Member State report / Art8 / 2012 / D8 / Ireland / NE Atlantic: Celtic Seas

Report type Member State report to Commission
MSFD Article Art. 8 Initial assessment (and Art. 17 updates)
Report due 2012-10-15
GES Descriptor D8 Contaminants
Member State Ireland
Region/subregion NE Atlantic: Celtic Seas
Reported by Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government
Report date 15/04/2013
Report access ACSIE_MSFD8bPressures_20130415.xml

Irish Assesment Area

GES component
Feature
LevelPressure
LevelPressureContaminant
ImpactPressureSeabedHabitats
ImpactPressureFunctionalGroup
Assessment Topic
PollutionEvents8_2_2
PollutionEventsSeabedHabitats8_2_2
PollutionEventsFunctionalGroups8_2_2
Element
Unknown
Unknown
Element 2
ThresholdValue
Threshold value/Value unit
Proportion threshold value
Status of criteria/indicator
NotAssessed
NotAssessed
NotAssessed
Status trend
Stable
Unknown_NotAssessed
Unknown_NotAssessed
Status confidence
NotRelevant
NotRelevant
NotRelevant
Description (status of criteria/indicator)
Not assessed due to lack of established methods
Not assessed due to insufficient data / lack of established methods
Not assessed due to lack of sufficient data.
Limitations
The key limitation in the input of this pressure to the marine environment relates to the request by the MSFD reporting structure to characterise a pollution event as “significant” or “acute”, in the absence of a definition at Regional level. However, it is noted that OSPAR Advise (p.11, OSPAR Commission, 2012) states that “There is a need to consider and assess the impact of such incidents on a case-by-case basis, rather than trying to work towards further refined definition for approaches to target setting”.
None
N/A
It is not possible at this time to indicate the impacts of significant pollution events on functional groups in the Irish marine assessment area, due to lack of monitoring data. In future IRCG reporting, it is proposed to incorporate reference to oiled birds, mammals, oil or tar balls on beaches or noticeable environmental damage.
Assessment period
Description
The categorisation of pollution events as significant or acute is problematic, and no definition currently is provided through either the Bonn Agreement or the MSFD as it is dependent on the specific location and extent of the accident or illegal incident and the scope and scale of the resources which are affected by the spilled oil or chemical (p.11, OSPAR, 2012). As a result, and for the purposes of MSFD reporting for Ireland, the Irish Coast Guard (IRCG) have provisionally determined that a significant event involves the use of significant IRCG resources in relation to an incident (IRCG, pers. comm.). Based on this provisional categorisation, there have been five notable pollution incidents in the period from 2006 to 2011 . Most incidents can be attributed to vessel incidents e.g. vessels running aground, sinking of fishing vessels and refuelling incidents. The IRCG responses to these incidents have included: investigation of diesel leakages from vessels which ran aground; investigation of slicks reported; and the cleanup and booming of diesel spills. Under Irish Sea Pollution legalisation, the Minister at the Department of Transport, Tourism and Sport, must prepare a plan specifying the measures to be taken to prevent and minimise damage in the Member State resulting from discharges of oil from ships, offshore units and oil handling facilities. The legalisation also requires Local and Harbour authorities to prepare plans for the areas under their jurisdiction. A draft National Marine Emergency Response Plan exists for Ireland and the Local and Harbour Authorities are currently preparing their plans for approval by the IRCG.
The Irish Coast Guard (IRCG), for the purposes of MSFD reporting, have provisionally determined that a significant event involves the use of significant IRCG resources in relation to an incident (IRCG, pers. comm .). Based on this provisional categorisation, there have been five notable pollution incidents in the period from 2006 to 2011. These were: 2006: MV Cobalt water tank holed - estimated 6.3 tonnes of Intermediate Fuel Oil 380 spilled. 2007: No significant actual pollution incidents. 2008 (10/07/2008): FV Koaxi sunk 31nm NM Loop Head 33m fishing vessel, 50,000 ltrs diesel and 1,500 ltrs luboil on board. Surveillance by R115 - slick observed to be breaking up with weather. 2009 (01/08/2009): Two fishing vessels sunk whilst alongside in Howth Harbour, FV Paddy Rose and FV Alan and David. 300 ltrs diesel on board - IRCG assisted Howth Harbourmaster with booming and cleanup over several days. Estimated that most of the diesel and a smaller quantity of luboil spilled. 2009 (14/02/2009): Admiral Kuznetsov refuelling incident - Difficult to get true figures but estimated 300mt of Heavy Fuel Oil spilt. 2010: No significant actual pollution incidents, one acute. 2011 (27/02/2011): FV Le Stiff 30m length, hit charted rock in Dingle Bay, weather favourable for dispersion - Harbour master would not permit vessel to enter Dingle due to pollution and no repair facilities. Vessel proceeded to Cork for dry dock. Lost 9t diesel from forward tanks and continued to lose up to 25t from mid tank. The trends in the spatial distribution and concentration of contaminants from significant pollution events show that the spatial distribution is predominantly confined to inshore areas although there are some offshore incidents, and the quantity of contaminants, which are predominantly composed of diesel were of quantities ranging from 300 to 50,000 litres of diesel spilled.
Unknown
The Irish Coast Guard receives reports of oiled birds, but it is generally very difficult to attribute oiled bird reports to a single reported spill incident.
Input load
5
lessthan1%
Unknown_NotAssessed
NotReported
Load unit
NotReported
Confidence
High
High
Non related GES component
Non related GES component
Trends (recent)
Stable
Stable
Trends (future)
Be stable
Be stable
Description (activities)
The Irish Coast Guard (IRCG), for the purposes of MSFD reporting, have provisionally determined that a significant event involves the use of significant IRCG resources in relation to an incident (IRCG, pers. comm.). Based on this provisional categorisation, there have been five notable pollution incidents in the period from 2006 to 2011. The origins of these incidents were fishing vessels, a product tanker (Cobalt Water), and a military vessel.
The Irish Coast Guard (IRCG), for the purposes of MSFD reporting, have provisionally determined that a significant event involves the use of significant IRCG resources in relation to an incident (IRCG, pers. comm.). Based on this provisional categorisation, there have been five notable pollution incidents in the period from 2006 to 2011. The origins of these incidents were fishing vessels, a product tanker (Cobalt Water), and a military vessel.
The Irish Coast Guard (IRCG), for the purposes of MSFD reporting, have provisionally determined that a significant event involves the use of significant IRCG resources in relation to an incident (IRCG, pers. comm.). Based on this provisional categorisation, there have been five notable pollution incidents in the period from 2006 to 2011. The origins of these incidents were fishing vessels, a product tanker (Cobalt Water), and a military vessel.
The Irish Coast Guard (IRCG), for the purposes of MSFD reporting, have provisionally determined that a significant event involves the use of significant IRCG resources in relation to an incident (IRCG, pers. comm.). Based on this provisional categorisation, there have been five notable pollution incidents in the period from 2006 to 2011. The origins of these incidents were fishing vessels, a product tanker (Cobalt Water), and a military vessel.
Activity type
  • "Shipping & floating structures (all vessels
  • Defence
  • Wild fisheries
  • "Shipping & floating structures (all vessels
  • Defence
  • Wild fisheries
  • "Shipping & floating structures (all vessels
  • Defence
  • Wild fisheries
  • "Shipping & floating structures (all vessels
  • Defence
  • Wild fisheries
Information gaps
Data obtained from aerial surveillance capability would have been of assistance in evaluating more incidents.
Data obtained from aerial surveillance capability would have been of assistance in evaluating more incidents.
Data obtained from aerial surveillance capability would have been of assistance in evaluating more incidents.
Data obtained from aerial surveillance capability would have been of assistance in evaluating more incidents.