Oil Leak 249 MCA Comments – part 27

Here’s a fairly damning indictment of CFPA’s application from the MCA: The port’s oil spill contingency plan (OSCP) isn’t adequate for STS at sea – we’ve been saying this since the start and it’s good that this has finally been recognised. The OSCP will need complete rewritten to take account of STS at sea – […]

Read More »

Oil Leak 247 MCA Comments – part 25

The MCA say: So, the application said there would be a likely significant effect on bottlenose dolphins (and other species) without mitigation. Intertek proposed mitigation but haven’t provided any evidence as to whether it will be effective – indeed, some of the measures have “no basis in fact”. Strong words.

Read More »

Oil Leak 243 MCA Comments – part 21

The MCA said: Basically, there is is not enough water under most of the anchorage – presumably why 4 have been dropped leaving only 18a. Although 18a sits in c.20m, there is shallow water close by – the risk of grounding is still there especially in the event of engine failure.

Read More »

Oil Leak 241 MCA Comments – part 19

The MCA say: So, the MCA didn’t like the CFPA’s plans for ballast water – calling it “poorly addressed”. We have said this all along – given where that proposal is, it is unbelievable that the anyone could put out such an ill thought out plan for discharges in the middle of the SAC and […]

Read More »