Cefas has never been consulted by a statutory harbour authority on Maintenance Dredging Protocols and only once in 2015 did Cefas provide any advice on the MDP.

Cefas say that reference to Cefas in previous documents refer to the Marine and Fisheries Agency a predecessor of the MMO. So they do not expect to be consulted on MDPs and have never been by any Statutory Harbour Authority. Cefas suggest that the MMO is consulted on the MDP.

None of this agrees with the processes described in Maintenance Dredging and The Habitats Regulations 1994 - A Conservation Assessment Protocol for England, where Cefas's role is well defined, but the Marine and Fisheries Agency is mentioned by name.

Cefas are consulted extensively by the MMO on marine licence applications involving dredging.

The MMO say they are not the competent authority for the operations of dredging and as such only provide advice on an MDP where it refers to disposal at sea.

The SHAs are responsible to keep navigation channels open and so are tasked by specific Acts of Parliament to dredge their ports' navigation channels. This means the SHAs are the competent authority for the operations involved in maintenance dredging and so are responsible to ensure that these activities are compliant with all environmental legisations/regulations.

So if the SHAs perform the same function as the MMO do for certain types of dredging why do SHAs not regularly consult Cefas as the MMO do?

Cefas refered me to the the Ports Regulatory Sandbox, while this does mention Cefas explicitly it does state that all MDPs have been signed off by Natural England. So I await NE's response to a simialr EIR request.

6th September 2026

Dear Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science,

I am writing on behalf of North East Marine Research Group to request environmental information under the Environmental Information Regulations (EIR) 2004 as follows.

PD Ports as the strategic harbour authority for the Port of Tees and Hartlepool. PD Ports as the competent authority are responsible to ensure that any dredging operations authorised by reason of the Statutory Harbour Authority’s duty under Act of Parliament are compliant with all necessary environmental regulations.

According to the Maintenance Dredging Protocol for England” PD Ports have to consult yourselves as set out in the Defra advice to Statutory Harbour Authorities as described during the introduction of Maintenance Dredging Protocol -

• Defra description of the Maintenance Dredging Protocol - EU Birds: Maintenance Dredging Protocol for England
• The Simplified Process Flow Diagram shows the necessary consultation and review steps - Simplified Process Flow Diagram

The Maintenance Dredge Protocol was introduced from 2010 onwards, and so PD Ports may have consulted anytime between 2010 and today on the Maintenance Dredging Protocol.

As I do not know when PD Ports consulted yourselves, I am only able to limit the date range to 2010 to the present day inclusive. However, I only require information which is part of a direct request from PD Ports to yourselves on the River Tees and Hartlepool Maintenance Dredging Protocol. I do not require information you have supplied to the Marine Management Organisation as part of the licencing of either capital dredging or disposal of dredge arisings at sea.

1. Please confirm that PD Ports has consulted yourselves directly on the Port of Tees and Hartlepool Maintenance Dredging Protocol and the years of these consultations.
2. Please provide all information, including advice, correspondence, other communications, and meeting minutes related to PD Ports on the original Maintenance Dredging Protocol you were consulted on.
3. Please provide all information, including advice, correspondence, other communications, and meeting minutes related to PD Port on the most recent Maintenance Dredging protocol you have been consulted on.

Please respond within the 20-working-day statutory limit.

15th September 2026

Thank you for your request for information regarding Maintenance Dredging Protocol Consultations which we received on 6th September 2026. It has been processed in accordance with the Environmental Information Regulations 2004 (EIR).

Firstly, for clarity, the ‘Marine and Fisheries Agency’, which appears to have been referred to as Cefas, was in fact a predecessor of the Marine Management Organisation (MMO). All consultations relating to marine licensing come at the request of the MMO only, and this is done under contract between Cefas/MMO rather than with the Ports directly or through any legislative requirement.

Responses to your questions:

Question 1: Please confirm that PD Ports has consulted yourselves directly on the Port of Tees and Hartlepool Maintenance Dredging Protocol and the years of these consultations.

Cefas are not, and (to our knowledge) have never been, directly consulted by any Port or similar applicant for these requests. Such requests are only facilitated through the Marine Management Organisation at their request, under the Service Level Agreement Cefas have with the MMO to provide marine licensing advice. Prior to the establishment of the MMO, such requests would have been similarly facilitated by the Marine and Fisheries Agency and other regulatory predecessors. It should be noted that Cefas are generally not consulted on new or updated MDP documents. They are sometimes submitted as supporting documents or for more direct consultation with Statutory Nature Conservation Bodies (SNCBs) where impacts to statutory designations are referenced. For the purposes of Cefas advice, MDPs are more so used to provide contextual information for an application.

Question 2: Please provide all information, including advice, correspondence, other communications, and meeting minutes related to PD Ports on the original Maintenance Dredging Protocol you were consulted on.

Cefas has undertaken extensive searches of its records, including historic case management databases, the HPE document repository, and relevant team shared mailboxes. Following these searches, we have been unable to identify any records relating to Cefas advising on the original Tees Maintenance Dredging Protocol produced in 2010 and have established that we do not hold the information requested.

Question 3: Please provide all information, including advice, correspondence, other communications, and meeting minutes related to PD Ports on the most recent Maintenance Dredging Protocol you have been consulted on.

The last time Cefas were consulted on and/or commented on the MDP document for the Tees was under MLA/2015/00088 in November 2015, the licence application for the previous Tees maintenance disposal licence. This advice is attached, and the reference to the MDP can be found in point 15. Updates to the Tees MDP were submitted to the MMO throughout that licence period but it does not appear that Cefas explicitly advised on any of these updates. All Cefas advice provided for this licence can be found on the MMO Public Register.

Under Regulation 12(4)(a) of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004, a public authority may refuse a request where it does not hold the information requested. Following appropriate enquiries and searches of our records, Cefas has determined that it does not hold the information requested in Questions 1 and 2, and accordingly, the information is being withheld under Regulation 12(4)(a) of the Environmental Information Regulations 2004.

As Regulation 12(4)(a) is subject to the public interest test, Cefas recognises the public interest in transparency regarding environmental decision-making and dredging activities. However, there is no public interest in requiring a public authority to disclose information that it does not hold, and on balance, the public interest favours maintaining the exception.

Handling your information: Our [1]Personal information charter explains how we treat your personal information.

Complaints: Under the regulations we are also required to point out that if you are unhappy with the service you have received in relation to your request and wish to make a complaint, you should write to the Senior Information Risk Owner (SIRO) at the below address, who will arrange for an internal review of your case.

If you are not content with the outcome of the internal review, you have the right to apply directly to the Information Commissioner for a decision. The Information Commissioner can be contacted at:

Information Commissioner’s Office
Wycliffe House
Water Lane
Wilmslow
Cheshire
SK9 5AF

Kind regards,

Marine Data Coordinator
Science Data Team
Pakefield Road, Lowestoft, Suffolk, NR33 0HT, UK

Tackling global challenges through innovative science solutions

Follow us @CefasGovUK : LinkTree

While I accept that you do not hold the information I requested, I do not understand your reasons for this.

Cefas's role in the development of Maintenance Dredging Protocols is explicitly defined in the 2007 Defra document Maintenance Dredging and The Habitats Regulations 1994 - A Conservation Assessment Protocol for England.

When I communicated with the Marine Management Organisation over Maintenance Dredging Protocols, I have been told that the MMO have no role in the oversight of dredging operations themselves as they are not the competent authority and so do not regulate any environmental impacts of the dredging operations. The MMO have stated however, they are the competent authority for the disposal of dredged material and so do advise / regulate environmental impacts of the disposal of dredged material.

So I am now concerned that either I have asked the wrong questions or that the competent authorities (Statutory Harbour Authorities) are not seeking Cefas advice for dredging operations in the same way that the MMO are for disposal of dredged material.

I assume that I need to contact Defra to clarify how dredging operations are being overseen.

For the purposes of your Environmental Information Regulations (2004) request, we can confirm the following:

We have reviewed the link you provided and do not agree that it designates Cefas as having an explicit role in reviewing Maintenance Dredging Protocols. The Marine and Fisheries Agency was a regulatory agency that preceded the MMO, and Cefas was never part of this agency.

Regarding your concern that “competent authorities (Statutory Harbour Authorities) are not seeking Cefas advice for dredging operations” we reiterate that there is no such requirement for this consultation, and no agreement or arrangement exists - or (to our knowledge) has ever existed - to enable this, outside of routine Marine Licensing advice coordinated through the MMO (and its predecessors).

We trust that this response, together with our comprehensive response to the duplicate request submitted directly to our Senior Advisor, clarifies Cefas' position regarding the issues raised.