,5<322,5
322,5<337,5
337,5<352,5
352,5<7,5
4
4
4
5
6
8
11
12
11
9
8
8
7
6
6
6
6
6
7
8
9
12
16
17
15
14
13
12
11
12
11
12
8
8
8
9
11
16
19
21
16
18
15
15
15
16
15
20
Sector, degrees

Page 635
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Table 6.
Sector, degrees
1 year
Benthic
10 years
100 years
7,5<22,5
22,5<37,5
37,5<52,5
52,5<67,5
67,5<82,5
82,5<97,5
97,5<112,5
112,5<127,5
9
10
9
6
5
4
3
3
15
18
15
10
7
7
6
6
29
28
17
12
8
8
9
9
127,5<142,5
142,5<157,5
157,5<172,5
172,5<187,5
187,5<202,5
202,5<217,5
217,5<232,5
232,5<247,5
247,5<262,5
262,5<277,5
277,5<292,5
292,5<307,5
307,5<322,5
322,5<337,5
337,5<352,5
352,5<7,5
3
4
5
6
8
10
10
8
7
6
6
6
6
5
6
7
6
6
8
9
13
14
16
13
11
11
11
11
10
11
11
13
9
7
9
11
15
19
17
17
12
12
12
14
13
14
15
16

Page 636
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Table 7.
Sector, degrees
7,5<22,5
22,5<37,5
37,5<52,5
52,5<67,5
67,5<82,5
82,5<97,5
97,5<112,5
112,5<127,5
1 year
6
7
7
7
6
5
4
4
Benthic
10 years
12
14
13
11
9
9
8
7
100 years
21
20
15
15
11
10
10
11
127,5<142,5
142,5<157,5
157,5<172,5
172,5<187,5
187,5<202,5
202,5<217,5
217,5<232,5
232,5<247,5
247,5<262,5
262,5<277,5
277,5<292,5
292,5<307,5
307,5<322,5
322,5<337,5
337,5<352,5
352,5<7,5
4
4
4
5
5
7
8
8
8
8
7
7
6
6
5
5
7
7
7
7
9
10
12
13
12
12
12
12
11
10
9
10
8
8
9
9
11
13
16
16
14
13
14
16
13
15
12
13

Page 637
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Table 8.
Sector, degrees
1 year
Benthic
10 years
100 years
7,5<22,5
22,5<37,5
37,5<52,5
52,5<67,5
67,5<82,5
82,5<97,5
97,5<112,5
112,5<127,5
5
6
7
9
13
13
9
6
9
11
13
18
21
21
15
9
13
17
21
23
25
24
16
12
127,5<142,5
142,5<157,5
157,5<172,5
172,5<187,5
187,5<202,5
202,5<217,5
217,5<232,5
232,5<247,5
247,5<262,5
262,5<277,5
277,5<292,5
292,5<307,5
307,5<322,5
322,5<337,5
337,5<352,5
352,5<7,5
5
4
4
4
4
4
6
9
15
20
16
11
8
6
5
5
7
6
6
6
6
7
9
13
26
29
24
16
12
11
9
10
9
8
8
8
8
9
13
17
29
36
30
21
17
16
13
13

Page 638
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Table 9.
Sector, degrees
7,5<22,5
22,5<37,5
37,5<52,5
52,5<67,5
67,5<82,5
82,5<97,5
97,5<112,5
112,5<127,5
1 year
6
6
6
6
5
5
5
6
Benthic
10 years
11
12
12
10
9
9
8
9
100 years
14
20
17
14
12
12
11
10
127,5<142,5
142,5<157,5
157,5<172,5
172,5<187,5
187,5<202,5
202,5<217,5
217,5<232,5
232,5<247,5
247,5<262,5
262,5<277,5
277,5<292,5
292,5<307,5
307,5<322,5
322,5<337,5
337,5<352,5
352,5<7,5
6
7
6
6
6
7
7
7
7
7
7
8
8
8
7
6
10
10
10
9
11
11
11
12
11
11
11
12
13
14
13
12
13
15
12
11
13
16
15
14
13
13
13
16
19
18
19
15

Page 639
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Table 10.
Sector, degrees
7,5<22,5
22,5<37,5
37,5<52,5
52,5<67,5
67,5<82,5
82,5<97,5
97,5<112,5
112,5<127,5
1 year
6
5
6
6
6
5
5
6
127,5<142,5
142,5<157,5
157,5<172,5
172,5<187,5
187,5<202,5
202,5<217,5
217,5<232,5
232,5<247,5
247,5<262,5
262,5<277,5
277,5<292,5
292,5<307,5
307,5<322,5
322,5<337,5
337,5<352,5
352,5<7,5
6
7
7
6
6
6
6
7
7
8
8
8
9
9
7
6
Benthic
10 years
100 years
9
14
11
19
12
17
11
13
10
13
9
12
8
11
8
9
9
10
10
9
9
10
10
12
12
12
12
12
14
13
12
12
10
12
12
12
10
12
13
16
15
14
15
15
18
16
17
16

Page 640
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Fig. 4.
Current conditions (cm/s) at the benthic bed. Subsea crossing route in the Baltic Sea, area
of point numbe r 3
Fig. 5.
of point numbe r 4
Fig. 6.
of point numbe r 5

Page 641
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Fig. 7.
of point numbe r 6
Fig. 8.
of point numbe r 7
Fig. 9.
of point numbe r 8

Page 642
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Fig. 10.
Current conditions (cm/s) at the benthic bed. Subsea crossing route in the
Baltic Sea, area of point numbe r 9.
Mathematical formulation of model. This section describes the methodology and the calculation data
according to models of hydrometeorological processes and surface wind for the purpose of resolving
ecological tasks connected with the distribution of suspended matter during dredging work and oil spills
in the Baltic Sea. Calculations were carried out for a period of 1 year of modelling time, using data from
2005. In addition, the nature of the data files used in calculations and the results of calculations relating to
the hydrodynamic processes were examined.
For descriptions of the wind and tidal currents and variations in the level of the Baltic Sea, the following
system of equations is used [Gill, 1986]:
The beginning of the coordinates is arranged on the calm surface of the sea,
the z axis is directed vertically upwards. The following symbols are used:
- longitude and latitude,

Page 643
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

f 2 sin - Coriolis parameter, u - zonal speed component (positive in an easterly direction), v meridional speed component (positive in an westerly direction), w - vertical speed component (positive in
an upwards direction), - deviation of the free surface from the undisturbed location, g - acceleration due
to gravity, - angular velocity of the earth's rotation, Az, Kz - coefficient of the vertical turbulent
viscosity.
Values of wind stresses are given at the surface of the sea:
Kinematic condition:
A quadratic friction law is pre-assigned on the sea floor:
A non-flow condition for full flows is pre-assigned at the solid boundary at the side:
Variations in the sea level, determined by the tidal oscillation regime, are pre-assigned at the open sea
boundary. Depending on the organisation of the task, different options in terms of conditions at the
boundary to the open sea are feasible. These will be examined below.
Provision is made for a number of approaches in terms of describing turbulent exchange processes.
Models in which coefficients of vertical viscosity and diffusion are recorded in the form of algebraic
expressions are based on L. Prandtl's expressions regarding the turbulent viscosity coefficient in the
following type of boundary layer [L. Prandtl, 1949]:
where l - length of path of displacement, ur - speed of turbulent pulsations. Such an expression is

introduced by analogy with the molecular coefficient of viscosity/diffusion and, in the theory of
turbulence, serves as a heuristic expression with regard to realising parameterisation of turbulent
processes under specific conditions.
Scale l in the area of the boundary layer is directly proportional to the distance zd to the quay:
l = k zd,
k = 0.4 - Karman constant. In this instance, a logarithmic profile is obtained of the velocity close to the
quay.
As far as the sea is concerned, the scale is frequently tackled in the form of a parabolic expression

Page 644
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

l = kH (zd /H). This is at its maximum not far from the centre line at maximum distances from the
bottom and the surface of the sea, while k zd is striven for as the boundaries are approached. A simpler
example of such a function will be:
where H = +h - full depth, h - depth from the undisturbed level as demonstrated in fig. 1. = (z+h)/(+h).
zs , z0, [m] - roughness parameters at the surface and bottom respectively.
Fig. 11.
Configuration of the sea floor and the free surface
When striving for the surfaces, formula (2), together with the expression regarding scale (3), gives the
following:
where
is the velocity of friction.
Description of the bottom logarithmic boundary layer. In the bottom layer, the change in velocity can be
described with a sufficient degree of accuracy using the logarithmic law (A. S. Monin and A. M. Yaglom,
1965]:
u = u*/k ln(z/z0)
(8)
where z0 - roughness parameter, u* = Vxb - friction velocity, k=0.4 - Karman constant. When using a
quadratic friction law as a friction coefficient, 100 is frequently used, i.e. its value at a distance from a
measurement point is equal to 100 cm from the bottom. In the theoretical hypothesis (5), we have the
following:
u = u100 /k ln(z/z0),
(9)
Consequently, if we arrange the final reference junction of the grid at a distance of 1 m from the bottom,
then a determination of the velocity at lesser distances may be carried out in accordance with formula (4),
accepting as the value 100 which is well known from experiments. At the same time, (2.1.13) serves
to link the coefficient of friction and the roughness parameter z0:
= [k/ ln(z/z0)]2.
(10)

Page 645
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

It should be noted that the roughness parameter is linked to the average height of surface elements in
relation to boundary layer conditions in pipelines or above flat plates and provides us with z0 = h0/30. If
z0 = 0.3 [Davies A.M., Lawrence J., 1994], then = 0.005.
To approximate the system of equations (1) according to time, a semi-implicit, two-layer, time differential
chart is used. In this chart, the vertical viscosity elements are examined implicitly, while the remaining
elements are examined explicitly. In terms of approximation along the area, "" - a grid with junctions
which are spaced apart, is used. Scalar variables are determined at the centre of the cell in this grid, with
vector variables determined at the boundaries. A more detailed description of the calculation chart is
provided, for example, in Arkhipov B. V., 1989.
Original data and calculation results. The calculations are carried out allowing for the impact of the
tide, wind and specific gravity ("forcing"). Tidal surges affecting the sea level are pre-assigned at the
open boundary (fig. 2.1).
Adequate specification of the configuration of the calculated area (alteration of the sea bed and
waterfront) is of great importance as regards the correct reproduction of basic physical (hydrodynamic
and lithodynamic) processes which shape the distribution and changeability of the sea currents, the
temperature and salinity of the sea water, benthic deposits and so on, on the one hand, and as regards the
accurate geographical plotting of the results obtained from model calculations on the other. The latter is
especially important in the process of structural safeguards regarding the construction and operation of
hydrotechnical installations.
For calculating flow fields in the Baltic Sea, echo sounding based on "ETOPO5", "iowtopo2" and
"ETOPOREF.IAX2" (http://www.io-warnemuende.de/en_iowtopo.html, UNEP/GRID Documentation
Summary for Data Set: 'ETOPO-5' Elevation) data files and bathymetric maps provided by the company
"Peter Gaz" concerning the route of the pipeline were used. This data file was prepared at the U. S.
National Geophysical Data Center (NGDC) in Boulder, Colorado (USA). This is the best of the digital
topography files available which is obtained on the basis of a grid with a 5 minute resolution
(approximately 9 km by 9 km). Contour intervals are 1 m. This data file includes bathymetric
characteristics upwards of 10,000 m. Topography in excess of sea level reaches 8,000 m in this file. The
ETOPO5 data file includes a data file from the National Imagery and Mapping Agency within the USA's
Ministry of Defence for areas surrounding the USA, Western Europe and Japan, as well as data files from
Australia's Mineral Resource Directorate and New Zealand's Department of Science and Industrial
Research.
The "ETOPO5" data file has 2,160 records, each one 8,640 bytes. The data file has 2160 x 4320 two-byte
elements. It extends from 90 N to 90 S and from 180 E to 180 W. The size of the file as a whole is 18.66
MB. Refer to Edwards, M.H.,1986, Haxby, W.F. et al., 1983, for a more detailed description of the data
file. To carry out calculations on the basis of the "ETOPO5" data file, a grid area has been constructed on
the grid with a spacing of
1,100 km). A representation of the calculation area is provided in fig. 3.1.
(size of the area 1,100

Page 646
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Fig. 12.
Baltic Sea waters and the grid area for which a calculation of hydrodynamic processes
is performed (), the whereabouts of local areas (b) in which flows for calculating the diffusion of
suspended matter are computed

Page 647
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

The impact at the boundary is realised through emission conditions (Roed L. P., Cooper C.,1986)
determined at the western border of the area under consideration in which the impact of the tide is preassigned:
Here
- is the local velocity of gravitational waves.
The atmosphere exerts a mechanical and thermal effect via the above ground boundary of the body of
water.
The mechanical impact manifests itself in the form of wind stresses determined by the magnitude and
direction of the wind speed at an altitude of 10 m.
Here, ra - is the air density, rw - the water density and a - the angle between the northerly direction and
the wind speed.
When using formula (11), the question arises regarding determination of the wind speed
several different approaches are applied when calculating wind fields.
Currently,
The first approach consists of the direct construction of wind fields according to full-scale changes in
wind speed and direction, carried out using passing and expeditionary vessels with auto pilot and at
coastal meteorological stations. The drawback with this approach is the lack of accuracy when measuring
wind speed, the root-mean-square error in the region of 2.5 m/s, and also the lack of observations and
their non-uniformity according to area and time.
In the second approach, the wind field speed can be determined using the method of global atmospheric
circulation. Such models are utilised by big meteorological stations.
Latterly, the use of satellite data has been extremely far-sighted. In particular, methods have been
developed based on an analysis of the back scatter signal and restoration of the wind speed using special
methods. The chapter explaining the information will provide more detail on this.
In the fourth option, one may dispense with areas of pressure re-established above the region under
consideration using some procedure or other.
In order to conduct numerical calculations of the Baltic Sea's currents and the dispersal of oil, wind data
relating to one whole year was prepared. The following was used as the initial information: an
NCEP/NCAR reanalysis for 2005 with a spatial resolution of 2.5 degrees. Data presented on CD ROM
was also used: NSCAT OCEAN WINDS CD-ROM, (vol. Ocean_wind01- Ocean_wind01, spatial
resolution: grid with a spacing of 25 km). These disks are distributed by the following organisation:
PO.DAAC (Physical Oceanography Distributed Archive Center) JPL Physical Oceanography DAAC, Jet
Propulsion Laboratory, USA.

Page 648
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

The wind field according to the NCEP/NCAR reanalysis data is given in fig. 3.2 as an illustration.
Fig. 13. Wind field according to the NCEP/NCAR reanalysis data at the start of 2005
When calculating the impact of the tides at the border of the area (fig. 5.2), cotidal maps of the principal
surges in the area under consideration are used; constructed on the basis of the global ocean tide model
ORI.96 developed at the University of Tokyo (Ocean Research Institute). In this model, the tides are
calculated using a 0.50 grid with assimilated satellite data (NASA TOPEX/POSEIDON MGDR). This
model ensures harmonic constants for the eight constituents (M2, S2, N2, K2, K1, O1, P1, Q1).
Examples of instantaneous currents as a whole which have been calculated in the surface layer are shown
in fig. 3.3.

Page 649
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


Page 650
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Fig. 14.
Current fields based on calculation data at various times of the year since the
beginning of 2005
To provide a direct description of the currents in the sphere of performing dredging work, as
demonstrated in fig. 3.4 (b), mathematical modelling was carried out using the following system of
shallow water formulae [Gill, 1986]:
x,y
- longitude and latitude. The following symbols are used: f =2sin - Coriolis parameter, u - zonal
speed component (positive in an easterly direction), v - meridional speed component (positive in a
northerly direction), H,h - full depth and sea floor elevation respectively, g - acceleration due to gravity,
- angular velocity of the earth's rotation.

Page 651
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Data relating to currents obtained using the global model were used as boundary conditions. A grid with a
resolution of 100 x 100 cells was used for calculation purposes.
x = 247.16 m, y = 247.67 m for the northern section and x = 462.86 m, y = 449.05 m for the
southern section.
Fig. 3.4 gives the results of the flow calculations for trench areas in coastal sections in the region of the
coastline intersection on the Russian side.

Page 652
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


Page 653
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Fig. 15.
Current fields calculated using the model at various times for trench areas in nearcoast sections in the region of the coastline intersection on the Russian side

Page 654
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

APPENDIX 4.
MATHEMATICAL MODEL FOR FORECASTING THE DISTRIBUTION OF
SUSPENDED MATTER ON THE SHELF
The mathematical model described here was developed by a number of authors from the Russian
Academy of Sciences [1] computing centre and is intended for forecasting the distribution of suspended
matter in oceanic shelf regions. The model takes account of the following existing features of the situation
under examination:
1.
the multi-dispersity of contaminants in the area of water containing suspended mineral

sediments and the possibility of differential precipitation of its various solids;
the turbulent nature of the conversion of suspended matter in the shelf area under
consideration, leading to an obvious dependence of the coefficient of horizontal diffusion
on the linear size of the polluted "eddies" (law "4/3" discovered by Richardson and
substantiated in theory by Kolmogorov and Obukhov; see [2-5]).
the temporary changeability of the velocity of the current, both in terms of magnitude and
direction;
the possibility of displacing the source of the suspended matter while work is being
carried out.
General concepts on which the model is based
In describing the distribution of suspended matter, we may distinguish between two qualitatively different
regions: the near zone, the dimensions of which are defined by the characteristics of the slurry source, and
a far zone. In the near zone, concentrations of suspended matter are high and modelling of the transfer of
contamination requires detailed information about the arrangement of the equipment, making this a highly
complex task. In the far zone, concentrations of suspended matter are considerably less due to the process
of turbulent exchange and as a result of the deposition of particles of solids. Conversion of each of the
fractions in this connection occurs independently from the others, with the speed of horizontal conversion
of all solids being determined only by the speed of the current and the intensity of eddy diffusion in the
body of water. The only differences are in the speed of settlement. Consequently, in the far zone, the
applicable diffusion and drift approaches are connected with a disregard for lags relative to the movement
of the contaminating component in the environment and also with the interaction between these
components.
In the case of small concentrations of suspended matter (in the far zone), distribution of contamination
may occur in the form of movement of an aggregate of separate, non-interacting eddies generated by
momentary sources of matter which simulate the infiltration of matter into the far zone from the near
zone. These eddies move through the water column under the influence of local currents and, possibly,
are deposited on the seabed. In the process of moving, they increase in size due to turbulent diffusion
while the concentrations of suspended matter in them fall. Slurry concentrations at an arbitrary point
meanwhile present themselves in the form of concentrations of suspended matter in separate eddies,
including the given point at the moment in time in which they are examined.
0

Page 655
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

The size of the area of contamination turns out to be considerably greater than the depth of the body of
water. For this reason we may use a two-dimensional (taking an average depth) model of the migration of
suspended matter. At the same time, the horizontal sizes of the area in which the migration of suspended
matter is being studied are, as a rule, small in comparison with the scales of space in which the
components U and V of the current speed (and also parameters of horizontal turbulence) undergo
substantial changes. As a result of this, we will propose that the components of current speed do not
depend on the point in the water being examined but exist as functions of time t. In this case, the
concentration of the i fractions in the contaminant Ci in a separate eddy, and the mass mi of this fraction
being deposited per unit of seabed surface, will satisfy the equations
in which K - coefficient of horizontal turbulent diffusion, H - local water depth, Wi - terminal velocity of
the particles taking into account differences in speed of deposit of slurry in flowing water compared to
still water [8,9].
In accordance with the "4/3" law discovered by Richardson on the basis of processing experimental data
on the dispersion of smoke in the atmosphere and substantiated in theory by Kolmogorov and Obukhov
(see [2-4]), the coefficient of turbulent diffusion depends on the linear expansion s of the diffusing eddy
and may be described as
where B - structural parameter of turbulence.

Law (1.2) is correct even in the event of dispersion of impurities in the ocean [5]. In order of size in shelf
regions, B"10-2 10-4 m2/3/s. In several studies (see [6]) for constant B use the value 4.510-4 m2/3/s.
We also point out that a solution to the equation (1.1) for any i particle from a separate eddy of suspended
matter may be presented in the form
Here, Mi - initial mass of i particle in eddy, while the function G, which does not depend on the number
of particles, describes the conventional distribution of the eddy with a single mass. This satisfies the
equation
under the condition of normalisation

Page 656
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

2.
Multidispersion calculation of the composition of the slurry deposit
Multidispersion of the composition of suspended matter is demonstrated in the differential nature of the
deposition of the different contaminant fractions. In the event of a contaminant with a complex particle
,
structure being dumped, the overall concentration of suspended matter will be equal to
where Ci satisfies equation (1.1). Performing a summary (1.1) for all fractions, we find that the overall
concentration C will also satisfy equation (1.1) if the effective hydraulic velocity W is determined in the
following way:
(1.3). As a result we find:
.We also point out that each of the Ci values satisfies correlation
Consequently, the task of modelling the distribution of an eddy of multidispersed slurry in a twodimensional arrangement results in the calculation of the distribution of a single-dispersed suspended
material, but with the speed of deposition depending on time according to the following formula (2.1).
3.
Calculating the distribution of a separate contaminated eddy
The time/space evolution of the concentration of multidispersed slurry in an individual eddy, the mass m
of the slurry which is being deposited on to a unit of area on the seabed, and the thickness of the sediment
h, can clearly be described in the following way (see point 1):
Here t0 - the moment of "birth" of the eddy, M - the initial mass of the substance in the eddy, H0 - the
depth of the water at the place of "birth" of the eddy, e - the coefficient of porosity of the sediment, r - the
mineral density of the slurry, while function G satisfies equation (1.4) and normalisation (1.5).
The two-dimensional Gaussian distribution provides the precise solution to tasks (1.4) and (1.5)
in which the parameters Xc and Yc, giving the position of the gravitational centre of the eddy, and the
values
x, y, Dxy satisfy the equation
The isolines of function (3.1) appear as ellipses rotated at a certain angle but relative to the selected
system of coordinates (x,y). if = 0, then x and y represent typical values for the axis of the ellipse,
while Dxy = 0.
Page 657
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


Page 658
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

The coefficient of diffusion K in (3.2) is defined by the horizontal turbulent movements of the water. In
the event of locally homogenous and isotropic (at the horizontal level) turbulence with the Kolmogorov
spectrum of pulsations, as was already observed in point 1,
Equation (3.2) is not difficult to integrate if we know the initial position of the centre of the eddy Xc, Yc,
and the initial values of the parameters x, y, Dxy, which determine the size of the eddy and its
orientation in the chosen fixed system of coordinates.
4.
Formation of contaminated eddies
For the formation of individual eddies of suspended matter in the models being described, an algorithm is
used which is based on the following conditions.
During execution of work under typical flow conditions and using equipment utilised in dredging work, a
turbulent wake is formed which contains mineral slurry (see figure 4.1). Beyond the initial section of the
wake, in the (cross) section that remains at the approximate distance x'010a from the equipment (see [7]
by way of example), the lateral section of the distribution of the contaminated material is close to a Gauss
curve. In this connection, as per [7], the parameter c0.5.
Fig. 1.
Diagram to explain the formation algorithm for contaminated eddies
Let Q [kg/s] - flow rate of slurry entering the water environment as a result of work. Then, by virtue of
the law of preservation of mass,

Page 659
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

where u - speed of movement of water relative to the dredging equipment.

We will work out a fairly small interval of time tc through which the contaminated eddies will be formed
accordingly. Then the mass of slurry that is first contained in the eddy must be M = Qtc. We will choose a
typical eddy size x in the direction of the speed vector u such that the maximum concentration of slurry
therein equals C0:
From (4.2), (4.3) we will now have:
To conclude, we will quote the formulae that should be used to convert parameters that are typical for an
eddy during the switchover from a local system of coordinates (x,y) to the basic system of coordinates
(x,y) in which the joint evolution of the system of eddies is calculated:
Here a - the angle between axes x and x (see fig. 1), while the values y and x are determined by the
formulae (4.1) and (4.4).

Page 660
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Literature:
1.
Arkhipov B. V., Koterov V. N., Solbakov V. V. Automatic compressor station model for
forecasting distribution following industrial dumping from offshore drilling platforms. Information on
applied mathematics. - .: Russian Academy of Sciences computing centre, 2000. - 71 .
2.
Ozmidov R. V. Diffusion of impurities in the ocean.
[Hydrometeorological publishing house in the Russian Federation], 1986.
L.:
Gidrometeoizdat
3.
Kolmogorov A.N. Local turbulence structure in incompressible liquid with very large Reynolds
figures // Reports compiled by the USSR Academy of Sciences, 1941 vol. .30 number 4 C. 299.
4.
Bao-Shi-Shiau, Jia-Jung Juang. Numerical Study on the Far Field Diffusion of Ocean Dumping
for Liquid Waste // Proceedings of the Eighth (1998) International Offshore and Polar Engineering
Conference. Canada. May 24-29, 1998.

Page 661
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

APPENDIX4.3
CERTIFICATE RELATING TO CRUSHED GRAVEL-ROCK MATERIAL

FROM THE "ERKILYA" SITE
VYBORG DISTRICT, LENINGRAD OBLAST
Moscow
2008

Page 662
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


Page 663
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


Vol. 8. Book 1. Offshore section. Part 1.EIA
Page 661
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Calculation of the dispersal of contaminants into the atmosphere

Nord Stream project (offshore section)
Option 1
Emergency situation without ignition
DISPERSAL CALCULATIONS USING A COMPUTER
The calculation is performed using the "PRISMA" software system developed by the
"LOGUS" research and development enterprise.
The "PRISMA" software system is coordinated with the State hydrometeorological
observatory named after Voejkov, 9 February 2005, 115/25

Page 662
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Weather conditions
CALCULATION MODEL:
NS_incidents_without combustion
CALCULATION DATE: 25.12.2007
TOWN:
Russia
Meteorological characteristics and coefficients which determine the conditions under which contaminants are
dispersed into the town's atmosphere:
Characteristic designations
Values
Coefficient dependent upon the stratification of the atmosphere
160
Coefficient of terrain relief
1
Average temperature of the outside air during the hottest month at 1.00 p.m.,
21.70
Average temperature of the outside air during the coldest month (for boilers which operate
according to a heating schedule),
Average annual wind rose, %
N
NE
E
SE
S
SW
W
NW
Wind speed (U*), the frequency of increase of which is 5%, m/s
Calculation options
Calculation method: OND-86, automatic device
The calculation is performed at wind speeds of: 0.5, 0.5 Um/s, 1.0U m/s, 1.5 Um/s, u*
The calculation is performed for all wind directions
Background calculation: uniform background
Calculation criteria: 0.0500000
Evidence of a calculation of the contaminant level in the horizontal well: Yes
Evidence of a gas calculation: No
Enterprises, industrial sites

Industrial site: Nord_Stream
Matching the enterprise's system of coordinates to the urban system:
The enterprise's system of coordinates corresponds to the urban system
Calculation parameters
Number of contaminants:
Number of background contaminants:
Number of summation groups:
Number of calculation squares:
Number of calculation points:
3
0
2
1
1

Page 663
-8.00
11.00
11.00
11.00
9.00
16.00
20.00
11.00
11.00
9.00
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Substance
Code
1
333
602
2754
List of contaminants vented into the atmosphere

Atmospheric air
quality criteria
Designation
2
Dihydrosulphide;
hydrogen
sulphide
Benzene
Alkanes C12-C19; saturated
hydrocarbons C12-C19; solvent
RPK-265
MAC [maximum
allowable
concentration],
one-off
(mg/m3)
3
0.0080000
0.3000000
1.0000000
MAC, averaged
over a 24-hour
period
(mg/m3)
TSEL [tentative
safe exposure
level]
(mg/m3)
0.1000000
6
2
2
4

Hazard
class
Page 664
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Substance
code
Summation and contaminant

group designations
MAC, one-off
(mg/m3)
301
330
330
333
MAC, averaged
over a 24-hour
period (mg/m3)
4
TSEL (mg/m3)
Hazard
class
Group: 6009 (self-diffusion coefficient = 1.00)

Nitrogen dioxide; (nitrogen (IV)
0.2000000
0.0400000
oxide)
Sulphur dioxide; sulphurous
0.5000000
0.0500000
anhydride
0.5000000
0.0500000
anhydride
Dihydrosulphide; hydrogen
0.0080000
sulphide
3
3
3
2
List of contaminants and summation groups in respect of which detailed atmospheric pollution calculations are not
required
Substance (substance group)

Parameter E
Item
Code
Designation
1
2
3
4
1
333 Dihydrosulphide; hydrogen sulphide
0.0055986
2
602 Benzene
0.0000896
3
2754 Alkanes C12-C19; saturated hydrocarbons C12-C19; solvent RPK0.0178297
265
Summation groups
4
6043
0330 +0333
0.0355986
List of calculation squares
Number X coordinate
(m)
1
1
Y coordinate
(m)
Length (m)
Breadth (m)
Length
increment
(m)
Breadth
increment
(m)
Height (m)
3
6709762
4
10000
5
10000
6
1000
7
1000
8
2.0
2
561172
Results of the substance and summation group calculations

Substance: 333 - Dihydrosulphide; hydrogen sulphide
MAC: MAC value for calculation purposes: 0.0080000 (for calculation purposes, MAC on a one-off basis is used)
Sources of contaminant e missions: 333
Part 1
Industrial Section Source
site
number number
number
Type
Season
Back- Height Coefficient Diameter

ground
of relief
1
1
3
6001
4
It. 1
5
Summer
6
+
7
2.0
8
1.0
Localised
source at one
end of the
linear centre
to the side of
the area of the
source
X (m)
Y(m)_
At the
second end
of the linear
source at
the midpoint
of the
opposite side of
the area
X (m)
Y(m)
10
11
12
13
559575 6705984 562910 ******

Page 665
Areal
width
14
2000
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Part 2
GVS parameters
site
number number
Average Average Temperature
number
discharge
(1)
1
(2)
(3)
6001
Rate of
release
speed
m3/s
m/s
15
16
17
Total number of sources venting the substance:
g/s
18
19
0.0000016 1.0
Maximum Dangerous Hazardous

concentration
wind
distance
speed
mg/m3
m/s
20
0.0000448
21
0.50
22
11.4
Total emissions from all sources:

0.0000016 g/s
0.0000000 t/a
Totals - Cm/MAC and (m+)/MAC for all sources:
Cm/MAC = 0.0055986
(Cm+)/MAC = 0.0055986
Calculation results

Page 666
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Average weighted wind speed: 0.500000 m/s
Substance: 602 - Benzene


Part 1
Industria Section Source Typ
l site
numbe numbe
e
number
r
r
3
6001
Season
Back- Heigh Coefficien Diamete Localised source At the second Areal

groun
t
t of relief
r
at one end of the end of the linear widt
d
linear centre to
source at the
h
the side of the midpoint of the
area of the source opposite side of
the area
m
M
X (m) Y(m)_
X (m) Y(m)_
M
5
Summe
It. 1
r
2.0
1.0
10
11
12
13
14
55957 670598 56291 *****
2000
5
4
0
*
Part 2

GVS parameters
site
number number Average Average Temperature
number
discharge
speed
m3/s
m/s
t
(1)
1
(2)
(3)
6001
15
16
17
Rate of
release
g/s
18
0.0000009
19
1.0

concentration
wind
distance
speed
mg/m3
m/s
20
0.0000269
21
0.50
22
11.4

0.0000009 g/s
0.0000000 t/a
Cm/MAC = 0.0000896
(Cm+C)/MAC = 0.0000896
Calculation results
Substance: 2754 - Alkanes C12-C19; saturated hydrocarbons C12-C19; solvent RPK-265 P / TOC equivalent
Part 1
l site
numbe numbe
e
number
r
r
1
1
Season

groun
t
t of relief
r
d
linear centre to
source at the
h
the area
m
M
X (m) Y(m)_
X (m) Y(m)_
M
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
6001 It. 1 Summe
+ TRANSLATION
2.0
1.0
55957 670598
56291 ***** 2000
UNOFFICIAL
ENGLISH
FOR COURTESY
ONLY
Page 667
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Part 2
GVS parameters
site
number number
number
discharge
speed
m3/s
m/s
t
(1)
1
(2)
(3)
6001
15
16
17
Rate of
release
g/s
18
0.0006240
19
1.0

concentration
wind
distance
speed
mg/m3
m/s
20
0.0178297
21
0.50
22
11.4

0.0006240 g/s
0.0000000 t/a

Page 668
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


Cm/MAC = 0.0178297
(Cm+C)/MAC = 0.0178297
Calculation results

Page 669
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Calculation of the dispersal of contaminants into the atmosphere

Nord Stream project (offshore section)
Option 2
ignition-related incident
DISPERSAL CALCULATIONS USING A COMPUTER
The calculation is performed using the "PRISMA" software system developed by the
"LOGUS" research and development enterprise.
The "PRISMA" software system is coordinated with the State hydrometeorological
observatory named after Voejkov, 9 February 2005, 115/25.

Page 670
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Weather conditions
CALCULATION MODEL:
NS_ignition-related incident
CALCULATION DATE: 25.12.2007
TOWN:
Russia
Meteorological characteristics and coefficients which determine the conditions under which contaminants are
dispersed into the town's atmosphere:
Characteristic designations
Values
Coefficient dependent upon the stratification of the atmosphere
160
Coefficient of terrain relief
1
Average temperature of the outside air during the hottest month at 1.00 p.m.,
21.70
Average temperature of the outside air during the coldest month (for boilers which operate
-8.00
according to a heating schedule),
Average annual wind rose, %
N
NE
E
SE
S
SW
W
NW
Wind speed (U*), the frequency of increase of which is 5%, m/s
11.00
11.00
11.00
9.00
16.00
20.00
11.00
11.00
9.00
Calculation options
Calculation method: OND-86, automatic device (Russian national regulatory dispersion model)
The calculation is performed at wind speeds of: 0.5, 0,5Um/s, 1.0 Um/s, 1.5 Um/s, u*
The calculation is performed for all wind directions
Background calculation: uniform background
Calculation criteria: 0.1000000
Evidence of a calculation of the contaminant level in the horizontal well: Yes
Evidence of a gas calculation: No
Enterprises, industrial sites
Industrial site: Nord_Stream
Matching the enterprise's system of coordinates to the urban system:
The enterprise's system of coordinates corresponds to the urban system
Calculation parameters
Number of contaminants:
Number of background contaminants:
Number of summation groups:
Number of calculation squares:
Number of calculation points:
8
5
3
1
1
of contaminants
vented into the
atmosphere
UNOFFICIAL List
ENGLISH
TRANSLATION
FOR
COURTESY ONLY
Page 671
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Substance
Code
Designation
2
Divanadium pentoxide;
Vanadium (V) oxide / dust
oxide)
Hydrocyanide; prussic acid;
hydrocyanic acid
Carbon; carbon black
anhydride
Dihydrosulphide; hydrogen
sulphide
110
301
317
328
330
333
MAC [maximum
allowable
concentration],
one-off
(mg/m3)
3
0.2000000
0.1500000
0.5000000
Atmospheric air
quality criteria
MAC, averaged
TSEL [tentative
over a 24-hour
safe exposure
period
level]
(mg/m3)
(mg/m3)
4
0.0020000
6
1
0.0400000
0.0100000
0.0500000
0.0500000
3
3
0.0080000

Hazard
class
Page 672
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

337 Carbon oxide
5.0000000
703 Benzopyrene; 3,4-benzpyrene
3.0000000
0.0000010
Summation group contaminant list

Substance
code
Summation and contaminant

group designations
301
330
110
330
330
333
MAC, one-off
(mg/m3)
MAC, averaged
over a 24-hour
period (mg/m3)
3
4
0.2000000
0.0400000
oxide)
0.5000000
0.0500000
anhydride
Divanadium pentoxide; Vanadium
0.0020000
(V) oxide / dust
0.5000000
0.0500000
anhydride
0.5000000
0.0500000
anhydride
Dihydrosulphide; hydrogen sulphide
0.0080000
TSEL [tentative
safe exposure
level]
(mg/m3)
5
Hazard
class
6
3
3
1
3
3
2
List of contaminants and summation groups in respect of which detailed atmospheric pollution calculations are not
required
Substance (substance group)

Parameter E
Item
Code
Designation
1
2
3
4
1
110
Divanadium pentoxide; Vanadium (V) oxide / dust
0.0000618
2
317
Hydrocyanide; prussic acid; hydrocyanic acid
0.0001792
3
328
Carbon; carbon black
0.0046222
4
330
Sulphur dioxide; sulphurous anhydride
0.0300358
5
333
Dihydrosulphide; hydrogen sulphide
0.0022394
6
703
Benzopyrene; 3,4-benzpyrene
0.0001236
Summation groups
7
6018 0110 +0330
0.0300976
8
6043 0330 +0333
0.0322753
Background contaminants and data concerning their concentrations at observation stations
Code
Contaminant
Designation
Observation station
Concentration
Concentration at wind
at
wind
speeds
speeds
in excess of 2 m/s
Number Coordinates relative
of
0
2
m/s
(mg/m3)
to NC towns
(mg/m3)
Direction Concentration
X (m)
Y (m)
3
4
5
6
7
8
1
0
0
0.0500000
2
301 Nitrogen dioxide; (nitrogen
(IV) oxide)
Page 673
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

304 Nitrogen (II) oxide; nitrogen

oxide
330 Sulphur dioxide; sulphurous
anhydride
337 Carbon oxide
2902 Suspended matter
0.0210000
0.0150000
1
1
0
0
0
0
1.5000000
0.1700000
List of calculation squares

Number X coordinate
(m)
1
1
2
561172
Y coordinate
(m)
Length (m)
Breadth (m)
3
6709762
4
10000
5
10000
Length
incre ment
(m)
6
1000
Breadth
incre ment
(m)
7
1000

Page 674
Height (m)
8
2.0
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Results of the substance and summation group calculations

Substance: 110 - Divanadium pentoxide; Vanadium (V) oxide / dust
MAC: MAC value for calculation purposes: 0.0200000 (for calculation purposes, MAC averaged over a 24-hour period
* 10 is used)
Part 1
l site
numbe numbe
e
number
r
r
Season

groun
t
t of relief
r
d
linear centre to
source at the
h
the area
m
1
3
6002
5
Summe
It. 1
r
2.0
1.0
X (m)
Y(m)
X (m)
Y(m)
10
11
12
13
14
55957 670598 56291 *****
2000
5
4
0
*
Part 2

GVS parameters
site
number
discharge
speed
m3/s
m/s
t
(1)
1
(2)
(3)
6002
15
16
17
Rate of
release
g/s
18
0.0000164
19
1.0

concentration
wind
distance
speed
mg/m3
m/s
20
21
0.50
22
11.4
0.0004676

0.0000164 g/s
0.0000000 t/a
Cm/MAC = 0.0023380
(Cm+C)/MAC = 0.2523380
Calculation results
Results of calculations taken at separate calculation points
Maximum background Direction of
Background
Wind
Y
X
concentration
the wind
speed
Number coordinate coordinate Height
from the
MAC
MAC
(m/s)
(m)
mg/m3
mg/m3
(m)
axis ()
quotas
quotas
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
1
562444
6711731
2.0
0.0500001 0.2500005
73.0
9.0
0.0500000 0.2500000
Contributions made by the separate calculation points
Contributions at the point indicated by the number 1 and X and Y coordinates of 562444 and 6711731 respectively
Total concentration at this point from all sources:
0.0000001 mg/m3
0.0000005 MAC quotas
Page 675
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Source
Industrial Section
numbe
site numbe r numbe r
r
1
1
3
6002
Contribution value
mg/m3
MAC quotas
4
0.0000001
5
0.0000005
Contributio
n
percentage
(%)
6
100.00
Calculation results according to the points of maximum concentration at the boundary between the sanitary
protection zone and the residential area
Reference point
Type of
point
X
coordinate
(m)
Reference calculation concentrations at dangerous wind speeds
Y
coordinate
(m)
Height
Z (m)
Wind
speed
(m/s)
Background
MAC quotas
2
559172
3
6705762
4
2.0
5
0.0500003
6
0.2500013
7
225.0
8
0.75
9
0.0500000
MAC
quotas
10
0.2500000
562513
6711721
2.0
0.0500001
0.2500005
73.0
9.00
0.0500000
0.2500000
559063
6706490
2.0
0.0500004
0.2500019
206.0
0.50
0.0500000
0.2500000
559172
6706762
2.0
0.0500004
0.2500018
202.0
0.50
0.0500000
0.2500000
mg/m3
1
Outside
the
sanitary
protection
zone
Residential
area
Border
with the
sanitary
protection
zone
MAX
Direction
of the
wind
from the
axis ()
Maximum
background
concentration
mg/m3
Outside the sanitary protection zone - point of maximum concentration outside the sanitary protection zone
Residential area - point of maximum concentration within the residential area
Border with the sanitary protection zone - point of maximum concentration at the boundary to the sanitary protection
zone
MAX - maximum point according to the calculation squares
Contributions according to the maximum concentration points

Contributions at the point within the standard sanitary protection zone with X = 559172 Y= 6705762
site numbe r numbe r numbe r
1
1
3
6002
Contribution value
mg/m3
MAC quotas
4
0.0000003
5
0.0000013
Contribution
percentage
(%)
6
100.00

UNOFFICIAL
ENGLISH TRANSLATION FOR COURTESY ONLY
Contributions at the point within the residential area with X = 562513 Y=6711721
Page 676
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


1
1
3
6002
Contribution value
mg/m3
MAC quotas
4
0.0000001
5
0.0000005
Contribution
percentage
(%)
6
100.00

Contributions at the point bordering the standard sanitary protection zone with X = 559063 Y= 6706490

Page 677
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Industrial Section
1
1
Source
numbe r
3
6002
Contribution value
Contribution
percentage (%)
mg/m3
MAC quotas
4
0.0000004
5
0.0000019
6
100.00

Contributions at the maximum point according to the calculation squares with X = 559172 Y=6706762
Industrial Section
1
2
1
Source
numbe r
3
6002
Contribution value
mg/m3
MAC quotas
4
5
0.0000004
0.0000018
Contribution
percentage (%)
6
100.00
Substance: 317 - Hydrocyanide; prussic acid; hydrocyanic acid

* 10 is used)
Part 1
l site
numbe numbe
e
number
r
r
3
6002
Season

groun
t
t of relief
r
d
linear centre to
source at the
h
the area
m
m
X (m)
Y(m)
X (m) Y(m)
m
5
Summe
It. 1
r
2.0
1.0
10
11
12
13
14
55957 670598 56291 *****
2000
5
4
0
*
Part 2

GVS parameters
site
number number
number
discharge
speed
m3/s
m/s
t
(1)
1
(2)
(3)
6002
15
16
17
Rate of
release
g/s
18
0.0000006
19
1.0

concentration
wind
distance
speed
mg/m3
m/s
20
21
0.50
22
11.4
0.0000179

0.0000006 g/s
0.0000000 t/a
Cm/MAC = 0.0001792
(Cm+C)/MAC = 0.0001792
Calculation results

Page 678
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Substance: 328 - Carbon; carbon black

Part 1
Industrial Section Source Type
site
number number
number
Background
Height
Season
Coefficient of
relief
m
1
6002
It. 1
Summer
2.0
1.0
Industrial Section Source Average

site
number number discharge
number
m3/s
(1)
1
(2)
(3)
15
DiaLocalised source at
meter one end of the linear
centre to the side of
the area of the
source
m
X (m)
Y (m)
9
At the second end of

the linear source at
Areal
the midpoint of the
width
opposite side of the
area
X (m)
Y (m)
m
10
11
12
13
14
559575
6705984
562910
******
2000
Average
speed
Temperature
Rate of
release
m/s
g/s
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
0.0000081
3.0
0.0006933
0.50
5.7
6002

concentration
wind
distance
speed
mg/m3
m/s
m

Page 679
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


1
0.0000081 g/s
0.0000000 t/a
Cm/MAC = 0.0046222
(Cm+C)/MAC = 0.0046222
Calculation results
Substance: 330 - Sulphur dioxide; sulphurous anhydride

Part 1
Industria Section Source Typ Season Backgroun Heigh Coefficien Diamete
l site
numbe numbe
e
d
t
t of relief
r
number
r
r
m
1
3
6002
It. 1
5
Summe
r
2.0
1.0
Localised
At the second Areal
source at one
end of the
widt
end of the
linear source
h
linear centre to
at the
the side of the
midpoint of
area of the
the opposite
source
side of the
area
X (m)
X (m)
m
10
11
12
13
14
55957 670598 56291 *****
2000
5
4
0
*
Part 2
GVS parameters
site
number number
number
discharge
speed
m3/s
m/s
t
(1)
1
(2)
(3)
15
16
17
6002
Rate of
release
g/s

concentration
wind
distance
speed
mg/m3
m/s
18
19
20
21
22
0.0000006
1.0
0.0000179
0.50
11.4

0.0000006 g/s
0.0000000 t/a
Cm/MAC = 0.0000358
(Cm+C)/MAC = 0.0300358
Calculation results

Page 680
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Substance: 333 - Dihydrosulphide; hydrogen sulphide

Part 1
l site
numbe numbe
e
d
t
t of relief
r
number
r
r
m
1
3
6002
It. 1
5
Summe
r
2.0
1.0
Localised
At the second Areal
source at one
end of the
widt
end of the
linear source
h
linear centre to
at the
the side of the
midpoint of
area of the
the opposite
source
side of the
area
X (m)
X (m)
M
10
11
12
13
14
55957 670598 56291 *****
2000
5
4
0
*
Part 2
GVS parameters
site
number
discharge
speed
m3/s
m/s
t
(1)
1
(2)
Rate of
release
g/s

concentration
wind
distance
speed
mg/m3
m/s
(3)
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
6002
0.0000006
1.0
0.0000179
0.50
Page 681
22
11.4
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


Page 682
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


0.0000006 g/s
0.0000000 t/a
Cm/MAC = 0.0022394
(Cm+C)/MAC = 0.0022394
Calculation results
Substance: 337 - Carbon oxide
Part 1
l site
numbe numbe
e
d
t
t of relief
r
number
r
r
m
1
5
Summe
It. 1
r
6002
2.0
1.0
Localised
At the second Areal
source at one
end of the
widt
end of the
linear source
h
linear centre to
at the
the side of the
midpoint of
area of the
the opposite
source
side of the
area
X (m) Y (m) X (m) Y(m)
M
10
11
12
13
14
55957 670598 56291 *****
2000
5
4
0
*
Part 2
GVS parameters
site
number number
number
discharge
speed
m3/s
m/s
t
(1)
(2)
(3)
15
16
Rate of
release
g/s
17
6002

concentration
wind
distance
speed
mg/m3
m/s
18
19
20
21
22
0.0000044
1.0
0.00001265
0.50
11.4

0.0000044 g/s
0.0000000 t/a
Cm/MAC = 0.0000253
(Cm+C)/MAC = 0.3000253
Calculation results
X
Y
Height
Number coordinate coordinate
Z (m)
(m)
(m)
1
1
Maximum background
concentration
mg/m3
Direction
of the
Wind
wind
speed
MAC quotas from the (m/s)
axis ()
6
7
8
Background
mg/m3
MAC quotas
10
ENGLISH
TRANSLATION
ONLY
562444 UNOFFICIAL
6711731
2.0
1.5000000
0.3000000 FOR
73.0COURTESY
9.0
1.5000000
Page 683
0.3000000
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


0.0000000 mg/m3
Industrial Section
1
1
Source
numbe r
3
6002
Contribution
value
mg
MAC
/m
quotas
3
4
2.7621e-08
Contribution percentage
(%)
5
5.5242e-09
6
100.00
Reference point
Type of
point
1
Outside
the
sanitary
protection
zone
Residential
area
Border
with the
sanitary
protection
zone
MAX
Maximum
background
X
Y
Direction of the
Height
concentration
coordinate coordinate
wind from the
Z (m)
(m)
(m)
mg/m3
MAC
axis ()
quotas
2
3
4
5
6
7
556172
6714762
2.0 1.5000000 0.3000000
127.0
Wind
speed
(m/s)
Background
mg/m3
MAC
quotas
8
9
10
9.00 1.5000000 0.3000000
562444
6711731
2.0 1.5000000 0.3000000
73.0
9.00 1.5000000 0.3000000
560287
6705282
2.0 1.5000001 0.3000000
258.0
0.50 1.5000000 0.3000000
556172
6714762
2.0 1.5000000 0.3000000
127.0
9.00 1.5000000 0.3000000
zone
Contributions at the point within the standard sanitary protection zone with X and Y coordinates of 556172 and
6714762 respectively
1
1
3
6002
Contribution value
mg/m3
MAC quotas
4
1.0436e-08
5
2.0873e-09
Contribution
percentage (%)
6
100.00
Page 684
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


Contributions at the point within the residential area with X and Y coordinates of 562444 and 6711731 respectively
1
1
3
6002
Contribution value
mg/m3
MAC quotas
4
2.7621e-08
5
5.5242e-09
Contribution
percentage
(%)
6
100.00

Contributions at the point bordering the standard sanitary protection zone with X and Y coordinates of 560287 and

Contribution value
mg/m3
1
2
1
3
6002
4
9.8345e-08
Contribution
percentage
(%)
MAC quotas
5
1.9669e-08
6
100.00

Contributions at the maximum point according to the calculation squares with X and Y coordinates of 556172 and
site numbe r numbe r numbe
r
1
2
1
3
6002
Contribution value
mg/m3
MAC quotas
4
1.0436e-08
Contributio
n
percentage
(%)
5
6
2.0873e-09
100.00

Page 685
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Substance: 703 - Benzopyrene; 3,4-benzpyrene

* 10 is used)
Part 1
Industrial Section Source Type Season Back- Height Coefficient Diameter Localised source At the second end Areal
site
number number
ground
of relief
at one end of the
of the linear
width
number
linear centre to
source at the
the side of the
midpoint of the
area of the
opposite side of
source
the area
m
M
X (m) Y (m)
X (m)
Y (m)
M
1
3
6002
It. 1 Summer
2.0
1.0
10
11
12
559575 6705984 562910
13
14
******
2000
Part 2
GVS parameters
site
number
discharge
speed
m3/s
m/s
t
(1)
1
(2)
(3)
15
16
17
6002
Rate of
release
g/s

concentration
wind
distance
speed
mg/m3
m/s
18
19
20
21
22
4.3260e-11
1.0
1.2361e-09
0.50
11.4

4.326000000e-11 g/s
0.0000000 t/a
Cm/MAC = 0.0001236
(Cm+C)/MAC = 0.0001236
Calculation results
Summation group: 6009: 0301 + 0330
Coefficient for combining joint hygiene-related operations: 1.00
0.0000170 g/s
0.0000000 t/a
Cm/MAC = 0.0023738
(Cm+C)/MAC = 0.2823738
Calculation results

Page 686
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Number
1
1
X
Y
Height
coordinate coordinate Z (m)
(m)
(m)
2
562444
3
6711731
4
2.0
Maximum background Direction Wind

concentration
of the speed
(m/s)
mg/m3
MAC quotas wind
from the
axis ()
5
6
7
8
0.0000000
0.2800005
73.0
9.0
Background
mg/m3
MAC quotas
9
0.0000000
10
0.2800000

0.0000000 mg/m3

Page 687
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


1
1
3
6002
Contribution value
mg/m3
MAC quotas
4
0.0000000
5
0.0000005
Contribution
percentage
(%)
6
100.00
Reference point
Type of
point
1
Outside
the
sanitary
protection
zone
Residential
area
Border
with the
sanitary
protection
zone
MAX
X
coordinate
(m)
Y
coordinate
(m)
Height
Z (m)

Maximum
background
Background
Direction of the
Wind
concentration
wind from the speed
mg/m3
MAC
axis ()
(m/s)
mg/m3
MAC
quotas
quotas
5
6
7
8
9
10
2
559172
6705762
2.0 0.0000000 0.2800013
225.0
0.75 0.0000000 0.2800000
562513
6711721
2.0 0.0000000 0.2800005
73.0
9.00 0.0000000 0.2800000
559796
6705767
2.0 0.0000000 0.2800019
233.0
0.50 0.0000000 0.2800000
559172
6706762
2.0 0.0000000 0.2800019
202.0
0.50 0.0000000 0.2800000
zone
Contributions at the point within the standard sanitary protection zone with X and Y coordinates of 559172 and
1
1
3
6002
Contribution value
mg/m3
MAC quotas
4
0.0000000
5
0.0000013
Contribution
percentage
(%)
6
100.00

Page 688
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


Contributions at the point within the residential area with X and Y coordinates of 562513 and 6711721 respectively
1
1
3
6002
Contribution value
mg/m3
MAC quotas
4
0.0000000
5
0.0000005
Contribution
percentage
(%)
6
100.00

Contributions at the point bordering the standard sanitary protection zone with X and Y coordinates of 559796 and
1
1
3
6002
Contribution value
mg/m3
MAC quotas
4
0.0000000
5
0.0000019
Contribution
percentage
(%)
6
100.00

Contributions at the maximum point according to the calculation squares with X and Y coordinates of 559172 and
1
1
3
6002
Contribution value
mg/m3
MAC quotas
4
0.0000000
5
0.0000019
Contribution
percentage
(%)
6
100.00

Page 689
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


0.0000006 g/s
0.0000000 t/a
Cm/MAC = 0.0000976
(Cm+C)/MAC = 0.0300976
Calculation results

0.0000013 g/s
0.0000000 t/a
Cm/MAC = 0.0022753
(Cm+C)/MAC = 0.0322753
Calculation results

Page 690
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

APPENDIX 6
Materials relating to public hearings concerning the Nord Stream
project

Page 691
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

CONTENTS
1.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THE INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
PROCEDURE........................................................................................................................................................... 684
1.1. NOTIFICATION PERTAINING TO THE NORD STREAM PROJECT ..................................................... 684
1.2. COMPREHENSIVELY INFORMING THE PUBLIC ABOUT THE PROJECT ........................................ 685
1.3. WHITE PAPER .............................................................................................................................................. 685
1.4. INTERNATIONAL MEASURES CARRIED OUT BY THE COMPANY IN CONNECTION WITH THE
ADVANCEMENT OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NORD STREAM GAS PIPELINE............................... 687
2.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT
PROCEDURE........................................................................................................................................................... 693
2.1. WAYS OF INFORMING THE PUBLIC ABOUT HOLDING THE HEARINGS ....................................... 693
2.2. HOLDING PUBLIC HEARINGS RELATING TO THE PROJECT ............................................................ 693
2.3. OBSERVATIONS AND SUGGESTIONS MADE DURING THE PUBLIC HEARINGS.......................... 695
2.4. CONCLUSIONS BASED ON THE RESULTS OF THE PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING
ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECTS OF THE PROJECT .............................................................................................. 704
SUPPLEMENTS TO APPENDIX 6. ...................................................................................................................... 705

Page 692
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

INTRODUCTION
Public participation in the national Russian environmental impact assessment (EIA) procedure is essential in accordance
with Federal Law 174-FZ dated 23 November 1995 "On ecological expertise" and the "Regulation concerning the
impact assessment of the envisaged economic and other activities on the environment of the Russian Federation",
ratified by Order 372 dated 16 May 2000 issued by the Russian State Ecology Committee.
This Paper describes all the steps taken by the company with a view to maintaining a continuous dialogue between Nord
Stream and the general public in the Baltic Region countries.

Page 693
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

1.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THE INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL

IMPACT ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE
1.1.
Notification pertaining to the Nord Stream project
Nord Stream is one of the most open and transparent infrastructure projects in Europe.
One of the most important stages in the environmental impact assessment procedure, both in a national and international
context, is the project notification.
As regards the Nord Stream project, this procedure was performed in November 2006. The official notifications
constituted a detailed document describing the project as well as the nature of the possible impact on the environment
for so-called "passing parties" to whom this document was also sent. It reached various responsible State institutions in
the following countries: Russia, Finland Sweden, Denmark and Germany. "Affected parties" were also informed within
the notification framework: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania and Poland.
From this time, the company received 129 comments from responsible State institutions, establishments, NGOs and the
general public in the Baltic Region countries (Denmark - 5, Estonia - 12, Finland - 50, Germany - 29, Latvia - 1,
Lithuania - 1, Poland - 1, Russia - 1 and Sweden - 29). Nord Stream participated in 22 public hearings and meetings
during the first international consultation stage which has already been concluded.

Page 694
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

1.2.
Comprehensively informing the public about the project
Detailed project-related information was translated into 10 languages of the Baltic Region countries.
The company's website was translated into six languages
so that people could familiarise themselves with the
project and the progress of the environmental impact
assessment, as well as with a view to receiving criticisms
relating to the project and participation by governmental
and public organisations in discussions.
From April 2007, Nord Stream shall publish newsletters in
five languages on its website (www.nord-stream.ru).
These newsletters reflect the most important stages of the
project, for instance:
the fact that Nord Stream shall continue with its

environmental impact assessment;
the work strategy developed in the event of
munitions being discovered;
the fact that the European Union has confirmed
its support for the Nord Stream project;
the fact that the leading company has drawn up a
detailed technical design for the gas pipeline;
Nord Stream Project financing;
the fact that international consultations relating to
the Nord Stream project are continuing;
the pipe laying process;
the fact that Nord Stream is supporting
environmental and cultural projects in the Baltic
Region;
the fact that offshore pipelines are the most ecofriendly.
1.3.
White Paper
A White Paper was prepared on the basis of the questions and comments reaching the company from State institutions
and private individuals from all the countries in the Baltic Region following official notification of the project in
November 2006 and the publication of materials concerned with the project's progress in October 2007. This White
Paper represents an in-depth analysis of the results of international consultations with the public authorities in Baltic
Region countries and the general public. This compilation gives answers provided by Nord Stream (as at June 2008) to
more than 200 questions and comments from State institutions and private individuals from all the countries in the
Baltic Region.

Page 695
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

It satisfies the principles of transparency and open

dialogue observed by the Nord Stream company. It
constitutes an additional element of the process whereby
international consultations are held and the general public
is informed in accordance with the Espoo Convention
which regulates the environmental impact assessment
procedure in a transboundary context.
The White Paper is an important element of the
continuous dialogue which is taking place between Nord
Stream and the general public in the Baltic Region
countries. This compilation demonstrates the responsible
approach undertaken by Nord Stream in relation to all the
project-related comments it receives and provides
information on the general principles and the key results
of the company's research in a form which can be
understood by laymen in areas such as natural sciences,
project engineering, national and international law.
Mr. Dirk von Ameln, Deputy Technical Director of Nord Stream, who is responsible for finding solutions, pointed to
the following: "Nord Stream is carrying out the most extensive environmental research ever undertaken in the Baltic
Sea. The White Paper is one of the most important components of the on-going dialogue with the general public and
public authorities in this region".
The White Paper contains Nord Stream's replies to project-related questions and comments which reflect the project's
development and the results of the research carried out. The replies to all the questions which are of interest to the
general public are to be found in the EIA report. The sections of the White Paper direct the reader to the relevant
chapters of the report. The results of the scientific research and the changes to the gas pipeline route currently being
discussed are included in the final project report which was presented for consideration by State institutions in October
2008. The final report shall be published upon conclusion of the next round of international consultations.
Allowing for the complexity of the subjects affected and the comprehensive nature of the material, Nord Stream has
structured its White Paper in such a way so as to identify and elucidate more than 1,600 questions relating to the
potential impact of the gas pipeline on the environment, possible alternative routes and planned safeguards. The White
Paper is divided into 89 sections according to seven main topics and contains coherent replies to the questions raised.

Page 696
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

The 530 page compilation consists of two sections. The first section offers comments and replies to questions on
subjects raised by interested parties. The second section has chapters relating to the individual countries. Every chapter
presents comments received from countries and correlates these with the replies provided by Nord Stream in the
relevant section.
1.4.
International measures carried out by the company in connection with the advancement
of the construction of the Nord Stream gas pipeline
Ever since official notification of the project, Nord Stream has organised and participated in a multitude of events
whose main aim is to provide transparency for the project and exchange information.
Nord Stream AG is informing the general public about the environmental aspects of the offshore pipeline of the same
name, not just within the framework of official international and national procedures, but also outside this framework,
informing the public when international events are being held, conducting informal meetings with representatives of the
general public and replying to their letters.
Below is a list of the main events held within the framework of the project.
Events in 2006
1.
Information evening for local authority representatives in the Federal territory of MecklenburgWestern Pome rania, 23 June 2006
On 23 June 2006, Nord Stream held an information evening for local authority representatives in the Federal territory of
Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania. Nord Stream's General Manager and a technical and environmental expert delivered
presentations on the project, followed by a discussion. This event was organised in Schwerin, the capital of
Mecklenburg-Western Pomerania.
2.
Press Conference in Finland, 14 Nove mber 2006
The press conference was hosted by the Finnish Ministry of the Environment
to mark the start of Nord Stream's EIA programme in Finland. Following the
project presentation, Nord Stream representatives replied to questions put by
Finnish journalists.
Photo: Mr Dirk von Ameln, Permitting Director of Nord Stream, answers
questions raised by Finnish journalists.
3.
Public information meetings in Stockholm and Visby, 29-30
November 2006
Nord Stream held public information meetings within the framework of the
Espoo Convention in Stockholm and Visby (Gotland) on 29-30 November
2006, during which the company answered questions relating to the project
which were of interest to the general public. Inger Alness, from the Swedish
Environmental Protection Agency, also participated in the meetings and
presented a report concerning an assessment of the impact on the Swedish
environment.

Page 697
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

4.
Public meetings in Finland, 11-14 December 2006
Within the framework of the Espoo Convention, Nord Stream held public
meetings in Helsinki (11 December), Hanko (12 December), Turku (13
December) and Kotka (14 December). In the course of the meeting, the
company presented the project and answered a great number of questions
concerning its possible impact on the environment and fishing, energy supply
security, the route of the gas pipeline and other issues.
Events in 2007
5.
Participation in the Eighth International Environme ntal Forum - "Baltic Sea Day" - in St. Petersburg,
21 - 23 March 2007
A "Nord Stream project" round table meeting was held within the framework of the environmental forum: an
assessment of its impact on the environment within the framework of the Espoo Convention. The topics up for
discussion at this round table meeting were selected in execution of the recommendations made at the third and seventh
round table meetings relating to the Nord Stream project within the framework of the preceding Seventh International
Forum entitled "Baltic Sea Day", which took place on 22 - 23 March 2006.
92 representatives from 9 states (Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Poland, Russia, Switzerland, Sweden and
Estonia), including 7 Baltic Sea States, participated in the round table meetings. 14 reports were given hearings from the
round table meetings in Germany, Denmark, Lithuania, Russia and the "Coalition Clean Baltic" NGO. This NGO unites
NGOs in Germany, Denmark, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Russia, Ukraine, Sweden, Finland and Estonia.
The international community rated the company's activities very highly in terms of informing the general public in the
course of the project's implementation, specifically:
"The participants in the round table:
NOTE that on 19 April 2006, less than one month after the Seventh International Forum entitled "Baltic Sea Day" had
been held, its recommendations regarding commencement of the international assessment of the impact of the Nord
Stream project on the environment were implemented: at the initiative of the project's engineers, official bodies in five
countries (Germany, Denmark, Russia, Sweden and Finland), in whose waters it is proposed laying the gas pipeline,
initiated consultations concerning carrying out such an assessment within the framework of the Espoo Convention;
WELCOME the decision taken by the Russian Federation, which is not a party to the Espoo Convention, to participate
in carrying out such an assessment, acting in the spirit of good neighbourliness and cooperation;
APPROVE of extensive participation on the part of the general public in the EIA procedure concerning the Nord
Stream project, something which is realised on the basis of UNECE guidance on public participation in the
environmental impact assessment in a transboundary context (confirmed at the Third Meeting of the Parties to the
Espoo Convention (Cavtat, Croatia, 1-4 June 2004)), drawn up by an international group of experts, including
representatives from the EU, UNECE, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, UK, Hungary, Georgia, Italy, Kirghizia, Romania, Croatia,
Finland, France and Estonia, with Russia playing a coordinating role as the leading country. The full text of the
resolution is presented in Appendix No. 6-1.

Page 698
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

6.
2007
Information meeting with representatives of environme ntal organisations in St. Petersburg, 28 June
Nord Stream and the Russian Regional Environmental Centre held an information meeting with representatives of
environmental NGOs from the Baltic Region at which the gas pipeline construction project through the Baltic Sea was
presented.
7.
Public hearing regarding the preliminary EIA report in Vyborg, 23 November 2007
On 23 November 2007, in the municipal administration of the Leningrad oblast in the Vyborg District, public hearings
were held regarding the preliminary version of the EIA materials relating to the Russian sector of the Nord Stream
offshore gas pipeline.
Officials from the Vyborg District, managers of a number of enterprises in the district, representatives of leading
Russian and international ecological and environmental organisations, along with members of the media and Vyborg
district residents, participated in the hearings.
Events in 2008
8.
Nord Stream press briefing, Stockholm, 7 January 2008
On 7 January 2008, members of the Swedish media took part in the Nord Stream press briefing, which was dedicated to
submission of the application to undertake construction in Sweden. Nord Stream's Permitting Director, Mr Dirk von
Ameln, presented the project, while also dwelling on issues of energy development, climate change and the reliability of
gas supplies to Europe, having noted the particular importance of developing infrastructure projects with the aim of
procuring reliable energy supplies in the future. Mr von Ameln emphasised that the reduction in gas production in the
UK will establish the need to increase the volumes of gas imported into Europe. He also emphasised that Nord Stream
is a priority project within the framework of a development programme for Trans-European Energy Networks (TEN-E).
Mr Jens D. Mller, Nord Stream Communications Manager, described the process of submitting an application to
obtain a licence in Sweden.
9.
Public hearing of the Committee on Petitions, Brussels, 29 January 2008.
In response to the petition sent to the European Parliament in 2006 by representatives of Lithuania and Poland, the
European Parliament's Committee on Petitions adopted a resolution to prepare a report on an assessment of the impact
of the Nord Stream project on the environment. On 29 April 2008, the Committee conducted public hearings to which
all members of the European Parliament were invited. The discussion attracted the attention of a large number of
participants, primarily, European Parliament representatives from Poland, Lithuania, Latvia and Estonia. Matthias
Warnig, Nord Stream's Managing Director, and Mr Dirk von Ameln, Permitting Director, were invited to participate in
the discussion as speakers.

Page 699
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Other speakers included representatives from the company Ramboll - an independent consultant providing the Nord
Stream project with expertise in the sphere of environmental research, high-ranking representatives from interested
parties - European institutions, scientific research centres, NGOs involved with energy-related issues and the impact on
the environment, as well as independent experts. Stavros Dimas, European Commissioner for the Environment,
reminded MEPs that responsibility for conducting the environmental impact assessment procedure in connection with
the project will not rest with the European Commission but with the countries affected. He also added that Nord Stream
had participated in a large number of consultations and was discharging all the obligations incumbent upon it in
accordance with international legislation. Stavros Dimas particularly noted the transparency of the Nord Stream project.
Andris Piebalgs, European Commissioner for Energy, explained that the Nord Stream gas pipeline would increase the
reliability of energy supplies to Western Europe, guaranteeing additional supplies along the new route. This is precisely
why, in accordance with the Guidelines on Trans-European Energy Networks (TEN-E), Nord Stream acquired the status
of a priority, trans-European infrastructure project which satisfies general European interests. Andris Piebalgs also
noted that Nord Stream is not the only channel whereby gas can be transported to Europe, but is an extremely attractive
proposition which should be regarded as an addition, and not as an alternative, to other planned infrastructure projects
and those which require completion. Mr Piebalgs called on MEPs to support the Nord Stream project. Nord Stream
welcomed the initiative of the European Parliament's Committee on Petitions inasmuch as it afforded a unique
opportunity to broaden dialogue with the European Parliament and to take it to a new level. During the public hearings,
Nord Stream representatives had the opportunity to respond to all the questions - all members of the European
Parliament's relevant committees received replies in writing.
10.
Round table meeting with environme ntal NGOs, 14 May 2008
At the round table meeting with environmental NGOs which took

place in Riga on 14 May 2008, Nord Stream received praise for its
openness and its serious attitude to environmental concerns. The
meeting was organised with a view to exchanging information
regarding the development of the Nord Stream project and
discussing issues of concern to the ecological community. At the
meeting, detailed information concerning optimisation of the gas
pipeline route, environmental research and international
consultations within the framework of the Espoo Convention was
presented which regulates the environmental impact assessment
procedure in a transboundary context.

Page 700
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

The round table meeting in the Latvian capital took place immediately after the Forum of Baltic Sea States NGOs,
anticipating the meeting of Heads of State and Government in the Baltic Sea Region which will take place in Riga in
June 2008. The forum was attended by representatives of leading international environmental organisations from
Denmark, Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Russia, Finland, Sweden and Estonia, including the Baltic Environmental Forum
Group, the Russian Regional Environmental Centre, the Green Party in Estonia, MILKAS in Sweden, Russian Green
World, the Centre for Environmental Initiatives, the cross-border environmental information agency and other
institutions. Nord Stream experts talked in detail about the project's progress and the on-going, detailed research in the
Baltic Sea, noting the particular importance of the work on the EIA report, the final version of which should be
submitted this year. The company is planning to hand over the one-off research results to representatives of HELCOM the Baltic Marine Environment Protection Commission - in order to make this information as readily available as
possible to the environmental community. The data collected will be used to facilitate further research into the Baltic
Sea's ecosystem. In the main, the environmental community is interested in issues linked to the project's possible impact
on the environment and the characteristics of coordinating the project in the various countries, in particular, everything
concerning the environmental impact assessment procedure with regard to the Russian part of the project. Despite the
fact that Russia has not ratified the Espoo Convention, it intends to clearly follow its recommendations with respect to
execution of the Nord Stream project. Representatives of the environmental community are concerned about the
possible pipeline route near the planned Ingermanland Nature Reserve. Nord Stream experts emphasised that they are
ready to discuss this and other issues in more detail, while also emphasising their interest in consolidating cooperation
and the mutual exchange of information with NGOs. Participants at the meeting were satisfied with the detailed
information they received and noted that the Nord Stream project was one of the most transparent in the Baltic Sea
region, while experts in the company re giving particular thought to cooperation with the aim of preserving the
environment in the unique Baltic Sea region. Vera Ovcharenko, from Russian Green World and the international
"Coalition Clean Baltic" NGO, commented: "This is the first time we have been present at such meetings where
company experts were very attentive to the questions and comments received from environmentalists". The participants
in the Riga meeting agreed to hold similar round table discussions involving Baltic Sea region environmental agencies
and Nord Stream representatives. Comments made at these future meetings would be taken into account during the
project's implementation.
11.
Gas pipeline information tour around Baltic Region countries
Nord Stream has developed a mobile exhibition devoted to its project.
This information tour, the aim of which is to provide the general public
with information on all aspects of the project's development, will be
housed in a bus which will travel to many towns along the Baltic Sea
coast.
These exhibitions have already visited Finland and Sweden while tours through Germany, Russia and Denmark are
planned. The information tour is designed to explain all aspects of the Nord Stream project to the public at large.
Visitors will be able to learn more about Nord Stream using, for example, an interactive multimedia terminal which
provides interesting information on environmental issues, the use of gas, gas pipeline safety, its construction and
operation.

Page 701
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

2.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THE NATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT

ASSESSMENT PROCEDURE
In the context of public participation in discussions on construction of the Nord Stream gas pipeline project, public
hearings were held on two occasions - at the investment report stage in 2006 and at the feasibility study / project stage
in 2007.
Minutes of the public hearings involving discussions of the environmental impact assessment materials consisting of the
"Additional amendments to the investment report pertaining to construction of the North European gas pipeline
considering the increase in gas supplies for export to 55 billion m3 per annum" in the Leningrad oblast are presented in
Appendix 6-2.
2.1.
Ways of informing the public that hearings are being conducted
In accordance with Federal Law No 174-FZ dated 23 November 1995 "On ecological expertise", public discussions are
being conducted on the initiative of local authority bodies. In connection with this, the Head of the municipal
administration of the Leningrad oblast in the Vyborg District issued Decree 30 dated 15 October 2007 "Regarding
the holding of public hearings concerning a general outline of the project" which included the Nord Stream gas pipeline
construction project (Appendix 6-3).
In accordance with Order No. 372 dated 16 May 2000 issued by the Russian State Ecology Committee, information
concerning the location and timeframes for holding public discussions was published in the Federal publication
"Rossiyskaya Gazeta" 236 dated 23 October 2007) and three regional publications ("Vesty - the main newspaper in
the Leningrad oblast" 205 dated 3 October 2007), "Sankt-Petersburg Vedomosty" 199 dated 23 October 2007;
"Vyborg" 166 dated 19 October 2007). (Appendix 6-4).
The technical report concerned with conducting the Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and preliminary EIA
materials were available for perusal by the general public from 23 October 2007 to 23 November 2007 in the offices of
the municipal administration in the Vyborg District, at the central library named after A. Aalto (in Vyborg) and on Nord
Stream AG's company website (www.nord-stream.com). Electronic versions of all of the materials were made available
to all interested public organisations.
The following were placed in the library for receiving criticisms, suggestions and comments:
a register of legal entities and natural persons;

a book for suggestions and observations (Appendix 6-5).
2.2.
Holding public hearings relating to the project
On 23 November 2007, in the municipal administration of the Leningrad oblast in the Vyborg District, public hearings
were held regarding the preliminary version of the EIA materials relating to the Russian sector of the Nord Stream
offshore gas pipeline.
Officials from the Vyborg District, managers of a number of enterprises in the district, representatives of leading
Russian and international ecological and environmental organisations, along with members of the media and Vyborg
district residents, participated in the hearings.

Page 702
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

A complete list of all those participating in the public hearings is provided in Appendix 6-6.
Nord Stream experts talked about the project and the detailed environmental research that had been carried out, while
also presenting their findings based on the preliminary version of the EIA materials that, on the whole, the Nord Stream
gas pipeline will not have a significant impact on the environment.
Fig. 1. Public hearings at the municipal administration of the Leningrad oblast in the Vyborg District
Representatives of the "Peter Gaz" corporation and Nord Stream AG responded to questions raised by the
environmental community and took note of their comments which will be considered when preparing the final version
of the EIA materials relating to the Russian sector of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline.

Page 703
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Fig. 2.
Chief project engineer G. V. Grudnitskiy answers questions put by members of the general public
In the course of public discussions relating to the project, comments and suggestions were received from various NGOs
and experts, including from Mr. A. N. Sutyagin, "Friends of the Baltic", an inter-regional, environmental organisation
for young people, TEIA [Transboundary Environmental Information Agency] and others. (Appendix 6-7).
Further to the hearings conducted Minutes of the public hearings on discussion of the technical specification of
performing the environmental impact assessment and the preliminary EIA materials pertaining to construction of the
Russian sector of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline (feasibility study/project stage) were drawn up and signed.
The full text of the minutes is presented in Appendix No. 6-8.
2.3.
Observations and suggestions made during the public hearings
All observations made during the public hearings were considered when formulating the volumes of EIA materials.
The table, by way of example, provides several responses to observations made during the public hearings.

Page 704
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

REPLIES TO OBSERVATIONS MADE BY THE GENERAL PUBLIC

Observations and suggestions made
A. N. Sutyagin, project entitled "Monitoring the
Baltic pipeline system". Observations on the
preliminary EIA materials relating to the Russian
sector of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline,
prepared for the public hearings on 23 Nove mber
2007.
According to page 3 of the preliminary EIA materials
relating to the Russian sector of the Nord Stream
offshore gas pipeline, in the synopsis for non-specialists,
not a single accident resulting in the shutting off or
reparation of offshore pipelines built after 1980 was
registered. This assertion is based on information
confirming the absence of accidents involving offshore
gas pipelines (Energy Institute, London) and does not
correspond to the data found in Table 11.2-1, Page 223,
of the preliminary EIA materials relating to the Russian
sector of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline
(offshore section), or to the data in PARLOC-2001
("The Update of Loss of Containment Data for Offshore
Pipelines", 5th edition, 2003). Please explain this
disparity.
According to page 3 of the preliminary EIA materials
offshore gas pipeline, in the synopsis for non-specialists,
and in the preliminary EIA materials relating to the
Russian sector of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline
(offshore section), in accordance with design solutions
along the entire length of the section from the water
edge up to the isobathic line of minus 10 m, the pipeline
will be laid in a trench ensuring its depth. At the same
time, according to page 10 of the same preliminary EIA
materials relating to the Russian sector of the Nord
Stream offshore gas pipeline, in the synopsis for nonspecialists, and in the preliminary EIA materials relating
to the Russian sector of the Nord Stream offshore gas
pipeline (offshore section), the working of the trench for
laying the pipeline will take place along the section of
the route from the water line in Portovaya Bay to an
isobathic line of minus 20 m, i.e. along a length
exceeding by almost 5 times the length of a gas pipeline
section in the former case. Please explain the reason for
this disparity.
Please assess the impact
Replies
Note: The observations made and the references to the
lists of preliminary EIA materials relate to the
preliminary version of the EIA materials presented at
the public hearings.
In the final version of the draft, statistical data

concerning gas pipeline incidents is given in the
Industrial Safety Declaration (vol. 11 of the draft).
In the course of development work, certain technical

solutions, including the parameters of the trench along
the coastal section, were changed, in particular, in order
to minimise the volume of excavation and the
subsequent damage to the environment. Finally, the
need to work the trench from the water edge up to the
isobathic line of minus 12 m was substantiated. This
solution is documented in the "Construction
organisation plan" (vol. 7, book 1) and vol. 3, book 4,
part 1. All the calculations performed in the final
version of the EIA materials (vol. 8 of this draft) are
based on these definitive parameters.
This assessment is provided in the

Page 705
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


of nautical accidents on the safety of the Russian sector
of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline (offshore
section) or provide proof of absence of such an impact.
According to the preliminary EIA materials relating to
the Russian sector of the Nord Stream offshore gas
pipeline (offshore section), Section 11.2.2, Page 222 "Basic accident scenarios", various options are
examined in the event of methane escaping when the gas
pipeline is damaged, for instance, through micro holes
(flaws) in the pipe. However, no calculations have been
produced in the preliminary EIA materials regarding the
dispersion, diffusion and absorption of the methane in
water, and the formation of volumes of water with
methane concentrations which are toxic for the regional
fauna and flora.
The EIA materials relating to the Russian sector of the
Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline (offshore section) do
not contain any analysis of the possible presence and
negative impact on the environment of explosive
munitions submerged along the route of the main gas
pipeline (or in its safety corridor) (mines, bombs,
projectiles and other dangerous objects) during the
construction and operation thereof.
Please provide actual bathymetric and geolocation
profiles of the route (scale 1:1000000 or higher) with an
indication of the distribution of the areas of
impermissible spans, seabed movement zones, etc.
The EIA materials do not show the boundaries of areas
which impact on given specially protected natural sites
during construction of the gas pipeline - areas where
suspensions disperse, areas of acoustic influence, areas
affected when methane escapes following an accident,
etc. No proof is furnished of the fact that, during the
construction and operation phase, given specially
protected natural sites will not be adversely affected in
any way whatsoever by agitating factors (the storage of
construction tools and gear, etc. on their territories,
unlawful hunting and fishing, the presence of gas
pipeline personnel and suchlike). There is no indication
of the extent of boundaries of sites inhabited by sea
birds or those which reside near the water with respect
to the pipeline route
Replies
"Industrial Safety Declaration (vol. 11).
Such assessments are provided in the final version of the

EIA materials: vol. 8, book 1, part 1, pp. 274-277.
Inasmuch as the project makes provision for a thorough

inspection of the route and clearing it of dangerous
objects (including explosive munitions), contact with
such objects is excluded and there is no need to examine
its consequences for the environment.
Actual bathymetric profiles of the route, along with

detailed information on the nature of the soils,
hydrometeorological and other parameters are presented
in the engineering survey materials (vol. 12, book 1).
Questions regarding the possible impact of the
construction of the gas pipeline on specially protected
natural sites and corresponding graphic materials are
listed in vol. 8, book 1, part 1, on pages 56-60 and in
Appendix 2 (map). The project did not make provision
for the presence of personnel or the storage of materials
on islands or in adjacent waters (see also "The
organisation of construction", vol. 7).

Page 706
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


and its area of influence, for example, close to the
islands of Bolshoy and Maliy Fiskar, Gogland and
others. The preliminary EIA (Page 206, point 9.5.2)
mistakenly asserts that the least vulnerable time for sea
birds is the months of August and September although,
in reality, the habitats of sea birds on their return flights
have been observed during September and October in
the area of Portovaya Bay. There is no indication of the
extent of boundaries of existing grounds inhabited by
marine mammals and other places which are important
for their ecology with regard to the route taken by the
gas pipeline and its area of influence.
According to the technical report into performance of
the environmental impact assessment relating to the
Russian sector of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline
dated 29 March 2007, areas which are of great
importance for fish reproduction should be taken into
account in the EIA as special construction conditions.
However, according to inquiry 17/96 raised by the
"Peter Gaz" corporation dated 15 September 2006
(Appendix 10-1, Page 406), no questions were asked at
all regarding the locations of such areas (spawning
grounds, feeding and wintering grounds for fish,
migration routes). The only enquiries made related to
fishing and trawling areas. For this reason, the
preliminary EIA only shows the location of fishing areas
of the "Primorsky Rybak" corporation (fig. 10.1-1) and
not the location of spawning, feeding and wintering
grounds and migration routes of the principal
commercial fish species located along the gas pipeline
route.
There is even a lack of information on fish catches in the
fishing zones of the "Primorsky Rybak" corporation.
Data on fish caught are only given for the Gulf of
Finland as a whole.
Extreme negligence in calculating the damage to fish

fauna realised in the preliminary EIA stands out like a
sore thumb (State Scientific and Research Institute
concerned with fishing in lakes and rivers).
Replies
Development of the EIA in the sphere of safeguarding

fish stocks was entrusted to the establishment carrying
out public monitoring of the state of fish stocks in the
region (State Scientific and Research Institute concerned
with fishing in lakes and rivers) which, according to the
technical report, had to take into account those spawning
grounds and areas on the bottom which are important as
regards reproduction. This was done when assessing the
resources which are necessary for replacing the forecast
losses in fish stocks. Obtaining a more detailed
description of the spawning grounds and the migration
of fish along the pipeline route is recommended during
execution of the industrial environmental inspection and
monitoring until the start of production work in the
waters where fishing establishments are located with the
aim of defining industrial production periods more
precisely with a view to avoiding impacts on the fish, as
well as on the spawn, larvae and fry of commercial fish,
during the spawning season.
The information provided on fish caught over the last 10
years characterises the state of hunting and stocks of
those commercial species of fish caught which gain
weight in all the waters of the Gulf of Finland.
Information on the fish caught by one commercial
fishing organisation is insufficient for analysing the
level of utilisation of fish stocks which have been caught
by several commercial fishing organisations.
A reduction in zooplankton biomass does not imply its
loss. Any impact on fish food resource organisms when

Page 707
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


Above all, the conclusion drawn by the preliminary EIA
(refer to Page 196) whereby 25% of plankton dies in the
event of increased turbidity in the range from 10 mg/l to
50 mg/l is completely without foundation since,
according to its own published monitoring results in its
paper entitled "The impact of increased turbidity in the
water as a result of the performance of hydroengineering
work on the structural and functional characteristics of
zooplankton", which was drawn up by O. N. Susloparov,
V. A. Ogorodnikov and N. N. Volkhonekaya, vol. 1, pp.
274-334, State Scientific and Research Institute
concerned with fishing in lakes and rivers, St.
Petersburg, 2006), the quantity of zooplankton biomass
fell 3-9 fold in the presence of additional turbidity
ranging from 18 mg/l to 60 mg/l as a result of dredging,
for example, in Luzhsk Bay. This means that in a
genuine experiment, only 30-10% of plankton survived,
and not 75% as in the preliminary EIA. And even less
plankton survived with a turbidity range in excess of 50
mg/l. By the same token, food resource losses as a result
of temporary damage will be three times higher than in
the preliminary EIA.
Replies
conducting hydroengineering work is dependent on
many factors, including the extent of suspended
particles and pollution (by petroleum products, heavy
metals and other substances), seafloor sediments,
secondary contamination and the duration of the impact.
A sufficiently wide range of empirical data is available
on this issue, offering varying levels of aquatic organism
losses. Therefore, in the industrial environmental
inspection and monitoring schedules, provision is
always made for sampling of sea-bottom organisms and
zooplankton and a more precise definition of the level of
the impact on aquatic organisms and the extent of
aquatic bioresource losses.
Although the preliminary EIA confirms, with reference

to S. A. Patin's well-known book ("Oil and the Ecology
of the Continental Shelf", All-Russian Scientific
Research Institute for Fishing and Oceanography, 2001),
that seafloor biotic communities are already wiped out
when the bottom is backfilled with sediment to a
thickness of 5 mm (refer to Page 193 of the preliminary
EIA and others), when calculating the level of
permanent damage due to the Baltic herring losing its
breeding grounds when the trenches are filled, refer to
Page 200, consideration is only given to the impact at a
distance of 18 m from trenches in the event of these
being backfilled with a layer of sediment more than 100
mm thick. However, fish eggs perish under a
substantially thinner layer of sediment of 5 - 10 mm or
more. Hence, the permanent damage as a result of the
Baltic herring losing its breeding grounds is
underestimated at least 10 times fold!
Moreover, "scientists" from the State Scientific and
Research Institute concerned with fishing in lakes and
rivers forgot that the permissible removal of commercial
stocks of Baltic herring, which they themselves
estimated at 8,800 tonnes (refer to Paget 200 of the
preliminary EIA), is measured in tonnes per annum, i.e.
it makes sense to indicate the extent of catches which
are permitted during a single fishing season.
The impact on spawning substrata of Baltic herring fish

(macrophytes, soil surfaces) and not losses of seafloor
biotic communities is estimated. The loss of seafloor
biotic communities does not so much depend on the
thickness of the sediment as on the characteristic
features of the organisms making up the seafloor
community (the extent of macrophytes, the versatility of
the fauna, the extent of siphonal growth in bicuspid
molluscs and so on), as well as on the speed of
deposition of soil particles and the extent of such
particles. The book by S. A. Patin is not a
comprehensive monograph on this critical issue. The
industrial environmental inspection and monitoring
schedules always make provision for an elaboration of
the extent of the impact on seafloor biotic communities.
What is meant here is the average annual permissible

level of commercial stock removal over a period of
many years. In the final version of the EIA materials, a
conversion to the impact on fish resources was
performed in accordance with accepted technical
solutions.

Page 708
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


When calculating the level of permanent damage, it is
also necessary to multiply the specific damage inflicted
over a period of one year by the number of years during
which the work will be in progress, i.e. for at least 8
years, according to Page 199 of the preliminary EIA.
Hence, the permanent losses suffered by the Baltic
herring are underestimated at least 8 fold and are not in
the order of 3 tonnes, as specified in the preliminary
EIA, Page 200, but at least 30-240 tonnes!
In addition (refer to Page 200 of the preliminary EIA),
the authors calculating the level of losses confused the
roe stage of development of the Baltic herring (fish eggs
are located on the bottom or on macrophytes) with its
larval stage (larvae and alevins swim near the surface of
the water), which continues for 1-2 months and requires
a ban on dredging work being carried out, if only until
the end of June (N. Popov, "Dynamics over a period of
many years of the state of Baltic herring stocks in the
eastern part of the Gulf of Finland and determining
factors"). "Ecological aspects of the impact of hydraulic
engineering on the regional fauna and flora in the
spawning grounds of the eastern part of the Gulf of
Finland", vol. 2, pp. 119 - 139, State Scientific and
Research Institute concerned with fishing in lakes and
rivers, St. Petersburg, 2006).
In the preliminary EIA, when calculating the permanent
and temporary losses, no consideration whatsoever is
given to losses influenced by algal macrophyte
suspensions which serve as a substrate for the roe of the
Baltic herring during spawning (O. A. Sherstneva "The
influence of turbidity in the water on the population and
productivity of submerged macrophytes on the eastern
shore of the Gulf of Finland", "Ecological aspects of the
impact of hydraulic engineering on the regional fauna
and flora in the spawning grounds of the eastern part of
the Gulf of Finland", vol. 1, pp. 12-35, State Scientific
and Research Institute concerned with fishing in lakes
and rivers, St. Petersburg, 2006).
When calculating the temporary losses (refer to Pages
200-201 of the preliminary EIA), the reduction in the
volume of water in the area of negative influence of the
suspended matter on account of the volume of the
trenches, or the soil separated from it, is totally absurd
since, in the soil (of the trench), zooplankton does not
only not survive but does not even breed. Also, the
thrice-repeated subtraction of the volume of soil
separated from the trench from three volumes of water
containing differing concentration levels of suspended
matter is absurd three times over.
Replies
The level of permanent losses is counted using another
formula and does not require multiplication by 8 years
(Page 204). The damage to fish stocks is calculated as
being methodically correct.
This aspect is being taken into consideration: work in

these waters will commence in July.
In this instance, the macrophytes are not used by the

industry, are not eaten by the fish and are only regarded
as spawning substrata.
The volume of soil is deducted from the general area of

increased turbidity because zooplankton do not live in
the soil.

Page 709
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


There is no justification at all for the reducing
coefficient 7 (refer to Page 204 of the preliminary EIA)
since, in reality, the variation in prices in terms of a
kilogramme in weight between salmon and the
remaining fish species (whitefish, smelt and others) does
not exceed 200-300% (by2007 prices).
According to Page 160 of the preliminary EIA materials
offshore gas pipeline (offshore section), ichthyological
mapping only took place during the autumn when the
principal commercial fish species (Baltic herring, bream,
smelt and others) are not spawning. For this reason, no
calculation was performed of the damage resulting from
losses of roe and larvae during hydroengineering work refer to Page 198.
The basis for this - the fact that during the spawning
season, according to the data obtained from inspections
in the area of the Beryozovye Islands, the fish are
avoiding areas where hydroengineering work is being
carried out - is incorrect because: a) no data has been
produced from these very observations corroborating
this fact, b) no such data can be available in principle
since, according to Page 205 of the preliminary EIA, at
the request of fish conservation agencies, a ban is being
observed on all forms of hydroengineering work from
April until 15 June inclusive during the spawning
season. For this reason, a calculation of the damage to
fish stocks, as per Page 198 of the preliminary EIA, does
not have any basis in principle.
The particular losses suffered by plankton-eating fish

(refer to Page 200 of the preliminary EIA and others) on
account of the reduction in available food resources for
such fish during trench development and backfilling in
Portovaya Bay are not substantiated either.
Although calculations have been carried out in relation
to the areas having a negative impact on such fish when
performing hydroengineering work (refer to table 9.4-3
for the suspended matter content because of turbidity),
the preliminary EIA does not contain any information on
the background level of the concentration of suspended
matter in
Replies
This coefficient is based on a method and the price level
of various species of fish in the Leningrad oblast
(determined by the statistical management of the
regional administration on a quarterly basis). The price
of salmon is not being compared with species of
whitefish but with average prices according to the
composition of the catch.
Incorrect. Autumnal mapping was performed in 2005,
while spring and summer mapping took place in 2006.
No calculation was performed of the damage resulting
from losses of roe and larvae during hydroengineering
work since no hydroengineering and earth work will be
taking place in the waters or in the coastal area during
the vulnerable periods of the life cycles of fish and
pinniped mammals (breeding and spawning migration).
This assertion does not correspond to reality. During
construction of the port of Primorsk in the Strait of
Berkezund, inspections were performed by the State
Scientific and Research Institute concerned with fishing
in lakes and rivers. In point of fact, there was no need to
carry out any inspections on the impact of
hydroengineering work on spawning fish. Any work in
the water must be prohibited during the spawning
season. Such a decision by fish conservation agencies
was taken several decades ago on the basis of inspection
results. One of these inspections was the impact of
hydromechanised work in the Salekhard river port on
the spawning season of species of whitefish in the River
Sob in the 1980s (the documents can be found in the
"The Central department of fisheries expert opinion and
standards concerned with the conservation and
rehabilitation of fish stocks" Federal State Institution).
The parameters of the feeding components of plankton
and sea-bottom organisms are determined by the State
in lakes and rivers. If other data is available, it should be
included in the observations.
Consideration is given to background concentrations in
all programmes concerned with calculating the
dispersion of suspended matter. The area affected as far
as aquatic bioresources are concerned was determined
taking account of the maximum allowable concentration
of suspended matter for the shelf and data provided by
the State Scientific and Research Institute concerned
with fishing in lakes and rivers.

Page 710
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


areas where hydroengineering work is being performed,
in particular, in Portovaya Bay. According to the
preliminary EIA, such data on the background level of
the concentration of suspended matter in areas where
hydroengineering work is being performed was not
calculated, not determined by experiments, and not even
inquired about. Given this, it is not possible to reliably
assess the extent of the negative impact of the solution
which forms when carrying out hydroengineering work
on ichthyofauna or on aquatic organisms as a whole.
The preliminary EIA also fails to determine the damage
to the fishing industry when establishing the safety
corridor (1 km either side of the gas pipeline) during gas
pipeline operation and construction.
Please do not just perform an accurate calculation of the
damage to fishing stocks which is pertinent to actual
activity, but present to the preliminary EIA the
substantiated alteration to the design solutions and
technology used to lay the main gas pipeline which will
enable such damage to be actually and appreciably
reduced.
Please take into account the fact that, with the

technology being used, according to Table 6.3-1 of Page
112 to the preliminary EIA, the duration of settlement of
the suspended matter in the coastal part in
concentrations which are toxic to the regional fauna and
flora will be more than 3 months, for the duration of the
construction itself - about 1 month, i.e. the impact of the
construction of the main gas pipeline will not be brief
and negligible as stated in the preliminary EIA.
According to the technical report dated 29 March 2007

concerning performance of the EIA relating to the
Russian sector of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline,
the development of an industrial and environmental
programme for monitoring the impact of gas pipeline
construction and operation was required.
Replies
During the period of pipeline operation when using

fixed casting and trap nets, no losses are anticipated for
the fishing industry provided, during this time, vessels
which ensure pipeline operation (or repair) do not
operate.
The calculation corresponds to accepted procedures.
There is no justification for recalculating the damage. If
necessary, this recalculation may only be performed by
the State Scientific and Research Institute concerned
with fishing in lakes and rivers, using its original data
pertaining to regional fauna and flora, something which
it did when drawing up the final version of the
environmental impact assessment in connection with the
updating of the technical solutions for the concluding
stages of the project. In conclusion, recommendations
are necessary concerning the issues broached relating to
the performance of the industrial environmental
inspection and monitoring.
The data obtained by the State Scientific and Research
Institute concerned with fishing in lakes and rivers
regarding monitoring is different. It is possible that there
is a lack of data used in the model. In reality, the
suspended matter is absorbed by the plankton,
coagulates and settles much more quickly. The State
in lakes and rivers did not obtain data demonstrating
100% zooplankton loss under turbidity conditions of
100 mg/l in Neva Bay. Justification for recalculating the
damage resulting to fish stocks on the basis of this
design solution must be obtained when performing the
industrial environmental inspection and monitoring.
A detailed monitoring programme was presented in vol.
8. book 5 of the draft.

Page 711
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Replies
However, such a monitoring programme was not

presented in the month leading up to the hearings or
during the hearings themselves.
Questions and suggestions put by the "Friends of the
Baltic" organisation
When assessing the impact of the project on the
environment, consideration was not given to background
characteristics ... To carry out additional research ... and
evaluate the impact of the project as a whole together
with existing environmental violations.
The EIA materials do not indicate the boundaries of
existing and planned specially protected natural sites ...
an assessment was carried out of the possible impact of
the project on the ecosystems of the specially protected
natural sites.
The EIA materials do not provide any information on
important fishing industry areas close to the route taken
by the gas pipeline.
Background contamination of the Gulf of Finland's

ecosystems is taken into account in the final EIA
materials when assessing secondary contamination of
the aquatic environment whose seafloor sediments
contain pollutants.
listed in vol. 8, book 1, part 1, on pages 56 - 60 and in
Appendix 2 (map).
Such information is provided in vol. 8. book 1, part 1,
pp. 171 - 172, in the final version of the EIA materials.
The EIA materials do not contain any information

relating to the use of coastal territories and islands in the
Gulf of Finland for storing construction equipment and
other auxiliary materials and equipment.
The project did not make provision for the presence of

personnel or the storage of materials on islands or in
coastal areas with the exception of the construction area
in Portovaya Bay (see also "The organisation of
construction", vol. 7).
Memorandum of social responsibility of Russian

business
A proposal to the Nord Stream company to support the
establishment of the Ingermanland Nature Reserve
To conduct additional investigations of the pipeline

route for the purpose of identifying any dangerous
objects.
We propose that independent monitoring be conducted

within the area of potential impact of the pipeline and
that its results be made available to the public.
Letter from the TEIA [Transboundary

Environme ntal Information Agency]:
Regarding the possible impact of the intended
Nord Stream supports the idea of the establishment of

the Ingermanland Nature Reserve and shall be pleased
to examine concrete proposals for action which could
promote implementation of this project.
A detailed inspection of the entire route for the purpose
of identifying submerged chemical weapons and
dangerously explosive objects was conducted by Nord
Stream and on its instructions. Careful inspection of the
exposed objects will be continued.
The project makes provision for performing industrial
and environmental monitoring in the construction area
and in adjacent waters (including on islands). A design
for the industrial and environmental monitoring system
is provided in vol. 8 book 3.

Page 712
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6


activity on the specially protected natural sites
Taking account of the background state of ecosystems

when assessing the impact of constructing the gas
pipeline.
2.4
Replies
listed in vol. 8, book 1, part 1, on pages 56 - 60 and in
Appendix 2 (map).
Background concentrations of contaminants in the
atmosphere in the construction area are extremely small,
the impact of bulk oil terminals in Primorsk and
Vysotsk is not observed here, and background
contamination is therefore disregarded in the EIA
materials. The increase in background turbidity
associated with other forms of economic activity in the
Gulf of Finland is a transitory phenomenon comparable
with the natural increase in turbidity following storms
and, for this reason, this process is also disregarded. At
the same time, background contamination of the
ecosystems in the Gulf of Finland is taken into account
in the final EIA materials when assessing secondary
contamination of the aquatic environment by pollutants
contained in the seabed sediments.
Conclusions based on the results of the public hearing concerning environmental aspects
of the project
Representatives of public organisations and the local administration and residents of the Vyborg District familiarised
themselves with the preliminary EIA materials pertaining to construction of the Russian sector of the Nord Stream
offshore gas pipeline along the bottom of the Gulf of Finland and, having taken these materials into consideration,
expressed their wishes that both Nord Stream AG and project engineers of "Peter Gaz" consider the observations and
suggestions put forward when completing the environmental impact assessment.
Additional completion work saw consideration given to all possible observations which were reflected in the volumes
of the draft.

Page 713
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

SUPPLEMENTS TO APPENDIX 6.

Page 714
PETER GAZ No. 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

APPENDIX 6-1

Page 715
International Environmental Forum

"Baltic Sea Day"
St. Petersburg, 21 - 23 March 2007

"Baltic Sea Day"
ROUND TABLE RESOLUTION

The "Nord Stream" project: Environme ntal impact assessment within the framework of the Espoo convention
Within the framework of the Eighth International Environmental Forum - "Baltic Sea Day"
CHAIRMEN: S. G. Serdyukov (Technical Director, Nord Stream AG), A. A.Startsev (Representative of the
Environmental Committee of the State Duma of the Russian Federation), N. B. Tretyakova (Ministry of Natural
Resources in the Russian Federation, Head of the Russian delegation in HELCOM)
Number of participants: 92
The subject of this round table was chosen in order to implement Recommendations 3 and 7 of the Round Table on the
Nord Stream project (NEGP) within the framework of the Seventh International Forum - "Baltic Sea Day" (22 - 23
March 2006) whereby it was recommended to the project management to carry out an assessment of the impact of the
gas pipeline on the environment on the basis of international environmental law and with the involvement of
international and national experts, as well as to provide public access to comprehensive environmental information
during the EIA process.
The round table sessions were attended by 92 representatives from 9 states
(Germany, Latvia, Lithuania, Norway, Poland, Russia, Switzerland, Sweden and Estonia) including 7 states of the
Baltic Sea region. 14 presentations were made by round table participants from Germany, Lithuania, Russia and the
"Coalition Clean Baltic" NGO consisting of non-governmental organisations from Germany, Denmark, Latvia,
Lithuania, Poland, Russia, Ukraine, Sweden, Finland and Estonia.
CONSIDERING THE FACT that the Nord Stream project is part of the Trans-European Transport Networks (TEN-E)
development programme and is carried out in accordance with the basic goals of the common European energy policy:
stability, competitiveness and reliability of supplies;
TAKING INTO ACCOUNT the fact that the implementation of the Nord Stream project is designed to mitigate
possible energy shortages in European countries to ensure their economic development in a sustainable manner.
NOTING the importance of the comprehensive account of environmental factors during the preparation and
implementation of the project and the need to minimise adverse impacts on the sensitive and vulnerable ecosystem of
the Baltic Sea;
RECOGNISING the Convention on Environmental Impact Assessment in a Transboundary Context (Espoo
Convention) developed within the framework of the United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE), as
the prevailing international law in the field of transboundary environmental impact assessments;
The participants of the round table:
NTE that on 19 April 2006, less than one month after the Seventh International Forum entitled "Baltic Sea Day" had
been held (22 - 23 March 2006), its recommendations regarding commencement of the international assessment of the
impact of the Nord Stream project on the environment were implemented: at the initiative of the project's engineers,
official bodies in five countries (Germany, Denmark, Russia, Sweden and Finland), in whose waters it is proposed
laying the gas pipeline, initiated consultations concerning the carrying out of such an assessment within the framework
of the Espoo Convention;

Page 716

"Baltic Sea Day"

"Baltic Sea Day"
WELCOME the decision taken by the Russian Federation, which is not a party to the Espoo Convention, to participate
in carrying out such an assessment, acting in the spirit of good neighbourliness and cooperation;
SUPPORT the joint decision of Nord Stream AG and official bodies in Germany, Denmark, Russia, Sweden and
Finland which was taken as a result of consultations held in Germany (19 April, 9 May and 17 October 2006), Russia
(28 - 29 August 2006) and Denmark (7 November 2006) concerning performance of the international environmental
impact assessment as per the Espoo Convention, in accordance with which agreement was reached on the following:
the Nord Stream gas pipeline is assigned number 8 (large diameter oil and gas pipelines) in the List of
activities in Appendix I to the Espoo Convention which may have adverse transboundary impacts. Thus, the
EIA procedure, in accordance with the Convention, should be undertaken for the given project in Germany,
Denmark, Sweden and Finland, which are parties to the Convention, as well as in the Russian Federation;
Germany, Denmark, Finland and Sweden consider themselves as the parties of origin in the sense of the Espoo
Convention. However, the Russian Federation, not being a party to the Convention, will act as the party of
origin only as far as this complies with its national legislation;
All nine states of the Baltic Sea region, including Germany, Denmark, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, the Russian
Federation, Finland, Sweden and Estonia are considered to be affected parties according to the Espoo
Convention;
The four parties of origin and the Russian Federation agreed to send out an identical, agreed notification to
each affected party;
Having sent this notification, the project owner will prepare EIA documentation taking account of the
comments received from stakeholders and the general public. This documentation will then be sent as per the
Espoo Convention by the parties of origin and the Russian Federation to those affected parties who will
express their interest in participating in the EIA procedure. Later, the affected parties and the general public
will have another opportunity to participate in consultations regarding prepared EIA materials.
TAKE ACCOUNT OF activities of Nord Stream AG as the company prepared materials on environmental aspects of
planned activities (over 100 pages), provided for its translation into all languages of the Baltic Sea region countries, as
well as into English, and sent these materials, along with the notification, within the framework of the Espoo
Convention to all Baltic Sea region countries on 14 November 2006 with a view of receiving comments from
stakeholders and the general public, and also posted these materials on the company's website.
APPROVE of extensive participation on the part of the general public in the EIA procedure concerning the Nord
Stream project, something which is realised on the basis of UNECE guidance on public participation in the
environmental impact assessment in a transboundary context (confirmed at the Third Meeting of the Parties to the
Espoo Convention (Cavtat, Croatia, 1-4 June 2004)), drawn up by an international group of experts, including
representatives from the EU, UNECE, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, UK, Hungary, Georgia, Italy, Kirghizia, Romania, Croatia,
Finland, France and Estonia, with Russia playing a coordinating role as the leading country.
More than 140 responses were received from official bodies and stakeholders, including the general public, in all nine
Baltic Sea region countries. These were discussed at a meeting of representatives of the official bodies to the Espoo
Convention, the parties of origin, the Russian Federation and Nord Stream AG (20 - 21 March 2007, Stockholm) and
will be taken into account during further research and EIA document preparation.

Page 717

"Baltic Sea Day"

"Baltic Sea Day"
The participants in the round table recommend the following:

1.
TO CONTINUE with further constructive actions on the part of the official bodies in Germany,
Denmark, the Russian Federation, Sweden and Finland, as well as Nord Stream AG, regarding the
performance of an international environmental impact assessment within the framework of the Espoo
Convention, including broad participation by the general public and other stakeholders.
2.
TO INFORM the general public about Nord Stream's EIA within the framework of various international
forums and meetings, including meetings of the UNECE Working Group on EIA, 21 - 23 May and 21 - 23
November 2007, Geneva, Switzerland, and meetings of the Parties to the Espoo Convention, 19 - 21 May
2008, Bucharest, Romania, meetings of the Head of Delegations and Ministerial Meetings of the Baltic
Marine Environment Protection Commission (HELCOM), and also the HELCOM Ministerial Meeting, 15
November 2007, Krakov, Poland.
3.
TO PUBLISH the results of Nord Stream's international environmental impact assessment within the
framework of the Espoo Convention in easily accessible and special mass media, to send these to the
governments, parliaments, interested authorities, scientific and educational organisations, public and
scientific libraries and public organisations in the Baltic Sea region countries, and to post them on the
Internet, and also to facilitate the implementation of other projects which promote the informing and
participation of the general public in the EIA procedure within the framework of the Espoo Convention.
4.
TO CONSIDER the responses from official bodies and stakeholders, including the general public, which
have been received in response to the Nord Stream project notification within the framework of the Espoo
Convention and, as a result of this round table discussion, in future research and preparation of EIA
materials; in particular, the programme of future EIA-related work should include research into:
reasonable alternatives (for example, of geographical or technological nature) to activities proposed,
including the no-action alternative;
the consequences of disturbing the sea floor;
the possible impact of submerged WWII chemical and other weapons and of hazardous substances of
technogenic origin;
the impacts on commercial fishing;
the conditions where the gas pipeline intersects with the coast;
risks.
5.
TO PROVIDE an opportunity for all interested parties, including the general public, including those who
sent their comments and proposals at the stage of discussions over the Notification on the project within
the framework of the Espoo Convention, to study the EIA materials prepared in accordance with the
Espoo Convention regarding the planned construction of the Nord Stream gas pipeline.
6.
TO PROVIDE an opportunity for all interested parties, including the general public, to submit their
comments to the official bodies of the parties of origin and the Russian Federation regarding the draft EIA
materials relating to the planned Nord Stream gas pipeline.
7.
TO DRAW ATTENTION to the fact that conclusion of the inter-governmental agreements on the
construction of the Nord Stream gas pipeline along the bottom of the Baltic Sea where WWII chemical
munitions were dumped gives cause to once again consider the impact of these munitions on the Baltic
Sea ecosystem. The round table participants appeal to the governments of Great Britain and the USA to
provide access to the information on the chemical munitions dumped by these countries and recommend
that HELCOM reconsider this problem from the point of view of current issues.
8.
TO ENSURE that the final decision on the proposed activity (construction of the Nord Stream gas
pipeline) takes due account of the outcome of the environmental impact assessment, including the
environmental impact assessment documentation and the comments received in this connection.

Page 718
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- Feasibility study - EIA - 0801(1)-C6

APPENDIX 6-2

Volume 8. Book 1. Off-shore section. Part 1. Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
Page 711

MINUTES
of the public hearings involving discussions of the environmental impact assessment materials consisting
of the Additional amendments to the investment report pertaining to construction of the North European
gas pipeline in the context of the increase in gas supplies for export to 55 billion m3 per annum in the
Leningrad oblast.
Leningrad oblast
Vyborg, ul. Sovetskaya, building 12
21 September 2006
The public hearings were organised by the customer - the private joint stock company YamalGazInvest
and the public joint stock company Giprospetsgaz, with the help of the private joint stock company
NPF DIEM, in consultation with the administration in Leningrad oblast and the administrative offices
of the Vyborg municipal district, attended by scientific, public and environmental organisations and
engineering companies in accordance with:
Federal Law number 174-FZ dated 23 November 1995 On ecological expertise (with addenda
dated 29 December 2004 and 31 December 2005);
the Regulation on the environmental impact assessment of a planned economic or other activity
in the Russian Federation, ratified by Order no. 372, dated 16 May 2000, issued by the Russian
State Ecology Committee.
Information on the holding of these public hearings will be brought to the attention of the general public
via the mass media: the newspapers Rossiyskaya Gazeta, Vesti and Vyborg.
The meeting was opened by Nadezhda Yurevna Lyudvikova, chair of the Committee on economics and
investment of the Vyborg municipal district administrative office in Leningrad oblast.
Chairman of the meeting: Nadezhda Yurevna Lyudvikova, chair of the Committee on economics and
investment of the Vyborg municipal district administrative office in Leningrad oblast.
Party coordinating the meeting: Aleksandr Vyacheslavovich Kozyritsky - Project manager of the
ecological and analytical department of the private joint stock company NPF DIEM.
Secretary: Victoria Anatolevna Bashmak - Senior specialist of the political economy section of the
Committee on economics and investment of the Vyborg municipal district administrative office in
Leningrad oblast.
Participants: Heads and specialists of State and supervisory bodies in the Vyborg municipal district, the
senior specialist of the department concerned with the development and monitoring of Federal
construction and dedicated regional programmes prepared by the Construction Committee in Leningrad
oblast, heads and specialists of territorial executive bodies, representatives from the media and specialists
from the building owner, the private joint stock company YamalGazInvest, design documentation
development engineer specialists from the public joint stock company Giprospetsgaz and the EIA
development engineers from NPF DIEM, along with representatives from public organisations and
scientific establishments and members of the general public from the Vyborg municipal district (see
Appendix 1 for a list of participants).

Page 712

Presidium: N. Yu. Lyudvikova, S. I. Igolnikov, A. A. Shchelkunov, V. M. Leushin, A. V. Yurev, E. O.

Ulyanova.
Introductory remark: N. Yu. Lyudvikova - Chair of the Committee on economics and investment of the
Vyborg municipal district administrative office in Leningrad oblast.
Subject under discussion: materials relating to the environmental impact assessment carried out as part of
the Additional amendments to the investment report pertaining to construction of the North European
gas pipeline in the context of the increase in gas supplies for export to 55 billion m3 per annum.
Aim of the public hearings: the discussion of issues connected with the environmental impact assessment,
opinion research and collecting proposals and observations from the general public on the subject under
discussion.
Agenda:
1.
Introductory remarks made by the parties responsible for initiating these public hearings.
2.
Report entitled Main characteristics of the construction and operation of the European gas
pipeline in the context of the increase in gas supplies for export to 55 billion m3 per annum. Principal
technical solutions relating to the project. General project-related information. V. M. Leushin - chief
project engineer, deputy chief engineer of the public joint stock company Giprospetsgaz.
3.
Report entitled Environmental impact assessment carried out as part of the additional
amendments to the investment report pertaining to construction of the North European gas pipeline in the
context of the increase in gas supplies for export to 55 billion m3 per annum. E. O. Ulyanova - chief
engineer in the department concerned with the development of environment-oriented documentation at
the private joint stock company NPF DIEM.
4.
Debates, question answering.
5.
Summary of the outcome of the hearing and pronouncements.
The following parties were heard:

The first issue was addressed by Mr V. M. Leushin, chief project engineer of the public joint stock
company Giprospetsgaz, who presented information on the conceptual technical solutions, on the
increased need for natural resources, on basic regulations concerned with safeguarding the environment
from technogenic influences, on the protection of areas earmarked for construction from possible
emergencies of an environmental nature and on preliminary investment.
The speaker noted the following in particular:
1. The work was carried out in accordance with the task involving additional amendments to the
Investment report pertaining to construction of the North European gas pipeline in the context of the
increase in gas supplies for export to 55 billion m3 per annum, which was affirmed by the Gazprom
public joint stock company in 2006.
2. The planned gas pipeline route will take it through the Vologod and Leningrad oblasts, joining up
with the Gryazovets - Vyborg gas pipeline currently under construction.

Page 713

The route of the North European gas pipeline along the Baltic Sea will pass from Portovaya Bay (Russia)
to the Bay of Greifswald (Germany).
3. Implementation of the project will resolve the problem of diversified gas export flows; will ensure
that the pipeline is put to good use and will provide a direct link between Russias gas transport networks
and Baltic region countries, satisfying the growing demands for gas in the Northern European region of
Russia. Construction of a second branch of the Gryazovets - Vyborg gas pipeline will facilitate an
increase in the supply of gas for export.
4. During construction, the existing infrastructure will be utilised in the form of the client base, the
pipe-welding base, temporary small towns housing builders and suchlike, thereby allowing the temporary
allocation of land to be kept to a minimum during construction, and the permanent allocation of the same
to be kept to a minimum during the period of operation.
5. Along the entire 512 km section between Gryazovets and Volkhov 331 km of piping in the form of
looping of the Gryazovets - Vyborg gas pipeline that is already under construction will be laid. 405 km of
piping will be laid along the Volkhov - Vyborg section over its total length of 405 km. During
construction of the gas pipeline, piping shall be used with a smooth-walled internal diameter of
1420/1220 mm at a working pressure of 9.8 MPa.
The offshore section of the pipeline will be laid using third/fourth generation S-shaped pipe-laying
vehicles (pipe-laying barge). The pipes will be supplied using pipe carriers with intermediate storage
platforms. The pipeline will be laid directly on the sea floor. Excavation work (profiling of the bed) will
be required in individual areas to reduce the clear span dimensions.
6. Provision is made for the construction of seven linear compressor stations in order to ensure that gas
can be transported to the starting point of the offshore section of the North European gas pipeline in the
section between Gryazovets and Vyborg. The arrangement of additional compressor station works which
ensure an increase in the supply of gas to the starting point of the offshore section of the North European
gas pipeline (Portovaya compressor station) to the tune of 55.0 billion cubic metres per annum will be
realised in areas where the Gryazovets - Vyborg gas pipeline has already been constructed. Four of these
compressor station works, in turn, will be combined with the compressor station areas relating to the
Gryazovets - Leningrad gas pipeline.
7. Additional amendments to the investment report pertaining to construction of the North European gas
pipeline in the context of the increase in gas supplies for export to 55 billion m3 per annum will be
undertaken in full accordance with Gazproms environmental policy. Project planning will be executed on
the basis of existing Federal regulatory acts in the sphere of conservation and the rational management of
natural resources, as well as regulatory acts in the Leningrad oblast.
8. All the indicators presented are subject to further substantiation and elaboration owing to
optimisation in consideration of better global practices.
9. Resources will be returned to the regional funds in the form of taxes. Tax revenues which can be
obtained from the operation of installations located within Leningrad oblast are estimated at USD 5.9
billion.
10. Gazproms approach is based on the recruitment of specialists in places where, in the absence of the
necessary categories of workers, the plan is to attract them from outside or for them to undergo training in
Leningrad oblast.

Page 714

The second issue was addressed by E. O. Ulyanova, chief engineer with the private joint stock company
NPF DIEM, who presented information concerned with an assessment of the impact of the construction
and operation of the North European gas pipeline on the environment.
The environmental impact assessment is performed with the aim of averting and/or minimising the
impacts arising during construction and operation of the North European gas pipeline installations on the
environment and the social, economic and other consequences associated with this.
The section entitled Environmental impact assessment regarding the offshore section of the North
European gas pipeline is carried out in accordance with current international agreements in the area of
conservation and the legislation of the countries whose jurisdiction applies in this instance.
To achieve the stated aim when carrying out the EIA, the following tasks were resolved:
An assessment was carried out of the modern (background) state of environmental components
in the areas of the proposed location of North European gas pipeline installations, including the
state of the atmosphere, as well as the state of the soil, land and water and also the vegetation,
animals resources and fish stocks.
A full assessment was conducted regarding the impact of the North European gas pipeline
installations on the environment;
Factors having a negative impact on the natural habitat were examined, while a determination
was made of the quantitative and qualitative characteristics of the environmental impact when
constructing and operating the North European gas pipeline;
Measures were formulated regarding the prevention and reduction of the possible impact of the
North European gas pipeline installations on the environment;
Recommendations were worked out regarding the performance of environmental monitoring

when constructing and operating the North European gas pipeline;
The extent of the compensation for damage done to various environmental components while
implementing the project was determined;
The uncertainties associated with the possible impact on the environment when carrying out the
planned activity were identified and described while recommendations were worked out on
eliminating these uncertainties during subsequent work stages.
The speaker noted the following:

1. The impact on the environment when carrying out the building and installation works will consist of
pollutant emissions into the atmosphere and discharges into the water, noise, the formation of
construction waste and effects on vegetation and animals (including ichthyofauna). The impact during the
period when construction work is being carried out will be of a transitory and local nature.
2. During the period when the compressor stations are operational, all environmental components will
be contaminated on a constant basis, while its quantitative and qualitative characteristics are substantiated
by calculations using established methods, and which are agreed in accordance with established
procedure.

Page 715

An industrial and environmental monitoring system has been created to monitor the state of the
environment.
3. The performance of industrial and environmental monitoring enables the impact of facilities for
transporting gas on various components of the natural habitat to be controlled and environmental
protection measures to be implemented which will facilitate the timely prevention or localisation of the
negative effects on the environment.
4. The project makes provision for a series of environmental protection measures during construction
and operation. Consideration is given to the environmental constraints of undertaking the project.
Discussions
The following participated in the debates: representatives of public organisations, representatives of
controlling environmental agencies, scientists, specialists, residents of the region (refer to Appendix 2 for
the questions and proposals expressed at the public hearings).
The chair of the meeting mentioned the following:
To acknowledge the significance of the construction facility and its economic and environmental validity.
It is necessary to pay special attention to the environmental and socio-economic components during the
subsequent stages of the project.
To acknowledge the significance of the construction facility and its economic and environmental validity.
It is necessary to pay special attention to the environmental and socio-economic components during the
subsequent stages of the project. As far as the benefit of constructing the gas pipeline is concerned, this is
obvious and, at the same time, damage which will be compensated is in evidence.
The following decisions were taken at the meeting:

1. To approve as a whole Gazproms intention to construct the North European gas pipeline in the
context of the increase in gas supplies for export to 55 billion m3 per annum along the territory of the
Vyborg municipal district in Leningrad oblast.
2. To approve materials presented for discussion by the general public relating to the environmental
impact assessment carried out as part of the Additional amendments to the investment report pertaining
to construction of the North European gas pipeline in the context of the increase in gas supplies for export
to 55 billion m3 per annum.
3. To recommend that YamalGazInvest, Giprospetsgaz and NPF DIEM take into account the
questions and proposals put by the participants at the public hearings (Appendix 2).
4. To recommend that Gazprom examines the possibility of providing a gas supply to populated areas
of the Vyborg municipal district in Leningrad oblast.
Nadezhda Yurevna Lyudvikova, chair of the Committee on economics and investment of the Vyborg
municipal district administrative office in Leningrad oblast, proposed bringing the public discussions
surrounding the EIA to a close and switching to preparation of the minutes.

Page 716

N. Yu. Lyudvikova
Chairman of the meeting
Party coordinating the meeting
A. V. Kozyritsky
Secretary of the meeting
Signatures:
V. A. Bashmak
Senior specialist of the department
concerned with the development
and monitoring of Federal
construction and dedicated
regional programmes prepared by
the Construction Committee in
Leningrad oblast
S. I. Igolnikov
Manager of USEG, with an office

in St. Petersburg, the public joint
stock company Giprospetsgaz
Deputy chief engineer of the
public joint stock company
Giprospetsgaz, chief project
engineer
Giprospetsgazs chief project
engineer responsible for the North
European gas pipeline in the
section between Gryazovets and
Vyborg
Chief engineer in the department
concerned with the development
of environment-oriented
documentation at the private joint
stock company NPF DIEM
A. A. Shchelkunov
V. M. Leushin
A. V. Yurev
E. O. Ulyanova

Page 717

Participants at the public hearings

Page 718


Page 719

Appendix No. 1
to the minutes of the public
hearings dated 21 September 2006
List of registered participants at the public hearings

On behalf of the administration of the Leningrad oblast of the Russian Federation
Sergei Ivanovich Igolnikov - Senior specialist of the department concerned with the development and
monitoring of Federal construction and dedicated regional programmes prepared by the Construction
Committee in Leningrad oblast
On behalf of the Vyborg municipal district administrative offices
Nadezhda Yurevna Lyudvikova - Chair of the Committee on economics and investment of the Vyborg
municipal district administrative office in Leningrad oblast;
Irina Aleksandrovna Fomina - Leading expert on the administration of property from the Kamenogorsk
urban settlement municipal district administrative office;
Vladimir Nikolaevich Orlov - Senior forest ranger at the Roshchin regional forestry administration
federal state institution;
Pyotr Vasilivich Lavriv - Chief engineer concerned with forestry management at the Roshchin regional
forestry administration federal state institution;
Sergei Aleksandrovich Frolov - Head of the Pervomay rural settlement municipal district administrative
office;
Sergei Ivanovich Nechuchaev - Head of the Selezen rural settlement municipal district administrative
office;
Rimma Ivanovna Vodnyuk - Head of the Goncharov rural settlement district administrative office;
Lyudmila Aleksandrovna Kozlova - Head of the Goncharov rural settlement municipal district
administrative office;
Nikolai Aleksandrovich Stepanchenko - Senior forest ranger at the Vyborg rural regional forestry
administration;
Yuri Davidovich Grin - Director of Agroprom Trans [a limited liability company];
Nina Petrovna Omelina - Chair of the Council of Veterans;
Lyudmila Nikolaevna Tkachyova - Deputy head of the Roshchin urban settlement administrative
office;
Sergei Yurevich Smirnov - Deputy Head of department of the State Project-Design institute in the Vyborg
district;
Nikolai Nikolaevich Aleynikov - Assistant senior architectural engineer for the Krasnosel rural
settlement;
Yelena Vasilevna Ivoshova - Senior specialist of the Vyborg municipal district administrative office in
Leningrad oblast;

Page 720

A. N. Buyanov - Deputy head of the Vyborg urban settlement municipal district administrative office;
A. V. Pronicheva - leading expert at the department of architectural engineering and urban design and
building within the Committee on municipal property management and urban design and building;
I. A. Kuprevich - Senior specialist of the Committee on economics and investment of the Vyborg
M. V. Tretyak - leading expert of the Committee on economics and investment of the Vyborg municipal
district administrative office in Leningrad oblast;
V. A. Bashmak - Senior specialist of the Committee on economics and investment of the Vyborg
I. I. Moiseenko - Senior specialist at the Vyborg interregional state institution Ecological monitoring in
the Leningrad oblast;
A. I. Golovanov - Chair of the Kauratgevist special engineering design company;
On behalf of the mass media
Lilia Ivanovna Smirnova - correspondent for the Vyborgskiy Vedomosti newspaper;
N. Adylanova - journalist, Our town media group;
A. Grigorev - operator, Our town media group;
Yelena Vladimirovna Sokolova - Assistant editor in chief of the Vyborg newspaper, member of the
Vyborg urban settlement municipal district administrative office;
On behalf of the building owner
Aleksandr Alekseevich Shchelkunov - Manager of USEG, with an office in St. Petersburg;
Nikolai Eduardovich Aylamazyan - Deputy manager of USEG, with an office in St. Petersburg;
On behalf of the design documentation developers
Vladimir Mikhailovich Leushin - Assistant chief engineer of the public joint stock company
Giprospetsgaz, chief project engineer;
Andrei Vladimirovich Yurev - Giprospetsgazs chief project engineer responsible for the North
European gas pipeline in the section between Gryazovets and Vyborg;
Natalya Rudolfovna Peterson - Senior specialist from the department of industrial ecology, safety and the
organisation of construction at Giprospetsgaz;
Kirill Valentinovich Chernetsov - Head of the group responsible for introducing new network
technologies and information security in Giprospetsgaz;
Andrei Viktorovich Subbotin - Interregional association of archaeologists;

Page 721

On behalf of the developers of the EIA materials

Oksana Viktorovna Rodivilova - Head of the department of design and EIA in the Peter Gaz
corporation;
Aleksandr Vyacheslavovich Kozyritsky - Project manager of the ecological and analytical department of
the private joint stock company NPF DIEM;
Alfia Gabdrakhmanova Sadekova - Category I engineer of the ecological and analytical department of the
private joint stock company NPF DIEM;
Yelena Olegovna Ulyanova - Chief engineer in the department concerned with the development of
environment-oriented documentation at the private joint stock company NPF DIEM.
Vasiliy Arkadevich Uvarov - responsible for transfer of the task-force group.
Secretary of the Meeting
V. A. Bashmak

Page 722

Appendix No. 2
to the minutes of the public
hearings dated 21 September 2006
Questions and proposals expressed at the public hearings

Question:
S. A. Lavriv, S. I. Nechuchaev
Will the local population be recruited to assist in the construction of the gas pipeline?
Reply:
A. V. Yurev
Local labour will be utilised during the preparatory period.
Specialist organisations used in the construction of the North European gas pipeline will be chosen by the
client, the private joint stock company YamalGazInvest, by tender.
Question:
S. A. Frolov
How will our region benefit financially?
Reply:
Sergei Ivanovich Igolnikov - Senior specialist of the department concerned with the development and
monitoring of Federal construction and dedicated regional programmes prepared by the Construction
Committee in Leningrad oblast.
The project will have an exceptionally high social and economic significance, both from the point of view
of the economic potential in the region, and for the state as a whole. Everything proposed under the law
will be transferred to the budget of the Leningrad oblast in accordance with established procedure.
Funds may reach the budget of districts in the Leningrad oblast as follows:
1.
In accordance with the Land Code of land users (landowners), compensation will be paid in
respect of the removal or temporary occupation of land and losses of agricultural output. The make up of
the compensation and its amount will be determined in accordance with standards ratified by the
government of the Russian Federation on the basis of data presented and corroborated by agricultural
producers and land users. Everything prescribed by the law will be reimbursed.
Responsibility for this question rests with YamalGazInvest.
2.
In the consolidated budget covering construction, mandatory provision is made for funds for
repairing and reinstating roads and bridge structures affected during construction of the gas pipeline.
3.
When locating residential settlements for construction workers:
3.1.
Contractors must register with the taxation body. Funds allocated by the contractors will flow to
the regions budget.

Page 723

3.2.
As a rule, the residential settlement for construction workers will be located at the base of
unused buildings (rest homes, pioneer camps and suchlike). The workers will pay rent. At the same time,
extensive repairs are carried out on premises under the housing fund, as provided for by the project. In the
absence of such accommodation, the residential settlement shall be built from scratch. Once the
construction work is complete, the accommodation shall be transferred to the district.
3.3.
Local labour will be utilised during the preparatory period.
Question:
L. A. Kozlova
Does the project make provision for protecting the gas pipeline against terrorist acts?
Reply:
V. M. Leushin - Chief project engineer of the public joint stock company Giprospetsgaz
Yes, absolutely. A special department is being developed. This information is confidential (for official
use only). This issue comes under the jurisdiction of a special subdivision of Gazprom.
Question:
L. A. Buyanov
What is the level of industrial safety and reliability of the planned main gas pipeline?
Reply:
A. V. Yurev - Chief project engineer of the public joint stock company Giprospetsgaz
The project makes provision for a separate volume - the Industrial safety declaration - to be drawn up.
Organisational and technical solutions concerned with ensuring industrial safety in relation to the North
European gas pipeline, anticipating emergencies and eradicating their consequences, and measures taken
by the State protection department, have been formulated in the materials presented.
A raft of solutions have been worked out aimed at anticipating emergency situations and ensuring that the
lives and health of staff are protected during construction of the pipeline and the operation of its
installations. In the materials presented, the dangers posed to the gas pipeline were identified, emergency
situations assessed and a system of measures in the area of industrial safety practices, fire prevention
measures and conservation drawn up and introduced.
Wish:
E. V. Sokolova
Will it be possible to report on the construction of the North European gas pipeline in the media?
Reply:
V. M. Leushin - Chief project engineer of the public joint stock company Giprospetsgaz.
Publications concerning our project appear in the media periodically. Detailed information relating to the
project can be found on Gazproms website. Environmental impact assessment materials by means of
which the general public can familiarise themselves with the project can be found in the regional library.
Question:
E. V. Ivanovna, A. V. Pronicheva, S. I. Nechuchaev
1.
Will it be possible to provide gas to populated areas in municipal districts in Leningrad oblast
through which the pipeline passes?
2.
Is there the option of including further populated areas in the targeted gas supply programme?
3.
Will residents need to make an additional appeal for their populated area to be included in the
targeted gas supply programme?
Page 724

4.
At whose expense will the populated areas be supplied with gas?
Reply:
Responsibility for resolving this issue rests with Gazprom. Within the framework of constructing the
North European gas pipeline, the public joint stock company Giprospetsgaz is engaged in designing the
main gas pipeline.
S. I. Igolnikov (addendum):
Re point 1:
The targeted gas supply programme which is being revised and prolonged every year is operating within
the framework concluded between the administration of the Leningrad oblast and Gazprom.
Re point 2:
Yes, such a possibility does exist. A specific populated area is included in the targeted gas supply
programme on the basis of economic expediency, allowing for increases in natural gas prices. The supply
of liquefied natural gas to populated areas is frequently justified economically speaking.
Re point 3:
The regional administrative offices ought to present the project concerned with supplying gas to
populated areas to the Committee on the energy, housing and utilities sectors in Leningrad oblast.
Re point 4:
Gazprom shall ensure the supply of gas, while the administration in Leningrad oblast shall explore the
possibility of designing and constructing the gas pipelines and its branches to guarantee the supply of gas
to populated areas. The tenants must bear the cost of acquiring meters, gas cookers, etc.
Question:
A. V. Pronicheva
Who should be notified when shortcomings show up while the gas pipeline is being laid (for example, the
land which has been disturbed is not restored, road reinstatement measures, etc. have not been carried
out)?
Reply:
When shortcomings show up, a report should be drawn up and the building owner, the private joint stock
company YamalGazInvest, notified. Fines will be imposed on guilty parties.
Question:
S. I. Nechuchaev
What production facilities will be built on Vyborg district territory with a view to servicing the gas
pipeline?
Reply:
In addition to the gas pipeline itself, the Vyborg district will see the construction of the Portovaya
compressor station along with temporary buildings and structures (the clients transhipment facility, areas
where materials and equipment are unloaded, pipe-welding stations, the construction base and temporary
residential settlements).
Question:

Page 725

S. I. Nechuchaev
Where will the production facilities be located?
Reply:
Comprehensive information regarding the arrangement of production facilities in the Vyborg district is
provided in the project documentation in the section entitled Project concerned with the organisation of
construction.
Question:
S. I. Nechuchaev
Has a study been carried out concerning the economic situation and the situation in terms of health and
disease control in the region?
Reply:
Yes, such a study has been carried out. The EIA materials contain a section devoted to the social
characteristics and those in terms of health and disease control in the region where the facility has its
planned location. These materials have to be agreed in the Federal consumer rights protection and human
health control service. Circumvention and contravention is not possible.
Question:
I. I. Moiseenko
Who will obtain the permits?
Reply:
Giprospetsgaz is engaged in the gathering of basic data, followed by obtaining agreement on the
documentation prepared.
Question:
I. I. Moiseenko
How is the amount of compensation determined and who pays it?
Reply:
The make up of the compensation and its amount will be determined in accordance with standards ratified
by the government of the Russian Federation. Everything proposed under the law will be reimbursed.
Responsibility for this question rests with YamalGazInvest.
Question:
S. Yu. Smironov
Has provison been made for the construction of a fire station at the site of the compressor station?
Reply:
Yes, absolutely. A fire station forms part of the projected buildings and structures at the Portovaya
compressor station.

Page 726

Question:
Yuri Davidovich Grin - Director of Agroprom Trans [a limited liability company]
What are the demands in terms of land resources for building the Portovaya compressor station on
Vyborg district territory?
Reply:
As a whole, regarding the installation under consideration on Vyborg district territory within Leningrad
oblast, the project has determined that the construction and operation of compressor station structures will
require an amount of land in excess of 100 hectares, including:
- for long-term use (for the period of operation) - in the region of 70 hectares
- for short-term use (for the period of construction) - in the region of 30 hectares
Once the principal construction work has been concluded across all of the territory assigned to the
construction of compressor station structures in the short-term, provision is made for restoration.
Question:
Lilia Ivanovna Smirnova - correspondent for the Vyborgskiy Vedomosti newspaper
Is this Russias first attempt at constructing an offshore gas pipeline?
Reply:
No. The Blue Stream gas pipeline which runs along the bottom of the Black Sea between Russia and
Turkey has already been constructed and is operational.
Question:
Were requirements under international legislation taken into consideration when designing the North
European gas pipeline?
Reply:
The gas pipeline between Gryazovets and Vyborg was designed in accordance with the laws of the
Russian Federation and other normative documents of the Russian Federation, thereby ensuring
industrial, fire-fighting, public health and environmental safety, and measures for overcoming emergency
situations.
The offshore part of the main gas pipeline is designed in accordance with the requirements of
international legislation. In this connection, consideration is given to international treaties which are
directly related to implementation of this project and to which the Russian Federation is a signatory.
When designing the overland part in connection with the proximity of Finland, consideration was given to
the cross-border transfer coefficient.

Page 727

Question:
Which countries environmental interests must be taken into account when laying the undersea part of the
North European gas pipeline?
Reply:
The offshore section of the North European gas pipeline will originate in the area of Portovaya Bay not
far from the town of Vyborg (Leningrad oblast), will run along the bottom of the Baltic Sea within
Russian territorial waters, the Exclusive Economic Zone of Finland, the Exclusive Economic Zone of
Sweden, the Exclusive Economic Zone of Denmark and the Exclusive Economic Zone of Germany and
its territorial waters. The pipeline ends at the receiving terminal in the Bay of Greifswald (Germany). The
section entitled Environmental impact assessment regarding the offshore section of the gas pipeline is
carried out in accordance with current international agreements in the area of conservation and the
legislation of the countries whose jurisdiction applies in this instance.
Question:
Yuri Davidovich Grin - Director of Agroprom Trans [a limited liability company]
Will the technological facilities arranged around our settlement have a harmful impact?
Reply:
The use of modern gas turbine pumping units with low noise emission levels, accepted technological
solutions depending on the layout of the technological equipment, architectural/structural solutions and
the use of noise-reducing materials ensures a compressor station noise level not exceeding 45 dB.
The impact of noise on the environment when operating the Portovaya compressor station of the North
European gas pipeline, as well as noise levels at the boundaries of populated areas in the region where the
projected installation will be located, correspond to permissible noise levels, both during the day and at
night, and satisfy the requirements laid down in construction standards and regulations.
Question:
federal state institution
How is the compensation for converting forest land into non-forest land calculated?
Reply:
The level of payment for converting forest land into non-forest land and for removing land from the
forestry fund with a view to constructing the compressor station is calculated in the project concerned
with converting forest land into non-forest land and the removal of forest land which was executed by
specialist organisations on the basis of:
- data pertaining to forest management which contains information on the area apportioned, the
plantation quality index and the forest protection category;
- the calculation of losses and the level of compensation in respect thereof in terms of forest management
when converting forest land into non-forest land, utilisation of the forestry fund, and when transforming
forestry fund land into land in other categories, as confirmed by Russian Government Decree No. 647
dated 17 November 2004;

Page 728

- materials used in the preparation of the plan for allocating land which form part of this project and
contain information on the extent of areas which are subject to allocation during periods when the
projected installation is being constructed,
Question:
How will damage incurred by forestry production be compensated?
Reply:
The financial estimate will include the costs of reimbursing the damage caused to forestry production as a
result of construction. These losses will be elaborated on when working out land use planning during the
period when areas of land are allocated under law.
All expenses relating to the reproduction of forest resources and the reimbursement of land users for
losses will be compensated in full.
Question:
When will the land management file be processed?
Reply:
The client is obligated to legalise land use planning before construction begins.
This is scheduled to take place at the end of 2007/start of 2008.
Question:
Ye. V. Sokolova - Assistant editor in chief of the Vyborg newspaper
Can you tell us when work on constructing the gas pipeline will commence in the Vyborg district?
Reply:
Vladimir Mikhailovich Leushin - Chief project engineer of the public joint stock company
Giprospetsgaz
According to the Schedule for commissioning the North European gas pipeline, work on construction
of the gas pipeline will begin in July 2008.
Secretary of the Meeting
A. Bashmak

Page 729


Page 730

APPENDIX 6-3

Page 731

PETERGAZ No. 36/07-01- Feasibility study - EIA-0801(1)-C6 NORD STREAM No. G-PELFR-EIA-101-08010100-06
HEAD OF THE MUNICIPAL ADMINISTRATION OF THE

VYBORG DISTRICT IN LENINGRAD OBLAST
DECREE
dated 15 October 2007
No. 30
regarding the holding of public hearings concerning general project outlines

In accordance with Article 28 of Federal Law No. 131-FZ dated 6 October 2003 Regarding general
principles of local government organisation within the Russian Federation, and Articles 11, 12, 15, 24,
28, 37 and 39 of Town Planning Code No. 190-FZ of the Russian Federation dated 29 December 2004,
Article 31.3 of Land Code No. 136-FZ of the Russian Federation dated 25 October 2001, and Article 12
of the municipal administration rules and regulations
IT IS HEREBY DECREED:
1.
to conduct public hearings concerning general project outlines at the following addresses.
1.1. Selezen rural settlement municipal district administrative office in Vyborg district within
Leningrad oblast, Portovaya Bay - the design and construction of the Russian section of the Nord Stream
gas pipeline (Russia - Germany) (Portovaya Bay [Russian Federation]) - Greifswald (Germany) - (Nord
Stream AG branch office [Switzerland]).
1.2. Kamenogorsk urban settlement municipal district administrative office, Pravdino settlement SKZ1 No. 34 Pravdino, Druzhnosiel settlement - SKZ No. 10 Druzhnosiel, Goncharov rural
settlement municipal district administrative office, Ozernoye settlement, - SKZ No. 29 Ozernoye,
project involving reconstruction of the cathodic protection system for the main Leningrad-Vyborg-State
border gas pipeline and its first and second branch lines (Lentransgas limited liability company);
1.3. Sovetskoye urban settlement municipal district administrative office, Polovo settlement,
Vysotskoye urban settlement municipal district administrative office, the town of Vysotsk, section of
the railway line between Polovo and Vysotsk - reconstruction of the railway approaches to Vysotsk
station - the public joint stock company RZHD;
1.4. The positioning of metal towers for the radio-telephone communication network of base stations
by the public joint stock company MTS at the following addresses:
Selezen rural settlement municipal district administrative office, settlements of Bolshoy Bor and
Kravtsovo;
-
the 122 km long Scandinavia highway.
Abbreviation
not found - trans.
UNOFFICIAL
ENGLISH TRANSLATION FOR COURTESY ONLY
Page 732
PETERGAZ 36/07-01- TEO-OOS-0801(1)-C6

Leningrad Region
(Constituent entity of the RF)
Vyborg District
(District)
City of Vyborg
(Name)
Book
of proposals and comments
Preliminary version of Environmental Impact Assessment material

and Terms of Reference for the EIA
for the Russian section of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline
Commenced 26 October 2007

page 747

////Handwritten text////
27 October 2007
In my opinion if this project does not cause any damage or harm to the environment and
the population (and judging from the material this is the case) then I am in favour of this
project being implemented.
6 November 2007
The main thing is that there should be no damage to the environment.
7 November 2007
When carrying out measures of this kind all the risks need to be taken into account. In
my opinion in Russia today the risks are being understated, and this could damage our
ecology, and thereby damage each person individually and the population as a whole.
[initials]
17 November 2007
Of course were all for gas!
19 November 2007
I hope that the people who are involved in this project are sufficiently competent not to
cause any harm and to use resources for the good of our children and grandchildren, in
other words for our future.

page 748

21 November 2007
I support the project in the depths of the Baltic Sea but I am concerned about the
irreplaceable loss of flora, fauna and ichthyology in the Vyborg district.
22 November 2007
I do not support this decision. The squandering of forests, oil and gas from such a
huge country which has equally huge demands for these raw materials, is ill-advised.
One of the key challenges of the day is to develop industry, and with that development
comes a growth in the demand for natural raw materials, and what will be left of them in
the future? This may be an economic standpoint, but I am in favour of raw materials
such as gas, oil and timber staying in Russia. [initials]
22 November 2007
I cannot say that I am either for or against, I think that everything has its positive
and negative aspects. It would be good if the construction of the gas pipeline has a good
effect on the life of Russia and of Vyborg in particular. [name]
22 November 2007
For gas!
22 November 2007
I am concerned that Nord Stream is quite a young company, and we dont know what
kind of experts they have. And then cutting down the forests soon there wont be any
trees left. And who will give us a guarantee that young fish wont die in nets, unable to
withstand the heaving of the water? And will the short-term changes in the chem[ical]
properties of the environment significantly alter the ecology? [1 word illegible] the
damage? When nature has been destroyed its hard to restore it with money. But if we
have to choose based on the principle of the least of several evils, then maybe its better
to let them build the offshore gas pipeline than to have other onshore energy systems
which have an adverse effect on the environment (coal).

page 749

22 November 2007
Of course, Id like to believe and hope that any undertaking will turn out to be a plus
both for our country as a whole and for our little homeland in particular. But I have to
admit that we are losing something: the forests, lands being destroyed and animals
disappearing. Im not an expert, of course, but the overall total amount of damage of
around 71.5 million roubles does seem rather small to me. And on a more general note,
maybe we need the gas ourselves. Maybe we need to some thinking, about the
irreplaceability of what were losing.

page 750

Stamp of Vyborg Municipal

Aalto Library

page 751

APPENDIX 6-6

page 752

Public hearings into the preliminary version of the EIA material for the Russian
section of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline
Vyborg, 23 November 2007
List of participants
Name
1
Yuri
Sergeevich
Shevchuk
Olga
Sergeevna
Krivonos
Grigori
Mikhailovich
Pasko
Vera
Vladimirovna
Ovcharenko
Tatiana
Pavlovna
Artemova
Vladimir
Nikolaevich
Zaitsev
Pavel
Sergeevich
Kharin
Vasili
Alexeevich
Ryskolenko
Alexander
Albertovich
Kazarin
Organisation
Chairman, St
Petersrburg
Branch, Green
Cross International
Bellona
Environmental
Rights Centre
Journalist
Contact details
Signature
Tel: 812-492-2583
8 911-951-79-49
[email illegible]
[signature]
936-00-74
olga@bellona.ru
[signature]
749-24-85
oskor@istel.ru
[signature]
Green World
8-921-9217925
[signature]
Posev magazine
posev@mail.wplus.net
[signature]
Giprospetsgaz
(812) 271 0544

vzaicev@gsg.spb.ru
[signature]
Administration of
Roschino
88137864755
[signature]
NP Ryskolenko
89213058095
[signature]
VNP
Joint
Company
Closed 957-10-09
Stock
[signature]

page 753

Vyborg, 23 Novembver 2007
Name
4
Olga
Nikolaevna
Senova
Dmitri
Sergeevich
[surname
illegible]
Nikolai
Donskov
Liudmila
Bogdan
8 David
Morchiladze
9 Gennadi
Viktorovich
Stopov
10 Alexander
Nikolaevich
Sutyagin
11 Alexander
Shkrebets
12 Tatiana
Vasilievna
Marushkina
13 Rimma
Ivanovna
Vozniuk
Organisation
Friends
of
Baltic Sea
Contact details
the Mob: 911-79-86
Signature
[signature]
Akvadril LLC
921-188-16-45
akvadril@mail.ru
[signature]
Novaya Gazeta
918-13-36
ndonskov@mail.rru
[signature]
RREC
Eco [illegible]
[signature]
Giprospetsgaz
625 0826
dm@parapharm.ru
8 911 7345156
BTC Monitoring
project
oil-project@mail.ru
TEIA
All Russian
Political Public
Movement of
Greens for the
Motherland
Goncharovskoe
settlement
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
812-315-66-22
sash
8-921-346 70 82
newgreenspb@mail.ru
[signature]
[signature]
63230
[signature]

page 754

Vyborg, 23 Novembver 2007
Name
14 Valentin
Petrovich
Kudryavtsev
15 IriniaViktorovna
Nekrasova
16 Anatoli
Pavlovich Krug
17 Valentin
Grigorievich
Polyakov
18 Sergei
Anatolievich
Alexeev
18 Evgeniya
Valentinovna
[illegible]
19 Viktor
Nikolaevich
Maximov
20 [name illegible]
Organisation
Signature
Vyborg District
Administration
283-38
[signature]
Kamennogorskoye
regional settlement
Deputy Chairman,
Property
management
Zheldoripoteka
CJSC
8 813 78 48-335
[signature]
213-00
[signature]
337-53-02
[signature]
Zheldoripoteka
CJSC
337-53-02
[signature]
Zheldoripoteka
CJSC
337-53-02
[signature]
Pensioner
8 9215703659
[signature]
Helsinki Sanomat
21 Galina Raguzina Belonna

22 Sergei
Ivanovich
Nechupaev
Contact details
Head of
Seleznevskoyoe
settlement
administration
[signature]
+7 911 4650400
ragunna@mail.ru
9119695203
[signature]
[signature]

page 755

Name
Rashid Alimov
Alexei Udarov
Alexei
Viktorovich
Maximov
Nelli
Anatolievna
Li
Evgeni
Viktorovich
Romanov
Andrei
Kolotunski
[name
illegible]
Organisation
Contact details
Bellona
+7 9219956118
Rashid@bellona.ru
Helsingin Sanomat 8-911-252-0831
[email illegible]
Property
survey (8-13)78 3-21-69
agency
Architect, Member 9213326414
of town planning
council
[illegible] LLC,
8-921-940-69-47
Northern trunk gas
pipeline division
Vyborgskie
andrei_k@pisem.net
Vedomosti
newspaper
Leading specialist
[illegible]
Signature
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]

page 756

Name
Evgeni
Valentinovich
Filippov
Organisation
Vyborg City
Administration
Contact details
Signature
[email illegible]
evgeniy.filippov@city.vbg.ru
[signature]

page 757

APPENDIX 6-7

page 758
TEIA
TRANSBOUNDARY ENVIRONMENTAL INFORMATION AGENCY
Transboundary Environmental Information Agency (TEIA) Independent non-commercial organisation
Registered with the St Petersburg Registration Chamber under 38910 on 12 April 1996
190000 Russian Federation. St Petersburg, per. Grivtsova 10, 26
Tel/Fax +7 812-3156622
Taxpayer Identification Number: 782352101
6
22 November 2007
St Petersburg
Dr. Dirk von Ameln
Nord Stream AG
Dear Dr Dirk von Ameln
Having studied the Preliminary Version of the EIA material for the Russian section I
would like to mention the vast amount of work done by PeterGaz in preparing this
material. On the whole the material describes in sufficient detail the nature of the work
and the conditions in which it is to be performed, and it covers virtually all aspects of
the environmental impact of the work. However, there are two puzzling issues and it is
these issues which have prompted me to write this letter.
- The first question concerns the examination of the situation regarding the Specially
Protected Natural Territories in the region of the construction of the gas pipeline. The
EIA preliminary material lists all the Specially Protected Natural Territories which fall
within the impact zone of the construction, and yet it is concluded that:
All existing and planned SPNAs are located at a considerable distance from the
planned route of the pipeline and therefore will not be affected. Later it is stated that
In 2000 a Leningrad Region Government Resolution for the creation of a reserve was
adopted. The Ingermanland reserve was included in the list of prospective SPNAs for
2001-2010, approved by Russian Government decree No. 725-r of 23 May 2001.
Therefore from our point of view it is not entirely correct to call the Ingermanland
reserve planned, since decisions to establish the reserve have been taken both at
Russian Federation Government level and at the Russian Federation Constituent Entity
level. The unique nature of the 9 islands which form the reserve is beyond any doubt,
however even the EIA material state that 7 out of 9 sections are located in the region
where the gas pipeline is to be built, therefore to conclude that All existing and
planned SPNAs are at a considerable distance from the planned route of the pipeline and
therefore will not be affected is in our view also incorrect. This also concerns the
Prigranichni reserve which is in the immediate vicinity of both the onshore and
offshore sections of the gas pipeline. It is possible that the misunderstanding was caused
by the response of the Head of Rosprirodnadzor for the Leningrad Region, Veronika
Mikhailovna Tarbaeva (currently no longer in this post), contained in the appendix
relating toUNOFFICIAL
the onshore section
of the
gas pipeline. FOR COURTESY ONLY
ENGLISH
TRANSLATION
page 747
On behalf of the competent body, Ms Tarbaeva states that in the onshore section in
question there are no specially protected natural areas, without providing response
for other information requested in relation to rare species of plants and animals, and the
background radioactive and chemical contamination of elements of the environment. It
is possible that in a purely formal sense she is correct, but such a standpoint on the part
of an official of Rosprirodnadzor undermines the competence of the whole
Rosprirodnadzor, and the issue of the Ingermanland reserve has been raised on more
than one occasion at the highest level of the Ministry of Natural Resources. As early as
October 2006 the Minister for Natural Resources, Yuri Petrovich Trutnev, said at an
EU-Russia summit that the new Ingermanland reserve will be included in the
transboundary reserves while on 21 September this year Alexander Ishkov, the
Director of the Department of state environment policy of the Russian Ministry of
Natural Resources named the Ingermanland reserve among the national parks and
reserves being created in the near future. Unfortunately I could not find the enquiry
about the protected areas and species of plants and animals in the material relating to the
offshore section of the pipeline, but I very much hope that PeterGaz has conducted
additional expert research on this subject.
The second question concerns the methodology for presenting data on atmospheric air
and the pollution of the aquatic medium. The EIA contains calculated data on
atmospheric air pollution but in so doing it does not provide data on emissions from
facilities located in the immediate vicinity, such as the oil terminals at Primorsk and
Vysotsk, although the State Report on Environmental Protection for the Leningrad
Region points out that more than 30% of all volatile organic compounds (VOC) in the
region come from the Primorsk terminal. There is no indication of the impact on
atmospheric air during the construction of the onshore section of the pipeline from
Gryazovets to Vyborg. The same is true of the pollution of the aquatic medium. Thus,
for example, the dredging operations during the construction of the so-called Saint
Petersburg sea faade caused considerable turbidity in the waters of the Gulf of Finland,
and with this in mind the actual pollution along the route of the pipeline may be dozens
of times higher than the calculated values contained in the EIA.
I very much hope that our comments will be taken into consideration during the
international EIA process.
I would also like to inform you that I am a signatory on behalf of the TEIA of the
Memorandum for the Social Responsibility of Russian Business, prepared by a group of
public organisations of northwest Russia during discussion of the Nord Stream project.
Yours sincerely,
Executive Director
A. E. Shkrebets

page 748
FRIENDS OF THE BALTIC SEA

Interregional Public Youth Environmental Organization
Member of the International Coalition for a Clean Baltic Sea
St Petersburg, Per. Grivtsova, 10. office 26
Tel/fax: (812) 3156622, e-mail: olga-senova@yandcx.ru
http://baltfriends.ru, htlp://spareworld.org
QUESTIONS AND PROPOSALS

for the public discussions of the EIA for the NORD STREAM PROJECT
23.11.2007, Vyborg
1. When assessing the impact of the project on the environment, the baseline characteristics
caused by other existing impacts were not taken into account. At the same time, according to
the evidence both of experts and of amateur fishermen, the turbidity of the gulf is already
substantial both in the coastal zone of the Gulf of Vyborg and in the open waters of the Gulf of
Finland.
Proposal: Conduct additional research taking account of baseline characteristics (including in
relation to the turbidity of the water, air pollution, threats to the fishing industry etc.) and assess
the total impact of the project in combination with existing environmental impacts.
2. The EIA material does not show the boundaries of existing and planned SPNA, but it is stated
that the route does not cross these areas. There is no assessment of the possible impact of the
project on the ecosystems of the SPNA during the implementation of the project.
Proposals:
Indicate in the EIA the boundaries of existing and planned SPNA, the location of the route
of the gas pipeline, showing the distances from the route to the boundaries of the SPNA;
Conduct additional research into the impact of the project and also of possible accidents on
the ecosystems of the SPNA, involving expert ornithologists, mammalogists and
hydrobiologists, and taking into account the disturbance factor along the route of the gas
pipeline, paying particular attention to the rare red book species of birds and mammals.
Consider the possibility of moving the route of the gas pipeline by a few kilometres to the
east of Great Fixar Island.
3. The EIA does not contain information about the major fishing areas in the vicinity of the gas
pipeline route.
Proposal: include in the EIA a list of the major fishing areas and conduct additional research
into the impact of the project on the protection and reproduction of fish resources.
4. The EIA material does not contain any information about the use of the areas on the coast or
on the islands of the Gulf of Finland for the storage of construction equipment and other
auxiliary material and equipment.
Proposals:
Indicate in the EIA material which areas on the coast and the islands of the Gulf of
Finland will be used for storage of equipment and materials.
Conduct additional research into the impact of the storage of equipment and materials on
the environment.
Please send your reply to our comments and proposals to the following address: St Petersburg,
190000, Per. Grivtsova, 10, office 26, MOMEO Friends of the Baltic Sea.
Chairman of the Board
MOMEO Friends of the Baltic Sea
O. N. Senova
Tel. 9117986
[signature]
[stamp] FOR COURTESY ONLY
UNOFFICIAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION
page 749
MEMORANDUM
on social responsibility of business
The environmental organisations of St Petersburg and the Leningrad Region are writing to the
management of Nord Stream to suggest that they should demonstrate a modern approach to the
development of their business, and that in conjunction with the implementation of the gas
pipeline project they take under their patronage the system of protected natural areas in the Gulf
of Finland which falls into the impact zone of the project, and primarily the Ingermanland
reserve, constituted by Russian Government decree No. 725-r of 23 May 2001.
Concern about the fate of the Ingermanland reserve was expressed by the environmentally
concerned public of North-West Russia in a special address to the participants in the VI
Conference of Environment Ministers from European Countries.
This area has been preserved thanks to the fact that for half a century it has been a closed border
zone, so that the landscape here has remained untouched along with the biological diversity of
its marine and coastal ecosystems, habitats of rare and Red Book species, major migration
resting and nesting grounds for bird colonies, seal breeding grounds and spawning grounds for
commercial species of fish.
The Ingermanland reserve could become a key link connecting the system of protected natural
areas of Russia, Estonia and Finland in the Gulf of Finland. It is a well-known fact that to be
socially and environmentally responsible is not only honourable but also beneficial; such an
approach attracts investment and significantly enhances a companys potential. Helping to
implement this conservation project is all the more important because in 2008 Russia will be
chairing the HELCOM, which imposes additional responsibilities for protection of environment
on Russia.
In our opinion this is very much the right time for establishing the Ingermanland reserve, with
the appearance of yet another threat to the natural life of the Baltic. The Ingermanland reserve
does not itself fall into the area of the route where the gas pipeline is to be laid, but the operation
of the reserve will have a substantial stabilising impact on the natural complexes of the Russian
section of the Gulf of Finland where the construction is to take place, thereby compensating for
any possible damage.
Another important issue which it would benefit the image of the company to address would be
to consider whether it is possible and reasonable to conduct additional research into the route, in
order to identify any dangerous objects in the area where chemical weapons are submerged.
Moreover we propose that independent monitoring should be conducted in the pipeline impact
zone and that the results of that monitoring should be accessible to the public.
The above proposals were discussed by the group of public environmental organisations for
North-West Russia at seminars held by the Russian Regional Environmental Centre.
Participants in the seminar of representatives of public organisations and scientific

organisations of St Petersburg and the Leningrad Region,
20.11.2007, St Petersburg.

page 750
Seminar on the problems of the impact of the Nord Stream project on

the Baltic Sea
St Petersburg, 20 November 2007
Phoenix Training Centre, VO 10 liniya d.33 (metro Vasileostrovskaya)
Time: 10:00 -17:30
Name
1 Tatiana Pavlovna
Artemova,
Co-chairperson
2 Daria Akhutina
Organisation
Posev magazine and the
Association of Environmental
Journalists, St Petersburg
NORDEN Association
3 Liudmila Georgievna
Bogdan, expert in RussiaEU co-operation on the
environment, seminar
organiser
4 Mikhail Vladimirovich
Verevkin Dr. Sc. (Biology)
Russian Regional
Environmental Centre
(RREC), Moscow
5 Olga Vasilievna Volnina,

post-graduate student
6
Andrei Glebovich
Grigoriev
7 Nikolai Donskov,
Head of Northwestern
bureau
8 Sergei Kouzov
9 Olga Krivonos,
lawyer
10 Tatiana Vasilievna
Marushkina
11 David Morchiladze,
Head of Environment and
Energy Section
St Petersburg State
University, Institute of
Biology
Neftegazgeodeziya LLC,
Department of Environmental
Protection
All-Russian Geological
Institute
Novaya Gazeta
St Petersburg State
University, Institute of
Biology
Environmental Rights Centre
(ERC), BELLONA, St
Petersburg
Contact details
posev@mail.wDlus.net
Tel.:+7 (812) 572 47 62
Mobile:+7 921 922 20 36
daria@norden.spb.ru
Phone: +7 (812) 5714090
Fax: +7 (812)3147153
boqdan@rusrec.ru
Tel./fax:+7(495)7376448
vermiv@TV9311 .Spb.edu
Mob. 8 921 976 94 99
volnena@mail.ru
Tel.: 452 54 56
Tel.: 328 90 01
Ndonskov@mail.ru
Mob. +7 921 918 13 36
skouzov@mail.ru
Tel.: 745 43 02
mail@bellona.ru
olqa@bellona.ru
Tel.:+7 (812) 275 77 61
Fax: +7(812) 719 88 43
Mob.: 8 921 346 70 82
OPSZFO, environment
working group
European Academy of Natural dm@parapharm.ru
Sciences
Tel.: + 7 (495) 625 51 15
Fax: +7 (495) 745 00 98
Mobile: +7 985 761 05 05
Research Institute of Biology Tel.: +7 (812) 450-73-10,
Mobile: 937-84-86
12 Georgi Alexandrovich
Noskov,
Doctor of Biological
Sciences, ornithologist
13 Vera Vladimirovna
Green World environmental vera-ovcharenko@mail.ru
Ovcharenko,
Mobile: +7 921 921 79 25
organisation, Sosnovy Bor,
Seminar co-ordinator
Leningrad Region
page 751
14 Vadim Timofeevich Paka

15 Tatiana Rudolfovna Pal,
director
16 Anna Poptsova
17 Igor Vsevolodovich
Rozhdestvensky,
Senior member of the
department for project
management, Cand. Sc.
(Physics and Mathematics)
18 Alexander Evmenievich
Rybalko, Doctor of
geological and mineral
sciences, head of geoecological monitoring
laboratory
19 Olga Nikolaevna Senova,
Chairman of the Board
20 Mikhail Alexandrovich
Spiridonov,
Doctor of geological and
mineral sciences, head of
department of regional
geoecology and marine
geology
21 Olga Nikolaevna
Susloparova, Dr. Sc.
(Biology), ichthyologist
22 Alexander Nikolaevich
Sutyagin,
Project manager, seminar coorganiser
23 Alexander Vladimirovich
Fedorov, manager
24 Lev Alexandrovich
Fedorov, Grand Doctor of
Chemistry Sc.
25 Mikhail Borisovich Shilin,
chief specialist, Grand
Doctor of Geography Sc.
26 Alexander Evgenievich
Shkrebets, manager
Institute of Oceanology,
Atlantic branch
Rodina Russian Green
Movement
Centre for Transboundary
Cooperation, St Peterburg
St Petersburg State
University, Faculty of
Geography and Geoecology
paka@ioran.baltnet.ru
vpaka@mail.ru
newgreen spb@mail.ru
Mobile.: 8 909 593 04 87
anna@ctcspb.ru
tel.: +7 (812) 3348835
iroidest@innovation.spbu.ru
Mob.: 8 921 978 89 20
Sevmorgeo
rybalko@sevmorgeo.com
Tel.: +8 (812) 252-21-12
Friends of the Baltic Sea

Interregional Youth
Environmental Organization,
St Petersburg and Leningrad
Region
Russian Geological Research
Institute, VSEGEI
olqa-senova@yandex.ru
olqa.senova@qmail.com
Tel./fax: +7 (812) 315 66 22
Mobile: +7 921 911 78 86
Michail.spiridonov@vsegei.ru
.: +7 (812) 328-91-59
Hidrobiolog10@mail.ru
Tel.: +7 (812) 323-77-24
State Research Institute for

Lake and River Fishing,
GOSNIORKh
BTS Monitoring project, St
Petersburg
oil-project@mail.ru
Tel.: +7 (812) 376-77-70
Centre for Environmental

Initiatives, St Petersburg
Union for Chemical Safety
ceispb@qmail.com
Tel./fax: +7 (812) 315 66 22
lefed@online.ru
Neftegazgeodeziya LLC,
shilin@rshu.ru
Department of Environmental shilin@ngg.ru
Tel.: +7 (812) 528-72-31
Protection
Fax: +7 (812) 528-86-40
TEIA, St Petersburg
sasha@teia.orq
Tel.:+7 (812) 315 66 22

page 752
Appendix 2.
Comme nts on the EIA material for the Russian section of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline
prepared for the public hearings on 23 Nove mber 2007.
A. N. Sutyagin. BTS Monitoring Project. St Petersburg, tel. +7 (812) 376-77-70,
-mail: oil-project@mail.ru
1. According to page 3 of the PEIA material for the Russian section of the Nord Stream offshore gas
pipeline, in the summary for non-specialists, there were no accidents recorded which has led to the
shutdown or repair of offshore pipelines built since 1980.
This statement is based on the Statement on the absence of data relating to accidents on offshore gas
pipelines (Energy Institute, London), and does not correspond to the data in Table 11.2-1, sheet 223 of
the PEIA material for the Russian section of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline (offshore section),
or to the data contained in PARLOC-2001 (he Update of Loss of Containment Data for Offshore
Pipelines, 5th Edition, 2003).
Please explain this discrepancy and give a precise reference to the aforementioned Statement, or make it
available to the public (for example, on the companys website).
2. Also according to page 3 of the EIA material for the Russian section of the Nord Stream offshore gas
pipeline, in the summary for non-specialists, the CO2 emissions when transporting gas through Nord
Stream will be lower than when transporting gas through the onshore Yamal-Europe pipeline and also
by comparison with the alternative option of transporting liquefied natural gas by tanker, according to the
research of the Global Insight Institute.
Since at the investment justification stage when the various alternative projects for transporting gas were
examined and compared the PEIA material for the Nord Stream project was not available to the public,
please make this analysis available (for example, on the companys website).
3. According to page 7 of the PEIA material for the Russian section of the Nord Stream offshore gas
pipeline, in the summary for non-specialists, and the PEIA material for the Russian section of the Nord
Stream offshore gas pipeline (offshore section), in accordance with the design decisions the pipeline will
be embedded in a trench along the whole length of the section from the waters edge to the -10m isobathic
line.
At the same time, according to page 10 of the same PEIA material for the Russian section of the Nord
Stream offshore gas pipeline, in the summary for non-specialists, and the PEIA material for the Russian
section of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline (offshore section), dredging of a trench for laying the
pipeline will be performed on the section of the route from the waters edge in Portovaya Bay to a depth
of -20m, i.e. along a length almost 5 times greater than in the first instance.
Please explain the reasons for this discrepancy.
4. According to the PEIA material for the Russian section of the offshore Nord Stream gas pipeline
(offshore section), section 10.1.4, sheet 209, Shipping, no analysis has been made of the existing
number of vessel crossings across the eastern part of the Gulf of Finland along the fairway near the route
of the offshore gas pipeline (dry-cargo carriers and tankers) and in the shallow part of the Gulf of Finland
(fishing boats etc.), taking into account the traffic of the existing Primorsk Special oil terminal, the
RPK-II terminal of Lukoil OJSC, and the sea ports of St Petersburg, Vysotsk and Vyborg (a total of
9500 ship crossings in one direction in 2005-2006).
Page 1 [initials]

page 753
The data presented was obsolete data for 1995, before the construction of the main oil terminals and the
expansion of the port of St Petersburg.
In the PEIA there is also no assessment of the probability of various types of navigation accidents, for
example, due to ship groundings on shallows near the fairway, and the impact of such accidents on the
safety of the offshore pipeline during its construction and operation according to sheet 221 of the PEIA
material for the Russian section of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline (offshore section).
According to official data from HELCOM the frequency of ship groundings in the Russian section of the
Gulf of Finland amounts to 2-3 incidents per year, such as, for example, the incident involving the tanker
Propontis on 9 February 2007.
Please conduct an assessment of the impact of navigation accidents on the safety of the Russian section of
the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline (offshore section), or provide evidence of the absence of any
such impact.
5. According to the PEIA material for the Russian section of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline
(offshore section), section 11.2.2, sheet 222, Main accident scenarios, possible scenario options for the
escape of methane, for example through a microscopic hole (flaw) in the pipeline in the event of the
pipeline being damaged were examined. However the PEIA material does not show any calculations for
the dispersal and absorption of methane in the water, and for the formation of water volumes containing
methane concentrations which are toxic for biota.
Please provide examples of such calculations to confirm that in the event of the release of methane
through holes in the pipeline as a result of an accident there is no danger to the sensitive natural
phenomena along the route of the pipeline, for example, the Baltic herring spawning grounds.
6. The PEIA material for the Russian section of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline (offshore
section) does not contain any analysis of presence along the route of the offshore gas pipeline (or in its
safety corridor) of submerged explosives (mines, bombs, shells and other dangerous objects), and any
adverse environmental impact which these could cause during the construction and operation of the gas
pipeline.
Although such an analysis was carried out at the project notification stage, together with a mapping of the
possible locations of such devices (see the companys website), and this was presented at the North
Europe Pipeline Project Round Table at the VII International Environmental Forum Day of the Baltic
Sea on 22 March 2006.
Please provide data about the presence of such objects along the route of the gas pipeline.
7. According to Figure 2.4-2 of the PEIA material for the Russian section of the Nord Stream offshore
pipeline (offshore section), the location of the route of the gas pipeline is shown within the limits of the
RF Exclusive Economic Zone of the Gulf of Finland, but the geolocation profile (Fig. 5.1-2) and the
bathymetric profile (Fig.5.1-3) are shown in directions which are either perpendicular to the route or in
the middle of the Gulf of Finland.
Therefore the bathymetric and geolocation profiles of the route are not shown in the PEIA material, and it
is not possible to understand how the seabed areas to be modified are distributed and where they are
located, i.e. areas where impermissible pipeline spans have to be eliminated, sedimentation zones,
sediment transit zones and bed movement zones which pose a hazard for the gas pipeline.
Page 2 [initials]

page 754
Therefore it is impossible to assess the reliability of the assessment of damage to biota during
hydrotechnical operations.
Please provide the actual bathymetric and geolocation profiles of the route, showing the sections which
contain impermissible spans, bed movement zones etc.
8. According to the Terms of Reference for conducting the EIA for the Russian section of the Nord
Stream offshore gas pipeline, dated 29 March 2007, among the special construction conditions the EIA
must take account of those regions which are very significant for the reproduction of fish resources.
However, according to petergaz LLC enquiry No. 17/96 of 15 September 2006 (Appendix 10-1, sheet
406), there was no request for the location of such regions (spawning grounds, fish feeding and wintering
areas, migration corridors). Only the fishing and trawling areas were requested.
Therefore the PEIA contains only the position of the fishing area of Primorski Rybak LLC, Fig. 10.1-1,
but does not contain the positionof the spawning, feeding and wintering grounds and the migration
corridors of the main commercial fish located along the route of the gas pipeline. There is also no
information on the catch of fish in the Primorski Rybak fishing areas. Data on fish catches are provided
only for the Gulf of Finland as a whole.
Please provide this information and present it in a graphic format.
9. According to the Terms of Reference for conducting the EIA for the Russian section of the Nord
Stream offshore gas pipeline, dated 29 March 2007, there was a requirement to take into account the
presence along the route of the gas pipeline of natural reserves protected under RF legislation.
According to Pitergaz LLC letter No. 17/99 of 15 September 2006 to Rosprirodnadzor for the
Leningrad Region, information was requested only about the protected natural areas situated in the
vicinity of the onshore section of the route of the gas pipeline.
Information about the location and boundaries of the marine SPNA was not requested.
Therefore the statement in the PEIA, sheet 32, that all existing and planned SPNA are located at a
significant distance from the planned route of the gas pipeline and therefore will not be affected by it, and
that none of the 7 of the 9 sections of the Ingermanland reserve included in the list of prospective
SPNA for 2001-2010, approved by Russian Government Decree No. 725-r of 23 May 2001, and of the
Prigranichny reserve, is located in the immediate vicinity of the route of the gas pipeline, is unfounded.
The PEIA material does not indicate the boundaries of the impact zones for these SPNA during the
construction of this gas pipeline dispersal zones of suspended matter, acoustic impact zones, accidental
methane leak impact zones etc.
No evidence is provided that during construction and operation the impact of disturbance factors on these
SPNA will be completely eliminated (storage of construction equipment, machinery etc. in these areas,
unauthorised hunting and fishing, the presence of personnel servicing the gas pipeline etc.).
Page 3 [initials]

page 755
The boundaries of the resting grounds of marine and wading birds in relation to the route of the gas
pipeline and its impact zones are not shown, for example, near the Great Fiskar and Minor Fiskar islands
etc.
The boundaries of the breeding grounds of marine mammals and other areas important for their ecology
are not shown in relation to the route of the gas pipeline and its impact zones.
Please provide this information or conduct additional research into these distributions.
10. According to sheet 160 of the PEIA material for the Russian section of the Nord Stream offshore
gas pipeline (offshore section), ichthyological surveys were carried out only in the autumn season when
there is no spawning taking place of the main spawning species (Baltic herring, bream, smelt etc.).
For this reason no calculation was made of the damage from the loss of roe and larvae when carrying out
hydrotechnical operations see sheet 198.
It is not correct to justify this on the grounds that according to data from observations in the region of the
Berezovye Islands during the spawning period fish avoid areas where hydrotechnical works are carried
out, since:
a)
the actual observation data confirming this fact is not provided,
b) in principle such data cannot exist, since according to sheet 205 of the PEIA, at the request of the fish
protection authorities during the spawning period from April to 15 June inclusive there is a ban on
carrying out all types of hydrotechnical operations.
For this reason the calculation of the damage to fish stocks, according to sheet 198, is unsubstantiated.
Also unsubstantiated is the particular damage for plankton-eating fish, see sheet 200 et seq., due to the
reduction in the food supplies for these fish during trench excavation and filling.
Although calculations have been made of the negative impact zones for these fish during hydrotechnical
operations, see Table 9.4-3 in relation to suspended matter content due to turbidity, the PEIA does not
contain any information about the baseline level of concentration of suspended matter in the areas where
hydrotechnical operations are to be carried out, in particular in Portovaya Bay.
This data on the baseline level of concentration of suspended matter in the areas where hydrotechnical
operations are to be carried out has not been calculated and was not requested.
As a result it is not possible to make a reliable assessment of the extent of the negative impact on
icthyofauna and the hydrobiota as a whole from suspended matter generated during hydrotechnical
operations.
Nor has the damage to fishing due to establishing a safety corridor (1 kilometre either side of the gas
pipeline) during pipeline operation and construction been determined.
Page 4 [initials]

page 756
Please conduct an accurate and substantiated calculation of the actual damage to fish stocks, and provide
this material to the PEIA.
11. According to the Terms of Reference for the EIA for the Russian section of the Nord Stream
offshore gas pipeline, dated 29 March 2007, there was a requirement to develop a programme of routine
environmental monitoring of the impact of the construction and operation of the gas pipeline.
However no such monitoring programme was presented at the hearings.
Please provide such a programme in accordance with the Terms of Reference.
23 November 2007
A. N. Sutyagin
Page 5 [initials]

page 757

6-8

page 747

APPROVED
Head of administration
of the municipality of
Vyborg District, Leningrad Region
K. N. Patraev
200
PROTOCOL
Conduct of public meetings to discuss the technical objectives of
conducting an environmental impact assessment (EIA) and the
preliminary EIA materials relating to construction of the Russian
(Feasibility study/Design stage)
Vyborg
23 November 2007
The public hearings were organised by:

The administration of the municipality of Vyborg District, Leningrad Region
Nord Stream AG
OOO PeterGaz
Information about the holding of public hearings was brought to public notice through the media:
Vyborg newspaper (Vyborg, Vyborg District, Leningrad Region) issue no. 166, 19 October 2007
Vesti newspaper (leading regional newspaper of the Leningrad Region) issue no. 205, 23 October 2007

page 748

Sankt-Peterburgskie Vedomosti newspaper issue no. 199, 23 October 2007 and Rossiyskaya Gazeta
newspaper, issue no. 236, 23 October 2007.
The technical objectives of conducting an EIA and the preliminary version of the EIA materials were
placed on public display at the municipal administrative offices of the Vyborg District and the Alvar
Aalto central city library (Vyborg) and on the Nord Stream AG website at www.nord-stream.com from 23
October 2007.
46 participants participated in the public hearings.
List of registered participants is attached (Annex 1).
The speakers at the public hearings were:

Deputy Chairman of KUMIG and Chief Architect of the municipality of Vyborg District, Leningrad
Region, O. Y. Likhovidov, who gave the introductory address.
In accordance with articles 39 and 46 of the RFs town planning code No. 190-F3 of 29.12.2004, order of
the head of the administration of the municipality of Vyborg District, Leningrad Region. He explained
that:
The objectives of the hearings were to inform the population, to consider public opinion and to involve
citizens in discussions on the question of the location of the Nord Stream offshore pipeline which will be
laid from Russia to Germany on the the Baltic Sea seabed.
The preliminary version of the environmental impact assessment materials in respect of the Russian
section of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline was submitted for consideration by those present at the
public hearings.
Ms. I. D. Vasilyeva, Nord Stream AG PR advisor gave a brief outline of the project.
Mr. N. N. Grishin, senior specialist at Nord Stream AG, gave an account of international discussions of
the EIA materials.
Mr. G. V. Grudnitsky, the projects chief engineer with OOO PeterGaz, reported on The design and
construction of the Russian section of the Nord Stream gas pipeline.
Mr. G. E. Vilchek, the projects chief engineer on environmental issues with OOO PeterGaz , reported
on The environmental impact assessment.

page 749

The following took part in the discussion on the preliminary EIA materials:
Ms. T. Artemova, Posev magazine and Association of Environmental Journalists of St. Petersburg:
In your presentation, you have not said a word about chemical munitions dumps in the Baltic,
even though experts consider this problem to be an extremely serious one. Is there any likelihood that
under certain conditions chemical munitions dumped in the Baltic will be on the gas pipeline route?
Mr. G. Vilchek:
Our investigations within the boundaries of the 2-kilometre corridor along the route did not
uncover any chemical munitions or traces of them (decomposition products of toxic agents). Nor is there
any documented evidence of chemical munitions dumping having taken place in the Russian sector of the
Baltic. It is for this reason that we are not looking into the consequences of possible contact with chemical
munitions.
Ms. O. Senova, Friends of the Baltic organisation and Coalition Clean Baltic
Was the background status of the Baltic environment allowed for in the calculations of possible
pollution levels? Is it possible to give an overall assessment of the effects of construction of the pipeline
that allows for existing background pollution?
Mr. G. Vilchek:
Yes, by carrying out large-scale environmental investigations, we now have data on the
background pollution levels of the Baltic Sea environment. This data will be taken into account in
drawing up the final version of the EIA.
Mr. Y. Shevchuk, Green Cross:
The materials distributed did not show the locations of Specially Protected Natural Areas, and
for some reason, archaeological monuments, in particular ship wrecks, and Finnish protected areas were
not marked on the map. Will construction work be limited during nesting, spawning and seal breeding
periods? It is unclear where pipes of such diameter and gauge will be sourced from as they are not
produced in Russia. The summary table of materials used indicates that the volumes of aggregate used for
post-trenching and free-span correction are around 2.5 million tons. Where will this aggregate be taken
from and how will it be transported - through the port of Vyborg or Vysotsky?
Mr. G. Vilchek:
The gas pipeline route was surveyed with the object of identifying items of cultural heritage.
Data on items uncovered was handed over to the expertise of archaeologists from the Institute of the
History of Material Culture of the Russian Academy of Sciences. According to their findings, the remains
of two 19th century merchant vessels and a range of smaller objects are to be found on the route. The route
was modified on the recommendations of the archaeologists so as not to inflict damage on the monuments
that had been discovered. There is a map of these and it will be included in the EIA. Finnish Specially
Protected Natural Areas were not shown on the map solely to make it easier to comprehend.

page 750

The construction schedule has been optimised so as to avoid impacting on fauna during the most sensitive
periods: this is the winter for pinnipeds and the spring and summer for birds and fish. During these
seasons, no active construction work will be carried out.
Mr. G. Grudnitsky:
Pipes of such diameter and wall thickness have not been produced by Russian factories in the
past, but they are beginning to handle this type of production. The question of selecting a supplier is being
decided. On the question of gravel, we are now carrying out work aimed at cutting our requirements for it.
It will be transported to the site of works by vessel, but the sites for loading vessels will be determined
based on the proximity of the carriers and the distance to the pipeline route.
Mr. B. Feygin, Nord Stream AG:
The pipes required will by produced by the Vyksunsky Metal Works Plants and Europipe. It is
the Vyksunsky plant that has won the contract to produce the pipes for the Russian section.
Mr. A. Sutyagin, Monitoring BTC project:
The EIA materials presented are more complete than those previously available, but a range of
materials is also missing from these. For example, a bathymetric and hydro-acoustic profile of the route,
without which it is difficult to asess what will be the distribution of inadmissible free spans that are
subject to correction (which Mr. Grudnitsky talked about); also not specified are areas of seabed erosion
that are dangerous for the gas pipeline, boundaries of marine Specially Protected Natural Areas, spawning
grounds, areas impacted by suspension, areas impacted acoustically, and others. There is no data on the
status of munitions which may be present. In connection with this issue: are you prepared to present the
real EIA materials and not extracts with references to existing data. And in that case, if there are
comments on these of material significance to you, are you prepared to carry out additional investigations
or to alter project decisions?
Mr. G. Vilchek:
EIA materials never cite primary data. Of course, we have such data, but much of what has been
listed is a classified information and cannot be presented to the public. Secondly, this is a huge amount of
data comprising many dozens of volumes. They are available at Nord Stream and OOO PeterGaz. Contact
Nord Stream for permission to use them. Environmental materials are not secret and may be provided. If
you familiarise yourselves with the materials and have comments and suggestions, we will be grateful if
you voice these. And if it proves necessary, then we will, of course, introduce amendments to the project.

page 751

Mr. N. Donskoye Novaya Gazeta:

-
In what regard are materials confidential? And what is this data?
Mr. G. Vilchek:
-
These are large-scale maps which are confidential in Russia in accordance with the law.
This has no specific relation to the Nord Stream project.

Ms. T. Marushkina, Rodina green movement:
-
Will the pipes be transported each time from the shore or will they be stored on islands?
Ms. I. Vasilyeva:
The logistics will be optimised in terms of both economic and environmental parameters. From
the factories the pipes will be transported to intermediate storage bases in order to minimise the distance
to the construction site. No storage locations in Russia have yet been planned.
Mr. B. Feygin:
The pipes will be transported on barges directly to the pipe-laying vessel. They will not end up
on the beach. The intermediate storage bases will be located in existing ports outside Russia.
Ms. V. Ovcharenko, non-governmental environmental organisation Green World, member of the board
of Coalition Clean Baltic:
Did I understand you correctly that Nord Stream will not carry out any construction work during
the period of mass fish spawning and will follow fisheries regulations in the Leningrad Region, the effect
of which limits certain kinds of activity in the waters of the Gulf of Finland from 15 April to 15 June?
How will waste be utilised? Is constructing of a plant for waste processing planned in Vyborg? Hasnt the
damage evaluation - 71 million roubles - been undervalued in the EIA, since, according to assessments by
ornithologists from St. Petersburg State University, damage to avifauna alone will amount to 18 million?

page 752

Mr. G. Vilchek:
That is completely correct: in strict compliance with the legislation, works will not be carried out
in the stated period, when spawning is taking place in adjacent areas. As regards to the damage to
avifauna, we are working together with ornithologists from St. Petersburg State University. The project is
still subject to further amendments and so is subject to amendments the sum of total of damages .
Ms. O. Rodivshova, OOO PeterGaz:
We are developing a Waste management document. We are looking at all the possible
mechanisms for utilising waste. The construction of a special plant is not envisaged. Waste formed during
construction of the onshore section will be transferred to specialised facilities in the Leningrad Region
which hold the appropriate licences. We are conducting negotiations with them and have received their
agreement that contracts will be concluded prior to the commencement of construction. Concerning the
waste which is generated during construction of the offshore section, this will be generated on foreign
construction vessels and in accordance with established procedures will be transferred at ports of
registration or bunkering ports outside Russia. All the vessels have systems for utilising consumption
waste in accordance with international codes.
Ms. O. Krivonos, Bellona environmental centre:
-
Will the environmental risks be insured?
How will decommissioning of the gas pipeline be implemented?

Are there residents of the Vyborg district present at the hearings?
Ms. I. Vasilyeva:
The object will, of course, be insured by the owner. Negotiations are currently underway with
insurance companies.
It is anticipated that the gas pipeline will operate for 50 years. It is possible that its operating life will then
be extended. In accordance with international practice, the way in which the gas pipeline will be taken out
of service will be determined upon termination of its operating life in accordance with the norms which
apply at that time.
Mr. G. Grudnitsky:
We have a decommissioning section in the project, and funds are earmarked for this. As a rule,
decommissioned offshore gas pipelines are now flushed out and left in place.
Ms. I. Vasilyeva:
It would be best to ask those present about this. Request for residents of Vyborg district to raise
their hands. (About a third of those present raised their hands).

page 753

Mr. A. Shkrebets, Transboundary Environmental Information Agency:

I cannot agree to Ingermanlandsky nature reserve being referred to in the EIA as a planned
reserve. It should be included as an existing reserve. In response to your enquiry to Rosprirodnadzor, you
received a reply only about the absence of Specially Protected Natural Areas on the onshore section, but
not about radionuclide levels, etc. Nor was an enquiry submitted regarding the offshore section. In this
case what data are you taking as your basis?
Mr. G. Vilchek:
Ingermanlandsky nature reserve is officially still only a planned reserve, but all the same we are
examining possible impacts on it. As regards the replies from Rosprirodnadzor we have recently carried
out our own investigations and obtained all the necessary data.
Maximov, pensioner, Seleznevskaya rural district:
There will be a gas pipeline running through Seleznevskaya rural district, but it has not been
reviewed here at all. Where will it run and how will damage due to its construction be compensated for?
For there will surely be some areas of waterlogging, and land drainage networks and roads will be
ruined I would like the rural district and the municipaly not to wait until residents raise these questions,
but to take tough measures themselves.
Ms. I. Vasilyeva:
We are talking today about the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline, and what will be constructed
on land does not form part of this project. Onshore gas pipelines are part of the unified gas transportation
system and fall within the remit of OAO Gazprom.
Ms. O. Senova, Friends of the Baltic:
At the Baltic Sea Day event, Mr. V. P. Serdyukov said that the company was looking for pipe
storage sites, also in Russia. Will this be reflected in any way in the EIA? Is Nord Stream intending to
support the establishment of the Ingermanlandsky nature reserve in any way? The non-governmental
organisations suggest that Nord Stream AG demonstrate its social responsibility by supporting the
establishment of the Ingermanlandsky nature reserve.
Ms. I. Vasilyeva:
As I said, the logistics is being developed and optimised. The pipe storage bases will be on the
shores of the Baltic, but most likely not in Russia. If this is required, then an additional EIA will be
conducted for these sites. As far as sponsorship is concerned, the company has a sponsorship policy and
funds a range of projects relating to the environment and cultural heritage of the Baltic region. We are
also open to new proposals, but these would have to be discussed in more concrete terms.

page 754


A safety corridor will be established along the pipeline, and this will limit fishing activity. And
the probability of accidents through contact with trawls and during anchoring is high, according to
published PARLOC-2001 data. Is this reflected in the EIA? Would it not be necessary to discuss these
issues with fishermen in advance, bearing in mind the catastrophic state of fisheries in the Gulf of
Finland, and to reach agreement, for example, on compensation?
Mr. B. Feygin:
The gas pipelines will be marked on charts, but catching fish along them will not be prohibited.
Besides, fish will concentrate here. From the technical viewpoint, the pipe has been designed so as to
withstand any impact from trawl boards, even those that may appear in future. Anchoring will, however,
be prohibited.
Ms. I. Vasilyeva:
The safety corridor is being established in respect of anchoring, not fishing. We are in dialogue
with fishing organisations in the Baltic and organising a seminar where we will explain how to ensure
safety when trawling in the vicinity of the gas pipeline. As regards other safety aspects, risk analysis is by
all means an important element of the project.
-
Are you planning to invite Russian fishermen to this seminar?
Ms. I. Vasilyeva:
The question is acknowledged but it is not possible for me to give a definite answer to it now, as
the company colleague responsible for preparing the seminar is not present here today.
Another factor in potential accidents is ship grounding. And the probability of this is not zero,
according to published HELCOM statistics (for example, the Propontis tanker accident in February 2007),
since no recommended navigational corridors for tankers have yet been introduced.
Ms. I. Vasilyeva:
The safety corridor is being established in respect of anchoring, not fishing. We are in dialogue
with fishing organisations in the Baltic and conducting a seminar where we explain how to ensure safety
when trawling in the vicinity of the gas pipeline. As regards other safety aspects, risk analysis is by all
means an important element of the project.

page 755

Mr. B. Feygin:
As regards the risk that a vessel will sink and in doing so fall onto the gas pipeline, risks of this
kind have been assessed by OOO PeterGaz and deemed acceptable. This is reflected in the Declaration
of industrial safety.
Ms. T. Artemova, Posev magazine and Association of Environmental Journalists of St. Petersburg:
Yesterday I received a letter signed by one of the senior managers of Nord Stream containing the
following statement: Nord Stream will do everything possible to minimise the risk of dumped
munitions. And it contained detailed information about munitions, i.e. the company does not deny the
fact that there are dumps. Will you be considering the possibility, even if it is only hypothetical, that
during construction or operation of the gas pipeline munitions will be found on the route or in its impact
zone? Is there an action plan for this eventuality: removal, transportation, processing, safety measures?
Ms. I. Vasilyeva:
Thank you for mentioning our information bulletin on munitions. It containes examination of all
aspects of both chemical and conventional weapons. We have designed the route far from dumping sites
and, in addition, the corridor has also been inspected by OOO PeterGaz and by a specialist company. If
dangerous objects are detected nonetheless, then measures to deal with them will be taken jointly with the
competent bodies of the country concerned.
Mr. A. Shkrebets, Transboundary Environmental Information Agency:
-
What is the further procedure regarding the EIA?
Mr. N Grishin:
With consideration of your comments, the EIA will be finalised and submitted to Russias
Rosprirodnadzor for an environmental audit in the first quarter of 2008.
Ms. O. Rodivilova, OOO PeterGaz:
Before the materials are handed over to Rosprirodnadzor, they will be submitted for approval by
the fish conservation agencies and the regional administration of Leningrad Region.

page 756

Ms. O. Senova, Friends of the Baltic:

How will access to the environmental monitoring materials be arranged in practice? Will they be
openly accessible? Will this be specified in the EIA?
Mr. G. Vilchek:
Thank you for the question. We see monitoring as our working tool; the materials will be handed
over to the supervisory state bodies, but we will think of the ways of how to make them accessible to the
public.
The Chairman Mr. O.Y. Likhovidov proposed that, in respect of the laying of the gas pipeline on the
seabed, the project be approved, considering the proposals of those who had spoken.
Applications to Nord Stream and comme nts on the project and the preliminary EIA materials were
submitted in writing (Annexes 2-5 to the Protocol) by the representatives of non-governmental
organisations.
RESOLUTION:
The administration and residents of Vyborg district, as well as representatives of the region's nongovernme ntal organisations, familiarised themselves with the preliminary EIA materials on the
Russian section of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline along the seabed of the Gulf of Finland
and, having taken note of them, expressed their desire to the company and project designers for the
remarks and proposals expressed to be taken into account when the EIA is finalised. The
participants in the discussion expressed their gratitude for the holding of public hearings to the
organisers - the administration of the municipality of Vyborg District, Leningrad Region, Nord
Stream AG and OOO PeterGaz.

page 757

APPENDIX 7
NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY

page 758

Introduction
This Annex No. 7 to the materials of the environmental impact assessment has been drawn up in
accordance with the "Regulation of the assessment of the impact of projected economic activity on the
environment in the Russian Federation (Annex to Order No. 372 of 16 May 2000 of the State Committee
of the Russian Federation for Environmental Protection). The text of Annex No. 7 represents a brief
summary of the materials of the environmental impact assessment (EIA) of the construction and operation
of the offshore section (including the underwater pipeline and landfall sections as far as the isolation
point) of the Russian sector of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline. The materials were developed by
OOO PeterGaz (Moscow, Russia) under contract no. 1 03-07 dated 29 March 2007 with its client
company Nord Stream AG.
The head office of Nord Stream AG is located at: Grafenauweg 2, 6304 Zug, Switzerland. Tel.: +41 (0)
41 766 91 91; fax: +41 41 766 91 92.
Nord Stream AGs Moscow branch office is located at the following address: Znamenka 7, building 3,
119019, Moscow, Russia. Tel.: +7 495 229 65 85; fax: +7 495 229 65 80.
Contact persons at Nord Stream AG:
Sergey Gavrilovich Serdyukov - Technical Director. Tel.: +7 495 229 65 85; fax: +7 495 229 65 80.
Boris Lvovich Feygin - Regional manager of the Russian sector of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline.
Tel.: +7 495 229 65 85; fax: +7 495 229 65 80.
The baseline information for preparation of the EIA materials was provided by materials for the project to
construct and operate the offshore section of the Russian sector of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline,
the EIA and Environmental protection chapters of the conceptual design (investment rationale) for
construction of the North European Gas Pipeline developed in 2005-2006 in accordance with the
technical objectives and schedule relating to agreement no. 6545-10 of 5 September 2005 between OOO
PeterGaz and OAO Giprospetsgaz on the basis of materials from surveys carried out by AO Nord
Transgaz in 1998 for the North European Gas Pipeline feasibility study, archive and bibliographical
materials and the results of engineering and environmental engineering surveys conducted by OOO
PeterGaz along the gas pipeline route in 2005/2007.
In drawing up the preliminary EIA section, account was taken of comments from Gazprom contained in
expert report No. 93 of 30 December 2002 on Rationale for investment in the Nord Stream gas pipeline
construction project, of comments reflected in the conclusion of the State Environmental Expert Review
Board on the rationale for investment in amending the Nord Stream project up to a capacity of 55 billion
cubic metres per annum (Rosprirodnadzor, 2007), and of:
Comments and proposals presented during public hearings on the rationale for
investment, in Vyborg, Leningrad Region, on 21 September 2006;
Questions, comments and proposals advanced during discussion of the project within the
framework of the Espoo Convention by government bodies, organisations, nongovernmental associations and private individuals (129 comments which can be viewed
on Nord Stream AG's company website at www.nord-stream.com);

page 759

Questions, comments and proposals set out in a letter from the Coalition Clean Baltic to
the Russian Federal Government;
Questions, comments and proposals from the public received during public hearings on
23 November 2007 in Vyborg to discuss the technical objectives for conducting an EIA
and the preliminary version of the EIA materials in respect of the Russian section of the
Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline.
This Annex sets out a brief summary of the materials of the impact assessment on marine ecosystems.
Environmental restrictions on natural resource use

Construction of the offshore section of the Russian sector of the Nord Stream gas pipeline will not affect
any Specially Protected Natural Areas (SPNA) of federal, regional or local importance. Closest to the
route of the pipeline is the island of Bolshoy Fiskar (about 3 km), which is covered by the planned
Ingermanlandsky State Nature Reserve.
Located at a distance of 4 km is the Prigranichny reserve, a reserve of regional status. The reserve is
situated on the mainland coastal zone and islands in the Gulf of Finland near the Russian/Finnish border.
The area of the reserve is approximately 5,825 ha, of which about 3,225 ha is on land and 2,600 ha in the
waters of the Gulf.
Suursaari reserve is 6.6 km from the gas pipeline route. It was established to conserve a unique geological
formation which is the island of Gogland with its picturesque natural environment, distinctive relief, rich
collection of rare and vulnerable species of flora and fauna. The reserve covers an area of 1,044 ha.
The principal natural constraints upon construction of the offshore section in terms of the geological
environment and relief conditions are linked to:
the occurrence of ice gouging processes inside Portovaya Bay;
the high degree of the relief roughness in the deepwater section of the route;
special features of lithodynamic processes in the littoral zone of the construction section.
Analysis of the current status of the avifauna showed that in the area which the planned section of the
Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline will pass in Russian waters the avifauna is characterised by high
diversity of species and a high proportion of rare and specially protected species (bittern, mute swan,
gadwall).
Three species of seal are encountered in the Baltic Sea: the grey seal (Halichoerus grypus), common seal
(Phoca vitulina) and ringed seal (Pusa hispida).

page 760

All these species are listed in the Russian Federations Red Book and in the IUCN Red List.
The gas pipeline route was selected so that it does not cross the migration paths of seals listed in the RF
Red Book, and does not coincide with their rendezvous positions outside the migration seasons.
The gas pipeline route also does not affect any specially protected natural areas of federal, regional or
local importance, either existing or planned.
Impacts on the geological environment

of the ancient Baltic shield. In the areas geological structure, an ancient foundation can be identified,
comprising proterozoic formations (rock material up to 2 billion years old) and a cover laid down in
quaternary depositions. The bulk of the quaternary depositions comprise accumulations dating from the
Valday glaciation (approximately 12,000 years ago) and the subsequent stages of the Baltic glacial lakes
and modern sea basins. The glacial deposits are formed of moraines which are laid down as dense clays
with inclusions of boulders, pebbles, gravel and sand lenses. In the lake and sea sediments, clays of
different consistency and grain size and silts predominate.
The seabed is a hilly and ridged plain which formed under the action of repeated glaciations and
neotectonic uplift of the Baltic shield. The ridges are small elongated massifs of islands and banks
grouped in chains extending in a north-westerly direction and separated by lower flat areas. The ridges are
in most cases composed of moraine deposits, the plains between the ridges of clays and silts.
The gas pipeline route lies in a relatively quiet seismic zone, with seismic tremors not expected to exceed
an intensity of 5 on the MSK-64 scale. Moreover, the probability of earthquakes occurring is extremely
small.
Along the route, most sections of the seabed provide favourable lithodynamic conditions for laying a gas
pipeline, and are also characterized by quiet hydrodynamic conditions. The only place where any
noticeable movement of alluvia can be observed is in a narrow coastal strip. However, calculations of the
amounts of alluvia have shown that status of the shore under consideration is stable, and in coming
decades the shore in Portovaya Bay will remain stable and may even accrete.
The impact on the geological environment and on relief conditions will be linked to the carrying out of
dredging during development of the subsea trench in the coastal zone (in Portovaya Bay from the water
line to a depth of 14 metres) and to levelling of the seabed along the gas pipeline route when filling with
rock and gravel material to prevent unacceptable pipe sagging on uneven stretches of submarine relief.
The impact will manifest itself in:

page 761

changes in the grain-size composition of seabed sediments along the gas pipeline route and in
adjacent areas. When backfilling uneven areas of seabed with imported rock and gravel material
(av. diameter 20-40 mm) an increase in the size of sea-floor particles will occur. In addition, when
work is being carried out, the suspension (disturbance) of local fine-dispersed sediments
(consisting mainly of clay and silt particles) together with their dispersal by currents and
subsequent deposition will be observed. This will lead to the formation in the area adjacent to the
gas pipeline route of a layer of freshly deposited sediments, with the particles composing them
being of minimal size. This effect will be temporary and localised in nature and will be evident
only during construction of the installation. The newly deposited sediments on the edge of the
route will, after the first storms, be repeatedly subject to re-suspension and dispersal by storm
currents over a large area of the sea. The grain-size composition of rock and gravel supports will
differ from the natural background material throughout the operational life of the pipeline. But this
will not have any negative consequences for the geological environment.
pollution of seabed sediments with oil products given the potential for leakage from technical
equipment operated during construction work in the waters of the Gulf of Finland and the nearshore section of Portovaya Bay. If oil products do enter the aquatic environment, they may sink to
the bottom in the form of suspended matter. This helps in part to cleanse the sea water of oil but at
the same time leads to greater contamination of seabed sediments with oil. By means of strict
compliance with existing Russian and international regulations governing the collection and
utilisation of waste on vessels, there will be no pollution of seabed sediments from this source.
changes in the seabed relief of the Gulf of Finland along the gas pipeline route Local and shortterm changes (only during the construction phase) linked to the working and subsequent
backfilling of trenches in the near shore zone. Upon completion of construction, the relief will
have a similar appearance to the natural background. Throughout the operational life of the gas
pipeline there will be changes in relief conditions at locations where gravel supports are arranged,
the latter ranging from 0.5 to 6.5 metres in height. However, since most of the backfilling will take
place at depths in excess of 20 metres, where lithodynamic processes are of little significance,
technogenic deformation of the seabed surface will not have any negative consequences.
changes in the parameters of lithodynamic processes. During construction, this will be linked to
the arrangement of a trench in the near shore zone. Where a trench lies open for a sufficiently long
period of time (up to several months), part of the sediment flow will be intercepted and accumulate
in it. The trench will absorb 75-80% of the sediments crossing it, thereby modifying the natural
lithodynamic flow. Total accumulation over the whole length of the trench is estimated at 21.3
thousand m3 per annum. Taking into account that the overall volume of the trench to a depth of 14
metres is approximately 60-65 thousand m3, then over the ice-free period the sediment
accumulatation material brought in may exceed 1/3 of the volume of the trench. However, it must
be taken into account that the pipe-laying cycle in the near shore trench is short and therefore the
time for which the trench will lie open is put at days. For this reason, the actual impact will be
significantly lower than that calculated and will not lead to a substantial change in the alongshore
transfer of seabed sediments. During gas pipeline operation, an impact on sediment transfer
conditions and morphodynamic changes in the seabed will be observed at individual sites where
rock/gravel supports are located. The impacted objects influencing changes in seabed
morphodynamic conditions are sand sediments brought into motion by the action of waves and
currents. The pipeline, together with its rock/gravel foundation presents a continuous impenetrable
barrier for such alluvia. Sediment flow decreases as the barrier is approached from the windward
side, and conditions for solid particle accumulation arise, which results in a decrease in depth. By
contrast, in the lee of the barrier a scouring zone appears, over which the flow of sediments
recovers from zero to its initial value. Movements of sandy deposits are possible down to a depth
of 30 m, but from a depth of 25 metres seabed deformations become minor. It is estimated that at a
depth of 15 metres maximum seabed deformation over the 50 years of operation of the gas
pipeline may reach 1.3 m (accretion)/ -0.99 m (erosion). The impact will be of a long-term nature,
but its scale and intensity will be minimal. In accordance with technical decisions taken, on the
section of the route from the 14-metre isobath to the 25-metre isobath it is planned to arrange 10
seafloor
supports measuring
5x3 metres
for the western
pipeline
and 4 similar
supports for the
UNOFFICIAL
ENGLISH
TRANSLATION
FOR
COURTESY
ONLY
page 762

eastern pipeline, with a total span of 70 linear metres. At depths of 15-22 m, there are plans to
install a continuous 3-metre-wide support for each of the lines (300 metres in length for the eastern
line, 200 metres for the western). In addition, local seabed scouring below the pipeline is possible
during pipeline operation on those sections of the route where sands form the seabed deposits.
Such sections usually have to coincide with strong bottom currents. The conditions for this process
to occur are possible on local sections of the gas pipeline route near to the island of Gogland. But
the probability of it intensifying is minimal, and the impact may be defined as being of little
significance.
Thus, the impact of both the construction and the subsequent operation of the gas pipeline will be
localised and mainly short-term in nature and will exert an insignificant effect on the geological
environment of the Gulf of Finland in the Baltic Sea.

The main pollutants which form as a result of burning fuel are nitrogen dioxide, sulphur dioxide, carbon
dioxide, hydrocarbons, etc.
Welding activities generate iron and manganese oxides, dust and hydrocarbons.
Gross emissions from vessels used during construction of the gas pipeline were calculated at maximum
operating conditions. The calculations took into account the simultaneous operation of all the equipment
used in conformance with the production schedule submitted in the Project for the organisation of the
construction work.
Calculations of the dispersion of harmful substances in the atmosphere were carried out using the
software package Prisma (version 4.30 revision 02) for the warm period of the year in accordance with
the construction works schedule. The results of the calculations showed that no residential areas fall
within the area exceeding 1 MAC (Fig. 1).

page 763

Figure 1.
Map of nitrogen dioxide dispersion
It must be stressed that the impact during construction will be local and of short duration.
Thus, the conclusion that the impact on atmospheric air during construction of the gas pipeline will not
lead to significant changes in atmospheric air is corroborated both by computational results and by
practical experience gained in the construction of similar installations.
Impact on the marine aquatic environment

Hydrological conditions in the Gulf of Finland are principally determined by the nature of the water
exchange with the Baltic Sea. Furthermore, in coastal areas considerable importance is being attached to
river runoff and the configuration of the coastline.
Overall, hydrological conditions in the Gulf of Finland are characterised by well developed wind flows,
the dominance of waves with a short wave period, of less than 5 s, and a height of up to 2 m, and a
relatively high temperature and low salinity of the water. Surging and seiche fluctuations in the water
level are one of the distinctive features of the water level regime in the Gulf of Finland.
Assessment of sea water quality in the waters of the Gulf of Finland was carried out based on a
comparison of the values of hydrochemical indicators against established MAC values for fishery waters.
For the area as a whole, the waters of the monitored body of water fell within class II in terms of quality
class, i.e. clean.

page 764

Among the chemical indicators, the most unfavourable situation is in the planned area are the levels of
dissolved oil products, mercury and phenols. In the open areas of the Gulf adjacent to the shipping lanes,
concentrations of oil products exceed the norm by a factor of dozens. In the near shore zone of Portovaya
Bay the levels of oil products are at the MAC level. The degree of water contamination with mercury and
phenols is significantly lower (2-4 MAC) (average value for the zone on the water contamination index
stands at 0.42).
The main impact on the marine aquatic environment is expected to occur during the gas pipeline
construction phase.
The largest negative impacts will occur during dredging operations, free span correction as well as during
cleaning and hydrotesting of the gas pipeline.
The main impact on the marine aquatic environment during dredging operations and work to remove free
spans will consist in temporary local changes in the physical/chemical properties of the seawater owing to
their contamination with mineral suspensions.
To assess this impact, modelling of the distribution of suspended material was carried out by the
Dorodnitsin Computing Centre of the Russian academy of Sciences.
The field of maximum concentrations reached over the whole period of dredging operations is plotted in
Figure 2. The distance from the edge of the trench to the position of the isoline representing a
concentration of suspended matter of 100 mg/l does not exceed 31 m, 83 m to the isoline representing a
concentration of 50 mg/l, 275 m to the isoline representing a concentration of 20 mg/l and 765 m to the
isoline representing a concentration of 10 mg/l.
Fig. 2
Field of maximum concentrations (mg/l) reached during dredging operations in the

offshore section of the Russian sector of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline
The maximum distances of spread of suspended matter during the elimination of free spans will be
observed in the stage of reducing longitudinal and vertical bending after laying the pipelines. In isolated
instances, concentrations of 10 mg/l may be observed at distances of up to 2 km from the source.

page 765

In the course of dredging operations and operations to correct free spans, more than 55,000 tons of
seafloor material will pass into suspended state (approximately 2% of all the material worked).
There will be practically no impact on the chemical composition of the seawater as a result of the stirring
up of seabed deposits. A very insignificant proportion - tenths of one per cent - of the heavy metals
contained in the seabed sediments will pass into dissolved form as the sediments are stirred up.
During hydraulic testing of the gas pipeline the marine environment will be impacted by the intake and
discharge of seawater.
Something in the order of 2,578,400 m3 of seawater will be taken from the waters of Portovaya Bay in
order to carry out the hydraulic testing. For the purposes of preventing corrosion in the pipeline, sodium
hydroxide (NaOH) and possibly sodium hydrosulphide (NaHS) will be added to the water. Calculation of
the MAC values of these pollutants has shown that no substantial impact will be exerted on the marine
aquatic environment.
Flush water after cleaning of the pipeline will be discharged into a sump/settling basin and cleaned to
concentrations not exceeding the MAC value for fishery waters. It is assumed, accordingly, that there will
be no contamination of Portovaya Bay waters in this case.
Project decisions provide a whole range of general technical and organisation mitigation measures which
will make it possible to reduce significantly the harmful impact exerted on the aquatic environment
during construction of the gas pipeline. The project also stipulates compensation payments for pollution
of the marine aquatic environment during implementation of the construction phase.
No adverse impact on the aquatic environment is forecast when the gas pipeline is in normal operation.
Provision has been made to carry out environmental monitoring and control measures in order to prevent
unforeseen situations arising during operation of the gas pipeline.
Impact on fish and their food supply.

Both marine and freshwater fish are found in the Gulf of Finland, whose water is characterised by its low
salinity. Freshwater fish (perch, ruffe, pike-perch, roach and white bream) principally inhabit near shore
areas of the Gulf, close to river estuaries. Marine fish (sprat, eelpout, sculpin, snailfish, flounder, turbot,
dab, cod, burbut) primarily inhabit the area around the islands of Gogland, Bolshoy and Maly Tyuters,
Moshchnyy and other islands of the Russian Federation lying to the west of Luzhskaya Bay. Fish species
such as Baltic herring, smelt, lamprey and stickleback are encountered everywhere.
Commercial fishing is well developed in the Gulf of Finland. The main commercial fish have traditionally
been herring, sprat, smelt, pike-perch, perch and bream, and other species with a definite commercial
value include whitefish, roach and ruffe. Over the last decade, there has been practically no change in the
species composition of the main commercial fish, but the quantity of saltwater fish caught has declined
substantially (for example, catches of Baltic herring are down more than fivefold and of sprats more than
tenfold).

page 766

Coastal sections of the Gulf of Finland are of major importance as feeding and breeding areas for
commercial fish. It is in the near shore coactal sections that the greatest quantity of food organisms is
concentrated and the Baltic herring spawning grounds are located (see Fig. 3). The remaining saltwater
fish species breed outside the Gulf of Finland as in order to breed they require higher salinity levels than
are found in the Gulf of Finland (not less than 10.5-11.0%o).
Figure 3.
Distribution of Baltic herring spawning sites in the Eastern part of the Gulf of
Finland
The more deepwater sections of the Gulf of Finland are relatively poor in biological resources: fish and
invertebrates. Over a significant area of the deepwater sections of the Gulf there is a complete absence of
bottom-dwelling organisms which provide the food supply for fish because conditions are unfavourable
for living organisms to dwell in these sections.
The ever increasing pressure which human economic activity is exerting on the waters of the Gulf of
Finland and which has led to a number of changes in the species composition of organisms inhabiting the
Gulf should also be noted.
The construction works will have a negative impact on marine organisms, the principal source of this
being the operation of machinery and mechanisms in the waters which will be accompanied by
disturbance of the seabed surface and an increase in the turbidity of the water.

page 767

At the same time, living organisms on which the fish feed will die in areas of seabed disturbance and in
volumes of water contaminated with suspended materials.
Baltic herring spawning grounds located in the shallow waters of Portovaya Bay areas will also be
partially destroyed. The area of spawning grounds destroyed constitutes less than 1% of the total Baltic
herring spawning grounds in the Gulf of Finland.
All these negative impacts have been taken into account in the design. To reduce the damage to fish
stocks, nature conservation measures have been drawn up, including plans for the financing of measures
to reproduce valuable fish species in the region.
At the same time, construction of the gas pipeline may also have a positive impact on the fauna of the
Gulf of Finland during the operational phase of the gas pipeline, since there are plans to pour in gravel
material supports in order to lend stability to the gas pipeline. Such gravel foundations are known to be
colonised quickly by bottom-dwelling organisms, which will increase the productivity of the Gulf, and
will foster an improvement in the food supply for fish, marine mammals and birds.
During operation of the gas pipeline under normal conditions, no noticeable adverse impacts on the fauna
of the Gulf of Finland are anticipated, and therefore the measures which are taken will be targeted
primarily at regularly monitoring the integrity of the gas pipeline, as well as at supporting the capacity of
the technical systems to operate properly and at preventing accidents.
The issue of the safe decommissioning of the gas pipeline will probably be resolved later - after
completion its planned service life (at least 50 years) taking into account the legislative requirements and
technological capabilities which will exist at that time.
Impact on marine mammals and birds

According to data from environmental surveys and bibliographical sources, the contemporary fauna of
marine mammals and birds in the Russian part of the Gulf of Finland comprises 69 species of birds and 7
specials of mammals, of which only 2 species are found regularly, the remaining 5 species being
distributed further to the west, beyond Russian waters.
The following features are characteristic of the Russian part of the Gulf of Finland:
-
the Gulf of Finland is a busy shipping traffic zone;
the White Sea-Baltic migration route, which is used by hundreds of thousands of birds nesting in
the north of European Russia and a number of species from the Asian tundra, passes through the Gulf of
Finland;
the Gulf of Finland is a habitat for rare pinnipeds listed in the Red Book - the grey seal and the
ringed seal;
a large number of islands are located in the Russian part of the Gulf of Finland, and numerous
reefs and rocks are found along the coast. The combination of specific natural, climatic and geological
conditions has led to the emergence of unique natural systems, including those in the areas around the
islands. To preserve these systems, specially protected natural areas of various categories have been
established and unique wetlands and Important Bird Areas designated in the Russian part of the Gulf.

page 768

The most valuable in the nature conservation sense are islands with seabird colonies and seal herds, and
sections of the coast and coastal waters. The concentration of migrating birds in the inner part of the Gulf
of Vyborg merits separate mention.
The main impact on marine mammals will come from the operation of machinery and equipment which is
accompanied by noise that frightens the marine mammals and causes them to leave the site where the
work is being carried out.
The list outlining the main types of impact includes:
the impact of physical fields (thermal, acoustic, electromagnetic, etc.);
changes in the physical and chemical characteristics of animal habitats (see section 4.3 of
this document);
disturbance of animals by vessels and machinery in operation;
changes in a habitats biotic components (see impact on fish and their food supply in this
document), which impact indirectly through changes in the status and accessibility of the
food supply;
changes in the social situation (increase in human presence and associated factors,
including disturbance, poaching, etc.).
Thus, the impact on marine animals during implementation of the projected activity may result in their
withdrawal from areas affected by noise, in the deterioration of their nutrient conditions due to a
reduction in the food supply (of fish and, to a lesser extent, of the macrozoobenthos) and in mortality as a
result of poaching. The most dangerous impact on marine mammals and birds will arise only in the event
of an emergency situation accompanied by an oil/fuel spill.
Birds
The area of the planned pipeline construction is a busy shipping zone, and birds resident here are to a
certain extent adapted to the noise and vibration impacts which are produced by shipping traffic.
The greatest impact on the avifauna will be at distances of up to 0.5 km from the site of operations,
whereas at a distance of 0.5 km -1 km the impact will be strong, at a distance of between 1-2 km the
impact on the avifauna will be moderate, and at a distance of 2-3 km the impact on birds will be weak.
A reduction in reproductive success or radical changes in the spatial structure of the nesting population of
island avifauna and consequently a decline in its numbers and productivity is unlikely to result from the
impact of construction operations carried out offshore. This is chiefly because the islands are located far
from the projected gas pipeline, as follows: Bolshoy Fiskar is 2.9 km away and Gogland is 2.7 km away,
while all others are at distances in excess of 4 km. The sole exception is the island of Maly Fiskar which
is located at a distance of 0.94 km from the planned route. The islands avifauna will be subject to a
strong impact which will be reflected in a reduction in the density of birds nesting on the shore and it is
possible that some individual birds will use neighbouring islands or the Gulf of Finland coastal area for
breeding, i.e. areas located far from the site of operations and not affected by a heavy noise loading. It
cannot be ruled out that during the year in which the work is carried out, some birds will not prefer to nest
in the northern part of Maly Fiskar island since that part is further from the site of operations than the
southern part of the island.

page 769

Construction of the offshore part of the gas pipeline will affect spring concentrations of waterfowl in the
area between the Beryozovyye Islands and Portovaya Bay (see Nature conservation atlas of the Russian
part of the Gulf of Finland, and also the description of spring migrations in chapter 3.6 of this book). The
total numbers of migrants stopping over in this area stand at approximately 800,000 individuals in the
spring and between 2 and 2.5 million individuals in the autumn. It is forecast that as a result of the
construction work being carried out there will be a movement of a proportion of the migrating waterfowl
stopping over in the area to contiguous parts of Gulf of Vyborg waters, but at the same time the
construction work will not affect the general (north-westerly) direction of the migration flow nor the
migration times. During the autumn migrations, birds will also avoid stopping over near to the site where
operations are being carried out, using instead adjacent sea areas of the Gulf of Finland for resting and
feeding.
The greatest threat to migrating birds forming concentrations on offshore waters comes from oil spills
forming on the surface of the water as a result of accidents. To prevent oil spills when work is being
carried out, it is essential that all safety regulations be observed.
Under normal (accident-free) operating conditions during construction and provided nature protection
measures are observed, technogenic pollution will be minimal and will not have a significant effect on
birds.
Overall, the impacts during construction will be short-term and reversible (disturbance, water turbidity,
temporary habitat removal and disruption). Nonetheless, it is inevitable that even where nature protection
measures are observed there will be an adverse impact on the avifauna during the construction phase. In
this connection, an estimate of the damage to birds is presented in the project design materials (see ch. 8,
vol. 8, book 1, part 2).
Mammals
The assessment of the impact on marine mammals has been carried out based on current information
about the population status of these animals in the Russian part of the Gulf of Finland. Unfortunately,
current information on the numbers and distribution of marine mammals in Russian waters of the Gulf is
quite scarce. Investigations of the sea and coasts in the planned construction area which were conducted
in the course of surveys confirmed the absence of a stable population of the common seal in the Russian
part of the Gulf of Finland; the presence of this species can be described as occasional. On this basis, it is
difficult to forecast the impact on this species of pinniped. For the same reasons (occasional nature of
their presence), the impact on cetaceans is considered insignificant.

page 770

Hence, during implementation of the project, the impact on Baltic ringed seals and grey seals, which
inhabit the area through which the gas pipeline passes, will be insignificant. Both species are rare and
protected in the area concerned, but in recent years their numbers have declined sharply. They are listed
in the Red Book of the Russian Federation and in the Red Data Book of Nature of the Leningrad Region.
As the water warms up, the ringed seal leaves the mainland shore and in summer uses the small island
and reefs for haul-outs so that the summer seal population is fairly dispersed and not permanently tied to
any section of the coast. During this part of the year the seal may undertake local migrations. The nature
of the seals presence in the work area makes it possible to predict that the impact on the seals population
while work is being carried out will be insignificant.
The periods during which construction work will be carried out on the offshore part of the gas pipeline do
not coincide with the pupping period in which significant casualties may be inflicted among the young
seals.
The grey seal uses the Khalikarty islands, located some 5-6 km from the gas pipeline route, for summer
haul-outs. This is an important area of habitat used by the seals every year during migration. Taking into
consideration the distance from the island to the gas pipeline route, it can be predicted that the impact on
seals using the islands for haul-outs will be insignificant. Furthermore, in the summer and during the
migration period the seals are not tied permanently to a particular site and are less vulnerable to local
impacts. Nonetheless, to ensure the safety of the grey seal haul-out sites on the Khalikarty Islands, it is
recommended that no construction activities be carried out around the island in May and June (moulting
period).
Conclusion
The projected pipeline route practically doesn't overlap with the main migration routes of the ringed seal
and the grey seal. Taking into consideration the local nature of the impact of gas-pipeline laying activities
and the existing situation in terms of shipping traffic (in which conditions the ringed seal and grey seal
reside) and also the numbers and distribution of seals in the Gulf of Finland, it can be stated that
construction of the gas pipeline will not have a significant effect on the seasonal movements and feeding
of seals in the Gulf of Finland.
Based upon the materials of surveys in 2006, including special seal counts conducted by specialists from
the Biological Scientific Research Institute (as part of the international count of marine mammals
between 28 May and 2 June 2006) from on board a ship following the route of the projected gas pipeline,
it can be concluded that during the summer practically no seals are encountered in the sea area of the Gulf
of Finland adjacent to the route of the projected gas pipeline, with the exception of the major haul-out site
on the island of Khalikarty (110-130 individuals). This site is located at a distance of 6 km from the route
of the projected gas pipeline, but is not of a permanent nature (the herd uses various islands as haul-out
sites during this period).

page 771

There is no data to suggest the presence of seals in the area of Portovaya Bay during summer.
During the winter, individual grey seals are encountered in the waters of the Russian part of the Gulf of
Finland, but ringed seals are predominantly encountered close to the shoreline where they build lairs and
give birth to pups on the ice. According to the data that is available, during winter the majority of seals
are encountered further south and east than the projected gas pipeline route.
The seals main haul-out sites are situated in the central and southern sector of the Russian part of the
Gulf of Finland. They are located at a significant distance from the projected pipeline route and will not
be impacted by the projected operations.
Due to the likelihood that exists of vessels encountering marine mammals, special instructions governing
the conduct of the crew in such situations will be placed on the vessels. The instructions will prohibit the
deliberate chasing, frightening, feeding and any kind of catching of these animals.
For the purposes of minimising the impact on marine mammals, work times for construction of the
offshore part of the gas pipeline have been selected so as to rule out the likelihood of juvenile seals and
breeding females being killed and of seal lairs located on the ice being destroyed. Offshore work will be
carried out in the period from June to November, the season when the sea is free of ice.
From analysis of survey materials and archive data on the current status of cetaceans in the Russian part
of the Gulf of Finland it can be concluded that all 4 species of cetaceans which inhabit the Baltic Sea
today are absent from the waters of the Russian part of the Gulf of Finland and are only occasionally
encountered here. The random nature of the presence of this group of mammals in the gas pipeline
construction area does not make it possible to reliably predict the impact on them.
Thus, data presented in the materials of environmental engineering surveys and the small amount of data
in the literature on the numbers and seasonal distribution of pinnipeds in the Russian part of the Gulf of
Finland make it possible to predict that the impact on this group of marine mammals during construction
of the projected gas pipeline will not be significant.
During accident-free operation of the Nord Stream offshore gas pipeline, its influence on the natural
environment, provided the applicable technical rules and regulations and nature conservation
requirements are observed, will not lead to a change in the ecological conditions in the area around the
gas pipeline.
When the gas pipeline is in operation, the numbers of birds in the pipeline area will be typical of those
found in that area under natural conditions. During the operational phase of the gas pipeline, the density
of typical seabirds will be practically the same as their normal density offshore.

page 772

The impact on marine mammals and birds during dismantling of the gas pipeline will be comparable to
the impact during construction, both in scale and duration. A specific description of the impact and
estimates of damage will be made after project decisions on dismantling of the gas pipeline have been
reached and taking into account changes in the state of the environmental elements over the operating life
of the gas pipeline.
Impact of production and consumption waste

During installation and construction operations, 7 types of production and consumption waste of 3-5
hazard categories will be generated:
Unsorted ferrous metal scrap;
residues and cinders from steel welding electrodes;
solid bitumen waste;
waste from vessels (solid domestic waste, food waste, maintenance waste, domestic
effluent ).
The total volume of waste will be 21,424,308 tons.

In terms of time, the environmental impact of the production and consumption waste can be classified as
a short-term impact, typical of the length of time for carrying out installation and construction works.
The environmental impact of waste generated during construction of the gas pipeline will be minimal
since all the waste types concerned are nonvolatile.
The impact of the installation and construction works is reversible since when the laying of the pipelines
in complete the aquatic environment will not be subjected to impact from the technology, and damaged
ecosystems will recover.
Domestic effluent will be transferred to a vessel dealing with the collection of waste water and bilge
water and delivered to the port of Primorsk (OOO Spetsmornefteport Primorsk). A contract will be
concluded with a specialist organisation (ZAO Ecoproyekt) for the removal of waste in the form of
ferrous metal scrap, electrode cinders and bitumen waste. Bitumen waste and waste generated by
employees and from vessel operations will be delivered to port and disposed of at a testing ground, and
nature conservation payments will be made for the waste.
During normal operation of the gas pipeline, no production or consumption waste is expected to be
generated, the exception being where possible repair work which has not been considered within the
scope of this project has to be carried out.
If an option of conservation of the gas pipeline is realiyed, then no waste will be generated.
If the pipeline is fully dismantled, the list of waste products will be similar to the list of waste products
generated during construction, namely:
unsorted ferrous metal scrap;
residues and cinders from steel welding electrodes;

page 773

solid bitumen waste;
waste from vessels (solid domestic waste, food waste, maintenance waste, domestic
effluent etc.).
In order to minimise the environmental impact of production and consumption waste, all temporary waste
storage sites will conform to Russian nature conservation requirements.
Conclusion.
The Environmental Impact Assessment materials allow the following conclusions to be made:
1.
Provided that project decisions and nature conservation measures envisaged under the project are
observed during construction and operation of the offshore part of the Russian section of the Nord Stream
offshore gas pipeline, the impact on the area's environment will be predominantly local and short-term in
nature, and negative changes to the ecosystems of the Baltic Sea will be reversible and moderate in scale.
2.
Compensation for damage to the environment and to the interests of third parties may be
provided by the project operator in accordance with established statutory procedures.
3.
The gas pipeline route selected and construction technologies used are optimal from the
environmental point of view.
4.
The set of nature conservation measures envisaged is sufficient for minimising damage to the
environment.

page 774

LIST OF AMENDMENTS TO DOCUMENT 36/07-01- TEO-OOS-0801(1)

Sheet
Description of amendment
Nord Stream logo moved so that it comes

before the PeterGaz logo
Throughout References to source material added
Abbreviation CDS (cleaning and diagnostics
Throughout system) replaced by DCD (diagnostic
cleaning devices)
16-17
Lists of symbols and abbreviations included
Chapter 1 General information revised in
21-113
accordance with Espoo document.
North European gas pipeline and Service
21-113
platform in Swedish waters data removed.
21-113,
Duplicate figures showing the distribution of
252-280,
rock material around the pipeline removed.
476-569
Information inserted to the effect that the
requirements of international legislative acts
18
were taken into account when developing the
volume (insertion of paragraph When
preparing this volume
Para. 1.4.5. Alternatives for the Russian
58
sector of the Nord Stream gas pipeline
added.
The following sentence added to para. 1.4.5:
Nevertheless, in spite of the conclusions
59
received from Russian Federation state expert
reviews
59
Reference to fig. 1.4-1 inserted.
Fig. 1.4-1 inserted, showing alternatives for
the gas pipeline route south of Gogland
60
Island from the Espoo report (September
2008).
Fig. 1.5-1 updated in accordance with the
71
new version of the gas pipeline route.
Sentence beginning The inner coating of the
76
pipes replaced by Applying to the pipes
(page. 38 of version C4)
Sentence For one pipe-laying vessel
83
removed (p. 45 of version C4)
Throughout
Date of
amendment
Signature
30.10.2008
[signature]
30.10.2008
[signature]
06.10.2008
[signature]
07.10.2008
[signature]
07.10.2008
[signature]
07.10.2008
[signature]
07.10.2008
[signature]
30.10.2008
[signature]
29.10.2008
[signature]
29.10.2008
[signature]
30.10.2008
[signature]
29.10.2008
[signature]
07.10.2008
[signature]
06.10.2008
[signature]
29.10.2008
[signature]

page 775

Sheet
86
87-88
90
91
92
92
92
92
93
Sentence The route of the Nord Stream gas
pipeline presumably crosses removed (p.
48 of version C4).
In the paragraph For filling and pressuretesting the whole offshore pipeline the
word discharge has been replaced by
releasing, and settling tank by cleaning
installation (p. 49 of version C4
The onshore pipeline outlets are periodically
serviced by personnel replaced by The
onshore pipeline outlets in Russia are
regularly inspected by personnel (p. 52 of
version C4).
When necessary duty personnel were
mobilised by the controllers in the main
control room replaced by When necessary
duty personnel will be mobilised by the
controllers in the main control room (p. 53
of version C4)
Sentence The detailed design stage was
begun in 2006 in parallel with the
environmental studies and the drawing up of
permitting documents replaced by The
detailed design stage was begun in 2007 in
parallel with the environmental studies and
the preparation of permitting documents (p.
54 of version C4).
Processing of permitting documents
replaced by The procedure for obtaining
construction permits (p. 54 of version
4).
In accordance with the Convention for the
assessment amended to in accordance
with the Convention on the assessment
(p. 54 of version C4)
Para. 1.6. Renamed Description of possible
types of environmental impact for the given
activity for each option (p. 54 of version
C4).
Reference added to section 1.4.5
(Comparison of possible impact.) which
provides a comparison of the environmental
impact when different options are
implemented (table 1.4-1).
Date of
amendment
Signature
29.10.2008
[signature]
29.10.2008
[signature]
29.10.2008
[signature]
29.10.2008
[signature]
29.10.2008
[signature]
29.10. 2008
[signature]
29.10.2008
[signature]
29.10.2008
[signature]
29.10.2008
[signature]

page 776

Sheet
93
93
94
95
101-102
102
112-113
112
113
113
113
133
Sentence It is forecast that mechanical

(dredging operations (p. 55 of version
C4) amended to It is forecast that
mechanical (pipeline burying operations
Sentence Carrying out dredging operations
reworded (p. 55 of version C4).
The phrase discharge of water after pressure
testing added to the impact factors in Table.
1.6-1.
When preparing the EIA material, the Espoo
Convention and the Convention on the
protection of the marine environment of the
Baltic Sea area were taken into account
(paragraph In addition when preparing the
material ).
Phrase removed: Representatives of the RF
Ministry of Natural Resources stated
(note to p. 64 of version C4).
Addition of wording from the Notice sent to
the Russian Ministry of Natural Resources to
the Espoo Convention official bodies in
which it was stated that Germany, Denmark,
Finland and Sweden see themselves as
Parties of origin in the terms of the
Convention
Paragraph 1.8 added: Compliance of design
documentation with the requirements of
national legislation for EIA.
Paragraph 1.8.1. added: Explanatory note on
substantiating documentation.
Paragraph 1.8.2. added: Measures to prevent
and/or mitigate the possible negative impact
of the project on the environment.
Paragraph 1.8.3. added: Uncertainties in
determining the environmental impact of
economic or other activity identified when
carrying out the assessment.
Paragraph 1.8.4. added: Summary of
monitoring and post-project analysis
programmes.
Paragraph 3.1.5.2. The following sentence
added to the paragraph Level of
contamination of the surface layer of
deposits : Chemical soil analysis methods
(p. 94 of version C4)
Date of
amendment
29.10.2008
29.10.2008
29.10.2008
Signature
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
07.10.2008
07.10.2008
[signature]
[signature]
07.10.2008
07.10.2008
29.10.2008
29.10.2008
29.10.2008
29.10.2008
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
29.10.2008

page 777

Sheet
176
215
234-235
243-250
In 3.3.2.1. the following sentence added to

the paragraph beginning: During
engineering and environmental surveys:
29.10.2008
Laboratory analysis methods for sea water
samples .
Paragraph added: One of the main principles
30.10.2008
of Nord Stream AG .
Section 3.7: brief information about
07.10.2008
cetaceans added.
Obsolete material about shipwrecks updated.
07.10.2008
Figs. 3.8-2 replaced in accordance
with comments (comment to p. 211 of
29.10.2008
version C4)
Areas occupied by earth supports and
disturbed deposits clarified (p. 214 of version
C4), paragraph In total, at all stages of
08.10.2008
construction filling will be performed 328
times.
K replaced by KP
29.10.2008
250
257
257
270
290
291-292
290-295
320
Date of
amendment
Areas where the seabottom relief will be

modified during the construction stage
clarified. Misprint removed: amended to:
08.10.2008
The total accumulation in the trench is
estimated to be 21.3 thousand m3year-1.
In Table 4.3-1 the times shown for different
concentrations of plumes of suspended
particles are different. These times were
calculated taking into account the duration of
work and the plumes being fed with new
suspended material. It should be noted that in 30.10.2008
general the duration of the existence of a
plume of suspended particles is determined
not so much by the concentration of the
suspended particles in that plume as by the
duration of the work.
K replaced by KP
29.10.2008
In Tables 4.3-1, 4.3-3, 4.3-4, 4.3-5 the
dimension has been changed (m3 replaced by
thousand m3).
Paragraph included re the absence of any
impact on the cetaceans in the Gulf of
Finland (Following a study of the materials
).
29.10.2008
07.10.2008
Signature
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]

page 778

Page
338
339
338-339
375
379
381
382-383
476-569
659-660
681-780
781-797
Paragraph added: When carrying out largescale filling in the fourth stage (note to
pa. 294 of version C4).
In the section entitled Transboundary
impact the quantity of harmful substance
entering the environment has been clarified.
Although the danger zone where the gas
come out onto the surface of the water is
small ... Baltic region in a 24-hour period (p.
294 of version C4) replaced by As a result
of such an accident, gas jets Risk
Assessment Report Offshore).
In the paragraph Total mass of relase the
quantity of harmful substance entering the
environment has been clarified.
New chapter included: Measures to mitigate
possible adverse impact
In Table 7.1-1 the values for environmental
damage during the construction and operation
phases have been rounded off.
New chapter added: Environmental
Monitoring and Control Programme.
Incorrect numbering in Appendix 4.1
removed.
Appendix 4.3 added: Granite macadam
certificate.
Appendix 6 added: Material from the public
hearings concerning the Nord Stream
project.
Appendix 7 added: Non-technical
summary.
Date of
amendment
Signature
29.10.2008
[signature]
07.10.2008
[signature]
[signature]
29.10.2008
07.10. 2008
07.10.2008
30.10.2008
07.10.2008
07.10.2008
08.10.2008
07.10.2008
07.10.2008
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]
[signature]

page 779
Source text
////Page 25////

:
,
,
////Page 39////
. .

////Page 40////
////Picture 1////

2005
////Picture 2////

2025 .
////Page 43////
////Page 46////

27

////Page 48////
Target text
////Page 25////
SUPERVISORY BODIES
Shareholders' council
MANUAL.
General Manager
Board of directors
Functions:
technical issues, commercial issues,
financial, etc.
////Page 39////
bcm
Import supply gap
Current import capacity
Domestic production
////Page 40////
////Picture 1////
Renewable energy carriers
Nuclear energy
Natural gas
Hard fuel
Oil
Share in primary power consumption in
2005
////Picture 2////
Renewable energy carriers
Nuclear energy
Natural gas
Hard fuel
Oil
Share in primary power consumption in
2005
////Page 43////
Norway
Russia
Algeria
Nigeria
Iran
Qatar
////Page 46////
Shtokman
Yamal
Extraction area
27
Natural gas pipeline
////Page 48////
1 -
2 -
3

4
5
6 -

Nord
Stream
////Page 50////
(20 ../)
(55-60 . ./)
(8 . ./)
(8 . ./)
(8 . ./)
(8-11 . ./)
)
(11-12 . ./)
Nord Stream (55 . ./)
(30 . ./)
(31 . ./)
2005
c

////Page 61////
2.

,

CD
-
CF
G -
CP -
DR -
CW -
CY -

, ()
NG1 Pipelines from the north-west of

Russia
NG2 - Pipelines from Algeria
NG3 Pipelines from Caspian Region and
the Middle East
NG4 LNG terminals
NG5 Underground gas storage
NG6 East Mediterranean Gas Ring
The pipeline from Shtokman gas field to
Nord Stream pipeline
////Page 50////
Langeled (20 bcm/year)
LNG (55-60 bcm/year)
Medgaz (8 bcm/year)
Galsi (8 bcm/year)
Transmed (8 bcm/year)
Green Stream (8-11 bcm/year)
Pipeline Link
Turkey Greece (11-12 bcm/year)
Nord Stream (55 bcm/year)
South Stream (30 bcm/year)
Nabucco (31 bcm/year)
Operated from 2005
c
Under construction
Underway
////Page 61////
Figure 2
Resident population density on the coast,
anthropogenic strain and "hot spots"
Anthropogenic strain
removal and hydraulic deposition of
soil
CD shore protection
- eutrophication
CF fishery
G - marine traffic
CP - technological pollution
DR - public recreation
CW - water use
CY - military activity
"Hot spots"
For today (existing)
, ()

2010 2012 .
(. )
2 000
2 000 10 000
10 000 50 000
50 000 100 000
100 000 500 000
1 .

2 000

500
500 1 000
1 000
1 6

25

,
////Page 62////
39.

()
.
-

.

.

For future (potential)

Water treatment plants
Leningrad APP
Legend
National border
Automobile roads
Rail roads
Working oil ports
Future planned oil ports
Predicted oil product transport in 2010 2012
(million tonnes)
Cities
Less than 2,000 people
From 2,000 to 10,000 people
More than 1,000,000 people - St.Petersburg
Urban-type settlements
More than 2,000 people
Rural-type settlements
Less than 500 people
From 500 to 1,000 people
More than 1,000 people
1 centimetre is 6 kilometres
Continuous contours are every 25 metres
Baltic pipeline system
Depth, m
////Page 62////
Figure 39.
List of specially protected natural areas
(SPNA)
Lebyazhye.
Wetlands of international importance
The Berezovye Islands.
Complex nature reserve of regional
importance
Vyborgsky.
importance
.

.

.

.

.

-.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Melkovodnoye Lake
Ornithological nature reserve of regional
importance
Rakovye Lakes.
importance
Vrmnselk Ridge.
importance
Ozernoye Wetland.
Hydrological nature reserve of regional
importance
Gladyshevski.
importance
Lindulovskaya Wood.
Botanical nature reserve of regional
importance
Lamminsuo Wetland.
Hydrological nature reserve of regional
importance
Yuntolovski.
importance
Gostilitski.
Botanical nature reserve of regional
importance
Velkota oak woods and villages.
importance
Kotelski.
importance
Gustoy Island.
Geological natural monument
Krasnoye Lake.
Geological and hydrological natural
monument
Komarovo beach.
Complex natural monument
Outcrop on Popovka river
Geological natural monument
Dudergof Hills.
Strelna beach.
.

.

.

.

.
.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

().

-.
.
.

Sergievka Park.
Dontso.
Radon springs and lakes in Lopukhinka
village.
Geological and hydrological natural
monument
Ingermanlandski.
National nature protection area.
Prigranichny.
importance
Orekhovski.
importance
Kurgalski.
importance
Primorsk beach.
Sapernoye.
importance
Smorodinka river valley.
importance
Termolovski.
importance
Sestroretski Razliv.
importance
Syuryevskoye Wetland.
importance
Lubenskoye Lake.
importance
Repuzi (Pudost).
"Wonder lawn" in Gatchina.
Botanical natural monument.
Paritsa river head.
Botanical and hydrological natural

.

.

.

.

.

()

(1)
(2-14)
(15-23)
(24)
(25-27)
(28)
(29-34)
(35-42)
1 6

25

,
////Page 63////
21

,

1 6
////Page 64////
monument
Karpikovo Wetland.
Botanical natural monument
Glyadino.
Vilpovitsy.
Gostilitsy flank.
Koporye steep ("glint").
Legend
Specially protected natural areas (SPNAs)
Existing
Wetlands of international importance (1)
Nature reserves (2-14)
Natural monuments (15-23)
Planned
Nature protection areas (24)
Natural monuments (28)
Proposed
Natural monuments (35-42)
Continuous contours are every 25 metres
National border
Automobile roads
Rail roads
Depth, m
////Page 63////
Figure 21
Flight routes and main staging places of
swans in autumn
Legend
National border
Automobile roads
Rail roads
Depth, m
Flight routes
Main staging places
////Page 64////
26.

( ) .

,

1 6
////Page 65////
30.

,
1 6

////Page 66////
33.

(hoca hispida botnica)

-

Figure 26.
Baltic Sea bird fauna representatives
distribution in spring-summer (breeding)
period
Legend
National border
Automobile roads
Rail roads
Depth, m
Common eider
Velvet scoter
Mute swan
Razorbill and guillemots
Greylag goose
Barnacle goose
Shellduck
Oyster-catcher
Turnstone
Dunlin
Great cormorant
Great black-backed gull and lesser blackbacked gull
Caspian tern
Arctic tern
////Page 65////
Figure 30.
Traces of terrestrial birds spring migration
Legend
National border
Automobile roads
Rail roads
Depth, m
Traces of mass spring migration
Traces of spring migration
////Page 66////
Figure 33.
Baltic ringed seal (hoca hispida botnica)
rendezvous at herds during spring /
summer and summer / autumn and its
migration routes during spring and autumn
/ winter
Legend

,

( )

- (
)
( )
- (
)
1 6
////Page 67////
34.

(Halichoerus grypus) ,

,
100
10 100
10
( )
( )
1 6
////Page 68////
38.

, ,

,
(
Halichoerus grypus macrorhynchus )
(
Phoca hispida botnica )
National border
Automobile roads
Rail roads
Depth, m
Baltic ringed seal herds during summer /
autumn (August - October)
Baltic ringed seal herds during spring /
summer (May - June)
Traces of spring migration (May)
Traces of autumn / winter migration
(November - February)
////Page 67////
Figure 34.
Grey seal (Halichoerus grypus) distribution
during spring, summer, and autumn and its
migration routes during spring and autumn
Legend
National border
Automobile roads
Rail roads
Depth, m
Herds with more than 100 individuals
Herds with 10 to 100 individuals
Herds with less than 10 individuals
Spring migration (May)
Autumn migration (September - October)
////Page 68////
Figure 38.
Distribution of species of amphibians,
reptiles and mammals, included in Red
Books, ashore
Legend
National border
Automobile roads
Rail roads
Depth, m
Baltic grey seal (Halichoerus grypus
macrorhynchus)
( Mustela lutreola )
( Triturus cristatus )
(Natrix natrix )
( Pteromys volans )
( Nyctalus noctula )
( Eliomys quercinus )
( Pelobates
fuscus )
1 6
////Page 71////
Nord
Stream

cece

( )
////Page 85////

////Page 119////
////Picture text1////
5
,

////Page 127////

.
.

-
-
////Page 131////
////Graphic text 1////
, %
European mink (Mustela lutreola)

Great crested newt (Triturus cristatus)
Grass snake (Natrix natrix)
Flying squirrel (Pteromys volans)
Noctule (Nyctalus noctula)
Garden dormouse (Eliomys quercinus)
Spade-footed toad (Pelobates fuscus)
////Page 71////
Planned Nord Stream pipeline
European natural gas network pipeline
The pipeline is planned or during
construction
The limit of the territorial waters
The limit of the exclusive economic zone
The limit of the exclusive economic zone
(not official)
////Page 85////
Gravel supports
Pipeline
////Page 119////
5 points and less
Areas of shocks, force
Areas of shocks limit
Russian Federation Subjects
Legend
domains
////Page 127////
Glotov bank
Hanko peninsula
Ursandet Island
Gogland Island
Kiperort peninsula
Berezovye Islands
Zelenogorsk
Sestroretsk
St. Petersburg
////Page 131////
Content, %

.
,
, %
,
////Page 132////
.
.
.
.
.

-
"-42"
////Page 133////
.
.
.
.
.

Portovaya Bay
Gogland Island
Fraction, mm
Content, %
silts
clay
Fraction, mm
////Page 132////
Finland
Russia
North
Berezovy
Western Island
Berezovy
Bolshoy Island
Berezovy
Moshchny Island
Maly Island
Seskar Island
Bolshoy Tyuters Island
Maly Tyuters Island
Luga Bay
Legend
Baltic Sea
Eastern part of Gulf of Finland
Gauss-Krger-Projection
Pulkovo-42 system of coordinates
kilometres
////Page 133////
Finland
Russia
North
Berezovy
Western Island
Berezovy
Bolshoy Island
Berezovy
Moshchny Island
Maly Island
Seskar Island
Bolshoy Tyuters Island
Maly Tyuters Island
Luga Bay
Legend
Baltic Sea

-
"-42"
////Page 134////

- .
- .
- .
- .
- .
- .
II

////Page 135////
////Graphic text1////
(/)

(/)

()
() (/)

////Page 136////
(/)

(/)

////Page 138////
, (/)
(/)

Eastern part of Gulf of Finland

Gauss-Krger-Projection
Pulkovo-42 system of coordinates
kilometres
////Page 134////
Legend
Information averaging areas borders
area - st.
area - st.
area - st.
area - st.
area - st.
area - st.
II class
Benthic sediments pollution class
////Page 135////
P.Hc. (g/g)
P.Hc.
Information averaging areas
Sum PAH (ng/g)
sum PAH
benz(a)pyrene
Benz(a)pyrene (ng/g)
////Page 136////
Sum and DDT (ng/g)
sum
Sum DDT
Sum and HCH (ng/g)
sum HCH
sum
////Page 138////
Copper, nickel (g/g)
copper
nickel
zinc
Zink (g/g)
(/)
(/)

////Page 141////

Mercury (g/g)
mercury
cadmium
Cadmium (g/g)
////Page 141////
Design profile
; 1
Sampling point of soil; No.1

; 2
; 3
,
////Page 143////
,
////Page 144////
1
,

,
1/1
1/10
1/100
,
.

.
,
////Page 145////
2
,

,
1/1
1/10
1/100
,
.

,

Route
Distance, m
////Page 143////
Route
Distance, m
////Page 144////
Wave data 1
Deformations, m
Normal level
Deformations, m
1/1 year
1/10 years
1/100 years
Negative surge
Deformations, m
Surge
Depths, m
max. surge
calm level
max. negative surge
Distance, m
////Page 145////
Wave data 2
Deformations, m
Normal level
Deformations, m
Surge
1/1 year
1/10 years
1/100 years
Depths, m
max. surge
calm level
Distance, m
////Page 146////
3
,
1/1
1/10
1/100

,

,
////Page 147////
,
. 1
. 2
. 3
,

,
////Page 148////

////Page 151////
-
-
////Page 153////
////Page 155////
////Page 146////
Wave data 3
Deformations, m
1/1 year
1/10 years
1/100 years
Normal level
Depths, m
calm level
Distance, m
////Page 147////
Deformations, m
wave data 1
wave data 2
wave data 3
Depths, m
calm level
Distance, m
////Page 148////
Calm level
////Page 151////
Gogland
Shepelevo
Leningrad Centre for Hydrometeorology
And Environmental Monitoring
Moshchny
Lomonosov
Staroye Garkolovo
Kronstadt Lisiy Nos
Nevskaya
Ust-Luga
Narva-Jesuu
Primorsk
Vyborg
Ozerki
Sestroretsk
////Page 153////
January
July
////Page 155////
Vyborg
January
April
July
October
Year
////Page 162////
.
.
, 0 ,
.
.
, 20 ,
////Page 163////
.
.
, 50 ,
////Page 166////
, /
,
////Page 172////
,
, NTU

////Page 173////
////Graphic 1////

////Graphic 2////
,
:
,

////Page 182////

////Page 189////
Gogland
January
April
July
October
Year
////Page 162////
Gogland Island
Moshchny Island
Water temperature, 0 m, September November
Gogland Island
Moshchny Island
////Page 163////
Gogland Island
Moshchny Island
////Page 166////
Current speed, cm/s
Depth, m
////Page 172////
Transparency, m
Turbidity, NTU
Station number
////Page 173////
////Graphic 1////
Gulf of Finland
Central areas
////Graphic 2////
Concentration
of ice pack, b
Legend:
Thickness of shore ice belt, cm
Drifting ice
Shore ice belt
////Page 182////
Sea water and bottom sediment sampling
stations
Planned pipeline route
Borders of the Exclusive Economic Zones
////Page 189////
Cyanobacteria
////Page 190////
////Page 193////
////Page 194////
////Page 201////
N, / 2
,
, / 2
////Page 222////
////Graphic 1////

Gavia spp
////Graphic 2////

////Page 223////
////Graphic 1////
100
Branta bernicla
Branta leucopsis
////Graphic 2////
1000
Clangula hyemalis
Melanitta nigra
////Page 225////
////Graphic 1////

Diatoms
Dinophites
Green
Other
////Page 190////
Cyanobacteria
Diatoms
Dinophites
Green
Cryptophytes
Euglenophyta
////Page 193////
Copepods
Cladocerans
Rotifers
////Page 194////
Copepods
Cladocerans
Rotifers
////Page 201////
N, species/m2
Depth, m
, mg/m2
////Page 222////
////Graphic 1////
Number of individuals per hour
Dates
Gavia spp
////Graphic 2////
Number of individuals per hour
Dates
////Page 223////
////Graphic 1////
Number of individuals per hour 100
Dates
Branta bernicla
Branta leucopsis
////Graphic 2////
Number of individuals per hour 1000
Dates
Clangula hyemalis
Melanitta nigra
////Page 225////
////Graphic 1////
Number of birds
September
////Page 238////

" "
////Page 240////
Unreadable
////Page 249////

Nord Stream
////Page 255////

+
.
////Page 267////
////Graphics////
////Graphic texts////

////Page 269////
,
,
, 3-1 -1

,
October
November
Divers
Swans
Gees
Mallard
Wigeon
Tufted duck
Velvet scoter
Black scoter
Long-tailed duck
////Page 238////
Legend
pipeline route
fishing ground
OOO Primorsky Rybak
////Page 240////
Unreadable
////Page 249////
Layout of Nord Stream gas pipeline
offshore section
////Page 255////
Trenches only
Trenches + dams
Bay
Portovaya
////Page 267////
////Graphics////
////Graphic texts////
Gulf of Finland
Trench design in the shore area
Bedrocks
Sea level
Seabed level
Imported stone gravel mix
Soil from dump heap
////Page 269////
Depth, m
Layer thickness, m
Accumulation rate, m 3m-1year-1
Grand total
Calm level
Natural sea-bottom profile
Bottom profile of the trench
Distance, m
////Page 272////

////Page 274////
,

15
50
100
,
20
50
100
,
25
50
100
,
////Page 275////
,
50
100
,
////Page 277////

////Page 291////

, 1

, 2

, 3

, 4
////Page 300////
////Page 272////
profile
Seabed deformations
////Page 274////
Deformations, m
Waves and currents direction
Depth 15 m
50 years
100 years
Deformations, m
Depth 20 m
50 years
100 years
Deformations, m
Depth 25 m
50 years
100 years
Distance, m
////Page 275////
Deformations, m
50 years
100 years
Depths, m
////Page 277////
Pipeline
Washout zone
////Page 291////
construction of supports to provide static
stabilization before laying of the pipelines,
stage 1
gravel post-trenching to provide static
stabilization after laying of the pipelines,
stage 2
gravel post-trenching to provide dynamic
stabilization after laying of the pipelines,
stage 3
gravel post-trenching to reduce the
longitudinal and vertical bend after laying
of the pipelines, stage 4
////Page 300////
stage
German shoreline section
offshore section
offshore section
offshore section
Russian shoreline section
////Page 301////
////Page 324////

Eastern pipeline
Baltic Sea
end of the run-in section
Stationary PIG launch and reception
chamber
Temporary pig reception and launch
chamber
////Page 301////
stage
German shoreline section
offshore section
offshore section
offshore section
Russian shoreline section
Western pipeline
Eastern pipeline
end of the run-in section
Stationary PIG launch and reception
chamber
Temporary pig reception and launch
chamber
////Page 324////
Terrorist attacks
SOURCE TEXT
////Page 346////
F/G
////Page 354////
3
2
1
4
(%)
////Page 357////
Oill spill (856 m3)
Time, hour
Vapour
Dispers
Surface
////Page 361////
35
30
20
10
////Page 362////

////Page 363////
TARGET TEXT
////Page 346////
F/G curve
////Page 354////
Group 3
Group 2
Group 1
Group 4
Volume (%)
Hour
Days
Week
Month
Year
////Page 357////
Oil spill (856 m3)
Time, hour
Vapour
Dispersion
Surface
////Page 361////
35 hours
30 hours
20 hours
10 hours
////Page 362////
On the surface
Evaporation
Dispersion
Hours
////Page 363////
Seskar
Kopytin
Virginy
Suursaari
Vyborgsky
Kurgalsky
Skala Khally
Maly Tyuters
near the border
Pokhyaskorkiya
Dolgy Kamen
Skala Virgund
Bolshoy Fiskar
Bolshoy Tyuters
The Beryozovyye Islands
////Page 367////

////Page 436////

(
)

(

.,. 39 , . -,
191104
. (812) 331-74-84, .(812) 331-74-62

////Page 437////

191311, - , .
, 3
:
-, 191311
:
Gustoy
island
////Page 367////
Evaporation
Diffusion
Photooxidation
Biodegradation
Sedimentation
Emulsification of the water in oil
Oil in water
Dispersion
Spread
Drift
Hours
Days
Stable mousse
Unstable emulsion
////Page 436////
FEDERAL SERVICE ON SUPERVISION
IN THE SPHERE OF RESOURCE
MANAGEMENT
OFFICE OF THE FEDERAL SERVICE
ON SUPERVISION IN THE SPHERE OF
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT
(ROSPRIRODNADZOR) FOR
LENINGRAD OBLAST
(Office of the Federal Service on
supervision in the sphere of resource
management for Leningrad oblast)
Liteiny prospekt, building 39, St.
Petersburg 191104
Tel.: (812) 331-74-84, Fax: (812) 331-7462
At No
////Page 437////
ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE IN
LENINGRAD OBLAST
COMMITTEE ON NATURAL
RESOURCES AND CONSERVATION IN
LENINGRAD OBLAST
191311, St. Petersburg, ul. Smolnogo 3
For telegrams:
St. Petersburg, 191311
Teletype:
121025
.
:

////Page 438////

-
(-)

-
(-)
()
- ()
////Page 439////

100
10 100
10
()
(-)
////Page 442////

()

()
////Unreadable text////
////Page 446////

(500
)
1
////Page 454////

( - -
121025 "Vremiya"
Tel.
Fax:
At No
////Page 438////
Legend
Breeding grounds of the Baltic ringed seal
during the summer/autumn period (August
- October)
Breeding grounds of the Baltic ringed seal
during the spring/summer period (May June)
Spring migration routes (May)
Autumn/winter migration routes
(November - February)
////Page 439////
Legend
Breeding grounds with more than 100 seals
Breeding grounds with between 10 and 100
seals
Breeding grounds with up to 10 seals
Spring migration (May)
Autumn migration (September - October)
////Page 442////
FEDERAL AGENCY FOR SUBSOIL
MANAGEMENT (Rosnedra)
REGIONAL AGENCY FOR SUBSOIL
MANAGEMENT IN THE NORTH-WEST
REGION (Sevzapnedra)
////Unreadable text////
////Page 446////
Route of the projected gas pipeline
Buffer (500 m on each side of the route)
Appendix 1 to
////Page 454////
FEDERAL SERVICE ON
HYDROMETEOROLOGY AND
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING
State institution "St. Petersburg centre on
hydrometeorology and environmental
monitoring with regional functions"
(State institution "St. Petersburg centre on
23 , 2, .., , 199026
:
-
:
(812) 323-68-276 ; :
:
////Page 469////

()

////Page 470////

////Page 473////

-
-

.

- .

////Page 477////
hydrometeorology and environmental

monitoring with regional functions")
23 liniya, building 2, Vladimirskaya
oblast, St. Petersburg, 199026
For telegrams:
St. Petersburg GIMET
Tel.:
(812) 323-68-276; Fax:
Teletype:
////Page 469////
FEDERAL SERVICE ON VETERINARY
AND PHYTOSANITARY
SUPERVISION (Rosselkhoznadzor)
ST. PETERSBURG ADMINISTRATIVE
AUTHORITY IN LENINGRAD OBLAST
////Page 470////
LENINGRAD OBLAST
ADMINISTRATION
CULTURE COMMITTEE IN
LENINGRAD OBLAST
STATE INSPECTION DEPARTMENT
CONCERNED WITH THE
PRESERVATION AND USE OF
CULTURAL HERITAGE SITES
////Page 473////
Legend
Lebyazhye
Kurgalsky Peninsula
Berezovye islands
Koporskaya Bay
Seskar island
Southern coast of Neva Bay
The islands of Bolshoy Fiskar and Dolgy
reef
Sestroretsky Razliv
North-West suburbs of St. Petersburg
Vyborg Bay
State border
Road traffic routes
Railways
////Page 477////
Sweden
////Page 494////

-

////Page 527////

////Page 531////
////Page 533////

////Page 534////

////Page 535////

////Page 550////

,

-
-

-

////Page 552////
Vyborg
Estonia
Latvia
Lithuania
Russia
Poland
////Page 494////
Sea level
Sea floor level
Delivered stone/gravel mixture
Soil from the stockpile
////Page 527////
Free surface level
Bottom
////Page 531////
Depth
Sweden
Vyborg
Estonia
Latvia
Lithuania
Russia
Poland
////Page 533////
Wind speeds
////Page 534////
Speeds of the currents
////Page 535////
////Page 550////
Types of sediment
Depth, m
Legend
Gravel
Sand
Coarse silts
Fine-aleurite silts
Aleurite-pelite silts
Pelite silts
Clays
Gulf of Finland
Northern Baltic Sea Basin
Medium-sized shoals in the north
Bornholm Bottom and Raney Bank
////Page 552////

-
-

1,
2, 3

-

////Page 567////

////Page 568////

////Page 571////
////Page 572////
-type sediments
Gravel
Sand
Coarse silts
Fine-aleurite silts
Pelite silts
Clays
Upper row of stations - with a classification
number of 1, medium - with a classification
number of 2, lower - with a classification
number of 3
B - Key for core samples
Gravel
Sands, gravel
Sands
Coarse silts
Fine-aleurite silts
Pelite silts
Micro-layered pelite silts
Homogeneous clays
Homogeneous grey clays
Varved brown clays
Micro-varved clays
Moraine clays
Moraine loams
Hydro spilled layer
////Page 567////
Baltic Sea
Eastern part of the Gulf of Finland
Legend
////Page 568////
Baltic Sea
Eastern part of the Gulf of Finland
Legend
////Page 571////
Depth
Sweden
Vyborg
Estonia
Latvia
Lithuania
Russia
////Page 572////
////Page 573////

////Page 575////

, 1

, 2

, 3

, 4
////Page 624////
////Page 626////

,
////Page 627////
////Page 639////
3
4
////Page 640////
6
7
////Page 641////
9
////Page 643////

Vyborg
Primorsk
St. Petersburg
Luga
Narva
Tallinn
Helsinki
Hammelina
Kouvola
////Page 573////
Gravel supports
Pipeline
////Page 575////
Gravel support fortification for ensuring
static stability until the pipelines are laid,
stage 1
Gravel-filled post trench for static stability
after the pipelines have been laid, stage 2
Gravel-filled post trench for dynamic
stability after the pipelines have been laid,
stage 3
Gravel-filled post trench for reducing
buckling and vertical twisting after the
pipelines have been laid, stage 4
////Page 624////
Kouvola
////Page 626////
Gravelly and sandy soil
Gravel, sand
Silt
Mudstone
Types of silt
////Page 627////
Clays
////Page 639////
Point 3
Point 4
////Page 640////
Point 6
Point 7
////Page 641////
Point 9
////Page 643////
Free surface level
Bottom
////Page 645////
////Page 647////

////Page 648////

////Page 649////

////Page 684////

,
/

,

////Page 685////
7 / 08 2008

Nord Stream .

,
,

.

,
////Page 645////
Depth
Sweden
Vyborg
Estonia
Latvia
Lithuania
Russia
Poland
////Page 647////
Wind speeds
////Page 648////
////Page 649////
////Page 684////
National authorisation procedures
Party of origin
The exclusive economic zone and/or
territorial waters of the country through
which the pipeline will pass
Party concerned
The country which may be affected by the
project
////Page 685////
FACTS
July / August 2008 ISSUE
FACTS RELATING TO THE GAS
PIPELINE PASSING THROUGH THE
BALTIC SEA
MODERN PIPELINE SURVEILLANCE
TECHNOLOGY PROMOTES
OPERATIONAL SAFETY
Safety is Nord Stream's priority.
The up-to-date pipeline monitoring system
is one of innovation, laying down new
standards in terms of gas pipeline design,
construction and operation.
The system allows all stages of pipeline
production, delivery and laying to be
,

,

1220 .

.

(
, ,

)
.

.
?
(
70

DNV
(Det Norske Veritas)

(OS F 101),
.
Nord Stream
,
,
,

.

(, )

,
,
.

.

monitored and recorded, while also

allowing detailed information on individual
pipes which will be used to build a gas
pipeline stretching 1,220 km to be stored.
This technology represents a complex
control system.
It gathers information at every stage of the
supply chain (production, transport,
storage, coating and laying of pipes) and
stores it in a single database.
Over a period of several decades, this

database will ensure continuous quality
control and will raise the operational safety
of the pipeline system as a whole.
How does this system operate?

Each pipe (made from special steel 70
and certified by the independent
accreditation society DNV (Det Norske
Veritas) for compliance with the generally
recognised maritime standard (OS - F 101)
is assigned a unique serial number.
This allows Nord Stream to provide

permanent quality control, starting with the
production process, transport, application
of the weighting concrete covering and
storage, right up to the final welding
process on board the pipe-laying vessel.
The results of the spot checks performed on

the materials (particularities, quality of the
steel) are also recorded in the central
database which holds information on each
pipe, valve and other pipeline elements.
The information obtained in this way is
automatically updated with the results of
the periodic checks.
The pipeline safety inspection process will

:

, Nord Stream
.

,
Nord Stream
( DNV).

,

,
Nord Stream
.

.

,
.

,

,

100 .

Nord Stream

.
be performed at three levels:

the inspection and quality check will be
carried out by the manufacturers of the
steel pipes, Nord Stream specialists and
independent experts.
The most important element of the quality
control system is participation by
independent inspectors recruited by Nord
Stream (such as DNV).
Having unlimited access to the central
database, the independent inspectors will
perform regular checks using the
continuous quality control system
organised by Nord Stream at every stage of
the supply chain.
They put their signatures under the results

of the checks and guarantee that established
standards have been observed
The quality of the materials, the loading of
the pipes on to pipe-laying vessels and pipe
welding are all subject to inspection.
A complex process such as this enables the
location of every pipe in the laying area to
be recorded, while also ensuring that all the
associated parts of both branches of the gas
pipeline, each of which will consist of
more than 100,000 pipes, conform to
technical specifications.
The unique serial number of every pipe in
the Nord Stream gas pipeline will be
traceable throughout the entire supply
chain.

Eia Report Russia Unofficial English Translation - 20081001 PDF

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Eia Report Russia Unofficial English Translation - 20081001 PDF

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

The Nord Stream offshore pipeline

construction project (Russian Sector)

Environmental Impact Assessment

PETERGAZ 36/07-01- Feasibility study -0801(1)-6

UNOFFICIAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION FOR COURTESY ONLY

The Nord Stream offshore pipeline

Environmental Impact Assessment

Assistant General Manager

Project Engineering Manager

PETERGAZ 36/07-01- Feasibility study -0801(1)-6

UNOFFICIAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION FOR COURTESY ONLY

PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Chief of The Environmental

Chief of EIA Department, Doctor

Deputy Chief of EIA Department,

Chief Specialist, Doctor of

UNOFFICIAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION FOR COURTESY ONLY

PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

The Nord Stream

Corrosion protection of the pipeline

Testing and commissioning

Operation, maintenance, and repairs

Labour organization and working condition.

Construction and architectural solutions

Engineering equipme nt, systems, and networks

Environme ntal Protection

UNOFFICIAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION FOR COURTESY ONLY

PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Volume / Book / Docume nt name

Code of OOO Petergaz / code of

36/07-01---0802(1) / G-PELFR-EIA-101 -08020100

Engineering metocean surveys

UNOFFICIAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION FOR COURTESY ONLY

PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Engineering metocean surveys

Technical requirements for materials and articles

Technical requirements for materials of offshore section

Technical requirements for tubing

Technical requirements for anti-corrosion coating

Technical requirements for internal pipe coating

Technical requirements for sacrificial anodes

Technical requirements for concrete weight coating

Technical requirements for welding and non-destructive

Technical requirements for sacrificial anode material

Technical requirements for materials of onshore section

Technical requirements for weight-coating

Technical requirements for ball valves

Technical requirements for pig launcher

Technical requirements for shut-off and control valves

Technical requirements for pipes and items

Technical requirements for isolation joints

Technical requirements for welding and non-destructive

Technical requirements for anchor flanges

Technical requirements for gate valve

Code of OOO Petergaz / code of

UNOFFICIAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION FOR COURTESY ONLY

PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Code of OOO Petergaz / code of

UNOFFICIAL ENGLISH TRANSLATION FOR COURTESY ONLY

PETERGAZ 36/07-01- --0801(1)-6

Declaration of project conformity by Project Engineering Manager

Project Engineering Manager