This is an old revision of the document!
Table of Contents
MLA/2025/00263 Updated 22nd July 2025
Initial Application - Submitted 27-May-2025
Granted - 5th-November-2025
Case ref: MLA/2025/00263
Licence ref: L/2025/00366/1
Project title
Tees and Hartlepool Maintenance Dredge Disposal
Project background
Renewal of the current maintenance dredge disposal licence L/2015/00427/7 which has been on-going over many years. This application is for a 10 year maintenance dredging disposal licence commencing 1st January 2026 and ending 31st December 2035.
The Tees Maintenance Dredging Protocol (MDP) Baseline Document has been updated for this application, it is attached below and referred to throughout the application.
Programme of works
Works are performed on a daily basis throughout the year and covered in the Tees MDP Baseline Document. The renewal applies to the next 10 years.
PD Teesport Limited employs two trailing suction hopper dredgers (TSHD) of 2,000m3 and 1,500m3 hopper volume to maintain depths within the navigable channel and berths within the Tees and Hartlepool. Both are traditional suction dredgers with active bottom door dumping systems, the only variation being the vessel hopper capacity. The suction dredgers operate on a nominal production time 12.5 hours per day for six days per week. This can, for a limited period, be increased to 24 hours and seven days per week where sudden increases in deposition rate occur, primarily following storm conditions.
Other information
Applicant details
Full details on https://marinelicensing.marinemanagement.org.uk/
PD TEESPORT LIMITED / 17-27 Queen's Square Middlesbrough / TS2 1AH
Date application submitted: 27-MAY-2025 Date application validated: 04-JUN-2025 Date initial decision made: 05-NOV-2025
Status: Completed (Discharging conditions)
Application and Documents
Response Documents - Licence L/2025/00366/1
| File | Size | |
|---|---|---|
| MLA202500263_Schedule 2_Sample Locations.pdf | 95 KB | 26-Sep-2025 |
| Decision Letter (Marine).pdf | 1 MB | 05-Nov-2025 |
| Licence Document (Marine).pdf | 113 KB | 05-Nov-2025 |
| Returns.pdf | 12 KB | 05-Nov-2025 |
| Marine Coordinate Schedules.pdf | 30 KB | 05-Nov-2025 |
Additional Documents
| File | Size | Date |
|---|---|---|
| SAM202400054.pdf | 1 MB | 28-Apr-2025 |
| MMO_Results_Template - MAR02481 V2 with TOC.xlsm | 613 KB | 28-Apr-2025 |
| MMO Results Template MAR02499 V2.xlsm | 560 KB | 28-Apr-2025 |
| Post_Consent_Discharge MLA201500088 CP_.pdf | 360 KB | 28-Apr-2025 |
| MLA2015000886_R11.1 Decision Letter.pdf | 211 KB | 28-Apr-2025 |
| Public Representation 2.pdf | 80 KB | 05-Nov-2025 |
| MMO Results Template MAR02499 V3.xlsm | 575 KB | 09-Sep-2025 |
| WER Compliance Assessment May 25.pdf | 3 MB | 21-May-2025 |
| Tees MDP Baseline Document May 25.pdf | 16 MB | 21-May-2025 |
| Tees Bay Density (January 2015-February 2021).pdf | 738 KB | 19-Jun-2025 |
| MMO Results Template MAR02499 V2.xlsm | 566 KB | 22-Aug-2025 |
| MMO_Results_Template - MAR02481 V2 with TOC.xlsm | 612 KB | 22-Aug-2025 |
| PC6304-RHD-XX-XX-ME-X-0001.pdf | 232 KB | 26-Aug-2025 |
| MMO Results Template MAR02481 V3.xlsm | 611 KB | 09-Sep-2025 |
Consultations
Environment Agency - North East Area
Consulted on 26 June 2025. Responded on 14 July 2025.
The consultee was asked for their comments on this case. They responded:
Please find attached EA comments.
The consultee included the following files with their response:
Historic England - Durham/Northumberland/Tees
Consulted on 26 June 2025. Responded on 18 July 2025.
The consultee was asked for their comments on this case. They responded:
Please see attached advice letter.
The consultee included the following files with their response:
PL00799246 MCMS MLA 2025 00263 Tees and Hartlepool Maintenance Dredge Disposal.pdf
Inshore Fisheries and Conservation Authorities - North Eastern
Consulted on 26 June 2025. Responded on 2 July 2025.
The consultee was asked for their comments on this case. They responded:
Please see attached letter for comments
The consultee included the following files with their response:
MMO Coastal Offices & MCT - North East Marine Area
Consulted on 26 June 2025. Responded on 25 July 2025.
The consultee was asked for their comments on this case. They responded:
Please find attached the MMO North Shields response to this consultation. Should you have any concerns please contact me directly and thank you again for agreeing to the extension of the deadline.
Regards,
Jack Coe (Marine Officer)
The consultee included the following files with their response:
Natural England - 1 - Northumbria
Consulted on 26 June 2025. Responded on 22 August 2025.
The consultee was asked for their comments on this case. They responded:
Please see attached for comment.
The consultee included the following files with their response:
517225 MLA 2025 00263 Tees Maintinence Dredge disposal NE response to MMO.pdf
Maritime and Coastguard Agency - Navigational Safety Branch
Consulted on 26 June 2025. Responded on 18 July 2025.
The consultee was asked for their comments on this case. They responded:
Dear Gregg,
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the Marine Licence application for Tees and Hartlepool Maintenance Dredge Disposal. The UK Technical Services Navigation team of the Maritime and Coastguard Agency has reviewed the documents received and would like to comment as follows:
We note that the works fall within the jurisdiction of a Statutory Harbour Authority (SHA) PD Teesport Limited and therefore they are responsible for the safety of navigation within their waters.
The MCA confirms we have no objections to a licence being granted on this occasion. This is on the understanding that all maritime safety legislation is adhered to, and that the following risk mitigation measures take place:
Conditions:
None
In addition, the following advice should be provided to the applicant to facilitate the proposed works:
Advisories:
Bunding and/or storage facilities must be installed to contain and prevent the release of fuel, oils, and chemicals associated with plant, refuelling and construction equipment, into the marine environment. The site is within port limits and the applicant should gain the approval/agreement of the responsible local navigation authority or the Harbour Authority/Commissioners/Council. They may wish to issue local warnings to alert those navigating in the vicinity to the presence of the works, as deemed necessary. The MCA has considered the relevant Marine Plan as part of its assessment of this application.
If you have any questions on this response, please let us know.
Kind regards
UK Technical Services Navigation
Trinity House - Trinity House
Consulted on 26 June 2025. Responded on 25 July 2025.
The consultee was asked for their comments on this case. They responded:
Good afternoon Gregg,
I can confirm that Trinity House has no objections or comments regarding this application.
Many thanks.
Kind regards,
C. Bransby
Crown Estate - Marine Estates
Consulted on 26 June 2025. Responded on 18 July 2025.
The consultee was asked for their comments on this case. They responded:
The Crown Estate is affected by the proposed works and landowner's consent is required. The applicant is requested to contact our Managing Agent for the area: Vicki Dean of Carter Jonas on 01925 940416, Vicki.Dean@carterjonas.co.uk regarding landowner's consent for the proposed activity.
and
The Crown Estate is affected by the proposed disposal activity and landowner's consent is required. The applicant is requested to liaise with Mark Wrigley on 0207 851 5062, mark.wrigley@thecrownestate.co.uk regarding landowner's consent for the proposed disposal activity.
Ministry of Defence - Defence Estates Safeguarding
Consulted on 26 June 2025. Responded on 27 June 2025.
The consultee was asked for their comments on this case. They didn't have any comments.
Centre for Environment, Fisheries and Aquaculture Science - SEAL
Consulted on 2 July 2025. Responded on 28 July 2025.
The consultee was asked for their comments on this case. They responded:
Please find the advice attached obo Sylvia Blake
The consultee included the following files with their response:
Royal Yachting Association - Royal Yachting Association
Consulted on 2 July 2025. Responded on 22 July 2025.
The consultee was asked for their comments on this case. They didn't have any comments.
MMO Coastal Offices & MCT - Conservation Team
Consulted on 19 August 2025. Responded on 15 September 2025.
The consultee was asked for their comments on this case. They responded:
Please find attached MCT's consultation response
Kind regards
Laura Trowsdale
The consultee included the following files with their response:
Representations
Representation 1
Submitted on Wed 06 Aug 2025 18:50
The representation and supporting documents detail NEMRG’s key recommendations for essential restrictions to be imposed on the River Tees maintenance dredging licence renewal (MLA/2025/00263), alongside errors identified within the accompanying licence renewal documents. These points are drawn directly from NEMRG's detailed analysis to address critical concerns for the Tees marine ecosystem.
Most Important Restrictions and Recommendations for the Dredging Licence:
- Eliminate or severely restrict overspilling during dredging operations. Trailing Suction Hopper Dredgers (TSHDs) are considered the least suitable for contaminated rivers like the Tees due to sediment dispersal and mixing. Overspilled material is more contaminated due to the concentration of hydrophobic contaminants (like PAHs and PCBs) on finer particles.
- Mandate enhanced and consistent sediment analysis and sampling. More frequent analyses for PAHs, PCBs, and Brominated Diphenyl Ethers (BDEs) are needed. Sampling must be performed before, during, and after dredging operations, with specific limits set on contamination spread. Crucially, analysis should consider the surface area of sediment particles, not just overall weight, as contaminants adsorb onto smaller particles.
- Adopt a precautionary and beneficial environmental management approach. This requires urgently exploring technologies for extracting dredged material without spillage and depositing it in lined landfill sites, rather than offshore redistribution. A full-scale Beneficial Use of Dredged Material (BUDM) Program should be commissioned, initially focusing on clean sand from outer channels for beach nourishment or construction.
- Re-evaluate the continued use of TSHDs in historically contaminated, silty upper reaches of the estuary (e.g., Billingham Reach). More precise, lower-dispersal dredging methods (e.g., environmental clamshell or auger dredgers) should be explored for targeted “hotspot” management.
- Implement an Adaptive Turbidity Monitoring Program. This necessitates real-time turbidity and Total Suspended Solids (TSS) sensors (upstream and downstream) linked to pre-agreed, tiered trigger levels (Alert, Action, Stop-Work) to allow real-time operational adjustments.
- Formally adopt an Annual Calendar of Ecological Sensitivity. This comprehensive, risk-based tool would consolidate all known ecological sensitivities into a colour-coded system to proactively schedule dredging campaigns, minimising conflicts with critical wildlife periods such as harbour seal pupping season (June-July) and peak waterbird feeding times.
Significant Errors and Concerns in the Licence Renewal Documents:
- “Providential” rather than precautionary approach: The licence application assumes existing practices are acceptable due to long-term occurrence, despite significant environmental damage such as the mass crustacean die-off in 2021 and high mortality of harbour seal pups.
- Incorrect application of Marine and Coastal Access Act 2009: The application incorrectly states that PD Ports meets the exemption within Section 75 for sea disposal, as the Tees Inner disposal site (Tees Bay 'A' TY160) is not classified as “surface waters” but rather the North Sea, governed by international conventions.
- Inadequate assessment of overspilled material: The environmental impact assessment in the renewal documents fails to consider the upto 25% of dredged material that is released as overspill back into the river at dredge sites. This overspill, enriched with fine particles, carries a greater fraction of adsorbed contamination.
- Inconsistent and insufficient sediment data: The reliance on limited, inconsistent data sets with missing fundamental measurements (e.g., total organic carbon, PCBs, BDEs) makes objective comparison and understanding of the system impossible. Samples are often taken from the surface and may not be representative of the underlying dredged material. The number of samples is insufficient to comply with OSPAR guidelines given the geographical spread and volume of material.
- Elevated contamination levels: Tees sediments, particularly in overspill, show significantly elevated PAH and BDE levels compared to other ports like Southampton, indicating a persistent pollution source.
- Over-simplistic plume modelling: Current modelling is over-simplified, ignoring the significant volume and highly contaminated nature of overspilled fine particles, and the continuous, chronic pressure of maintenance dredging across fragile habitats.
- Concerning sampling recommendations: Recommendations to reduce sampling frequency based on a single “good result” are concerning, given the high variability in contamination and ongoing development activities in the Tees region.
NEMRG stresses the urgent need for a shift from a “waste disposal mindset” to one of “resource management” and genuine environmental leadership, ensuring sustainable growth for the River Tees.
Associated Files
Representation 2
Submitted on Mon 04 Aug 2025 10:29
I object to the renewal of the dredge license.
Dredging is known to be deadly to sea wildlife, in this case mostly crabs and lobsters and it is time for this practice to end, or at the minimum for there to be a full environmental assessment carried out and proper decisions to be based on the conclusions of that.
I am also concerned about the dumping of the sediment gathered as a result of the dredging process as there is known historical industrial contamination in this area that is harmful to wildlife. There needs to be detailed chemical analysis and environmental assessment undertaken before any consideration is taken towards any possible decision to consider dredging in this area. It is time to put the health of our oceans before short term financial profit.
Submitted on Sun 03 Aug 2025 16:11
Representation 3
Subject: Objection to Tees and Hartlepool Maintenance Dredge Disposal Licence Renewal (L/2015/00427/7)
Dear Marine Management Organisation,
I am writing to strongly object to the renewal of the maintenance dredge disposal licence L/2015/00427/7 for the Tees and Hartlepool area, which proposes a 10-year licence from January 2026 to December 2035.
Many members of the public, local fishers, environmental experts, and marine conservation groups are deeply concerned about the environmental and ecological impacts of continued dredge disposal in this area. These concerns are based on the following serious issues:
⸻
1. Crustacean die-offs and suspected contamination
Since October 2021, mass shellfish deaths have occurred along the North East coast, including in Teesside, Hartlepool, and as far as Whitby. Crabs and lobsters were found twitching and dying in large numbers. Local fishermen have reported up to 95% declines in catches—an event with devastating effects on local livelihoods and marine biodiversity.
While official reports claimed algal blooms were likely responsible, independent scientists and local observers continue to believe that dredging and the dumping of potentially contaminated sediments may be contributing to the damage. Pyridine, a toxic industrial chemical, was found at elevated levels in crab tissues. Yet no full explanation has ever been reached, and no resolution has been offered to impacted communities.
⸻
2. Toxic sediment and unclear disposal practices
The Tees estuary has a long history of industrial pollution. Dredging in this area may disturb toxic sediments, including heavy metals and industrial chemicals such as pyridine. Disposing of this material at sea without thorough and independent chemical analysis may be putting the entire marine food web at risk.
Fishermen have expressed concern that dredged sludge is being dumped at sea when it should instead be disposed of on land under strict safety measures. Continuing to allow this dumping for another decade without proper scrutiny could further harm wildlife and public trust.
⸻
3. Lack of an independent Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA)
The application appears to rely mainly on the Tees Maintenance Dredging Protocol (MDP) Baseline Document. However, there is no indication that a full, transparent, and independent EIA has been carried out for this renewal. A licence of this length and scale—covering daily dredging and dumping over 10 years—must be based on robust environmental evidence and transparent public consultation.
Any sediment proposed for disposal must be tested for industrial contaminants, including pyridine. Without this, there is no way to assess the full risks to the marine environment, fisheries, or public health.
⸻
4. Calls for precaution and protection
Given the scale of previous ecological impacts, the uncertain cause of crustacean die-offs, and the lack of transparency around sediment testing, I ask that you adopt a precautionary approach.
Before any licence is renewed:
- All dredged material should be thoroughly tested for industrial toxins, including pyridine and heavy metals.
- Disposal at sea should not be permitted unless the material is proven to be non-toxic.
- An independent Environmental Impact Assessment must be conducted and published for public review.
- Ongoing environmental monitoring and real-time reporting must be part of any dredging programme.
- Full consideration must be given to the voices of local communities and fisheries, who have already suffered huge losses.
⸻
Conclusion
This decision will shape the health of the Tees estuary and the wider North Sea coastline for the next decade. The marine ecosystem, fishing livelihoods, and public confidence in environmental protection all depend on responsible, science-based decisions.
I respectfully urge the MMO to suspend or refuse this licence application until a full, independent environmental review is completed.
Current Licence Sampling
MLA/2025/00263 - Licence (and Mid-licence Sediment Sampling)
N.B. No new sampling was carried out for this licence, it relied on 2024 MLA/2015/00088 mid-licence sediment sampling
Trace metals (TMs), organotins (OTs), polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), organochlorine pesticides (OCPs), polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
| Date of Sampling | Reason | Sample collected | MMO references | Contaminants (PSA is required for all samples) | Outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024/10/28 | Mid licence sampling condition Year 9 SAM/2024/00054 | 8 samples | MMO Results Template MAR02499 V3.xlsm Display Data for 2024 sampling | TMs, OTs, PAHs, PCBs (2), OCPs (2), PBDEs, TOC | MLA/2015/00088 Condition 5.2.3 discharged |
| 2024/10/07 | Mid licence sampling condition Year 9 SAM/2024/00054 | 23 samples | MMO Results Template MAR02481 V3.xlsm | TMs, OTs, PAHs, PCBs (8), OCPs (8), PBDEs, TOC |
Previous Licence Sampling
MLA/2015/00088 - Licence and Mid-licence Sediment Sampling
Trace metals (TMs), organotins (OTs), polyaromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), organochlorine pesticides (OCPs), polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs), Total Organic Carbon (TOC)
| Date of Sampling | Reason | Sample collected | MMO references | Contaminants (PSA is required for all samples) | Outcomes |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 2024/10/28 | Mid licence sampling condition Year 9 SAM/2024/00054 | 8 samples | MMO Results Template MAR02499 V2.xlsm Display Data | TMs, OTs, PAHs, PCBs, OCPs, PBDEs, TOC | Condition 5.2.3 discharged |
| 2024/10/07 | Mid licence sampling condition Year 9 SAM/2024/00054 | 23 samples | MMO_Results_Template - MAR02481 V2.xlsm | TMs, OTs, PAHs, PCBs - 8, OCPs, PBDEs, TOC | |
| 2023/10/19 | Additional mid licence sampling | 10 samples | SAM/2023/000288 Data file MAR02085 MMO_Results_ - MAR02085 UPDATED.xlsm Display Data | TMs, OTs, PAHs, PCBs, OCPs, PBDEs - 2, TOC | Condition 5.2.9 discharged |
| 2021/10/13 | Mid licence sampling condition Year 6 | 20 samples | SAM/2021/00027 Data file MAR01178 MMO_Results_Template - MAR01178.xlsm Display Data | TMs, OTs, PAHs, PCBs, OCPs,TOC | Condition 5.2.3 discharged |
| 2019/09/26 | Samples to allow dredging of Billingham Reach by showing PCBs not present in high concentrations | 4 Samples | MMO Results_Template_MAR00407.1.xlsm Display Data | PCBs only, no PSAs, no TOC | L/2015/00427/4 - Condition 5.2.9 discharged |
| 2019/08/14 | Mid licence sampling condition Year 3 | 16 samples: 37 samples collected as part of sediment sampling to inform the Northern Gateway Container Terminal (NGCT) project and 10 additional surface samples to cover areas outside of the NGCT project. | MMO Results_Template MAR00356_2.xlsm | TMs, OTs, PAHs, PCBs, OCPs, PBDEs, TOC | Condition 5.2.3 discharged Display Data |
| 2019/01/24 | Mid licence sampling condition Year 3 | 10 samples - Northern Gateway Container Terminal project (as part of the dredge area for the Northern Gateway Container Project overlaps with the maintenance area on MLA/2015/00088 in the Tees estuary) – the results provided in ‘MMO_Results_Template MAR00179 V3’ are the samples that MMO requested from the Tees estuary to inform MLA/2015/00088. | MMO_Results_Template MAR00179 V3.xlsm | TMs, OTs, PAHs, PCBs, OCPs, PBDEs | |
| 2018/10/17 | Mid licence sampling condition Year 3 | Additional samples (a further 10) were collected in Hartlepool (SAM/2018/00050) as part of a capital dredge which were accepted as suitable for this area to meet the requirements of mid licence sampling. | Carcinus - 20126278 - MMO Results.xlsm | TMs, OTs, PAHs, TOC | |
| 2015/06/03 | Orignal licence application MLA/2015/00088 | 25 samples | MLP/2015/00094 20150603 MLP201500094 PD Teesport Results MMO Template.xlsx | TMs, OTs, PAHs | Licence granted |
