1. Marine Planning: Issues and Considerations
The Marine Management Organisation
Pete Cosgrove

2. Progress to date East adopted April 2014 East review process pending
South plans consultation ending January
South implementation intended for 2017

3. Implementation of East Plans
Aggregate Extraction
Shows how applicants consider the marine plans
Good example is the Aggs industry - provide details in their applications how they satisfy the policies within the plans

4. Remaining plan areas Issues Identification
NE, SE, SW, NW developed concurrently
Publish by 2021*
Iterative approach with informal engagement in Spring NE
* Allows for contingency if Independent Investigation is required by SoS

5. Marine planning process
Iterations

6. Marine Plan Production
Key Milestones
Date
Approval of Statement of Public Participation (SPP)
June 2016
Call for evidence
July 2016
Iteration 1 Stakeholder Engagement
Spring 2017
Iteration 2 Stakeholder Engagement
Spring 2018
Draft marine plans produced - SW,SE, NW, NE
May 2019
Secretary of State approves draft marine plans prior to consultation
July 2019
Public consultation starts (for 12 weeks)
August 2019
Secretary of State approves final marine plans for adoption - SW,SE, NW, NE
June 2020*
Publish adopted marine plans
Note the checkpoints – but not only point at which we engage.
What will we
* Aim for June 2020 to allow contingency, eg for an Independent Investigation if needed, rather than March 2021
share at each checkpoint?

7. Issues with evidence database
Additional evidence submissions are still welcome, this is best done through accessing the Marine Information System and clicking on the ‘marine planning evidence base’ tab on the black bar at the top of the screen (link below). Submissions will yield fruit for iteration 2 or 3 depending on issue, evidence and impact. Newly submitted evidence will not be incorporated into iteration one due to the development stage of I1.
(Google: marine planning issues database)

8. ‘Dregd’ Issues Synopsis
Maintenance dredging an obvious priority
Re-use of material
Smothering vulnerable habitats raised from various sources
Contribution to ambient and acute noise impact

9. Policy Responses
S-DD-1 Proposals within or adjacent to licenced dredging and disposal areas should demonstrate that they will;
a) avoid
b) minimise
c) mitigate significant adverse impacts on licenced dredging and disposal areas
S-PS-2 Static sea surface infrastructure that significantly reduce under-keel clearance must not be authorised within IMO routeing systems unless there are exceptional circumstances.
S-PS-1 Proposals that have a significant adverse impact upon port activities should demonstrate that they will;
a) avoid
b) minimise
c) mitigate significant adverse impacts upon port and harbour activity
S-DD-2 Proposals must identify where use of dredge disposal sites can be minimised by pursuing re-use opportunities through matching of spoil to suitable sites.

10. Thank you