Kerry Ingredients (Ireland) Limited Rathgoggan Middle, Charleville, Co Cork

Transcription

1 Kerry Ingredients (Ireland) Limited Rathgoggan Middle, Charleville, Co Cork Industrial Emissions Licence Reg No. P Proposed Upgrade to WWTP Discharge Arrangements Impact Assessment - Additional Information March 2017 LoCall OES Consulting Dublin Newry Tralee

2 Control Sheet Document Title: Proposed Upgrade to WWTP Discharge Arrangements Document No. R3_1195_05 Impact Assessment - Additional Information Rev Description Originator Reviewer Change Date 01 Final TQ Issue This report is produced solely for the benefit of Kerry Charleville and no liability is accepted for any reliance placed on it by any other party unless specifically agreed in writing otherwise. This report refers, within the limitations stated, to the condition of the receiving waters and data provided by Kerry Charleville on the performance of the WWTP. No warranty is given as to the possibility of future changes in the condition of the receiving waters or WWTP performance at a future date. OES Consulting Dublin Newry Tralee Head Office : LoCall: info@oes.ie Web: oes.ie Office Locations: Anfield House, Baldonnell Business Park, Naas Road, Dublin 22, D22 N2N4 Office 13, Linenhall House, WIN Business Park, Canal Quay, Newry, Co. Down, BT35 6FP Unit 2 E, Liber House, Monavalley, Tralee, Co. Kerry, V92 NN80

3 Kerry Ingredients (Ireland) Limited Rathgoggan Middle, Charleville, Co Cork Industrial Emissions Licence Reg. No. P Proposed Upgrade to WWTP Discharge Arrangements Impact Assessment - Additional Information Contents 1. Introduction Background to Assessment Scope Cumulative Assessment Assimilative Capacity Charleville Urban WWTP Assessment Assessment Catchment Improvement Catchment Loading Maximum Daily Mass Emission Conclusion Attachments Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Flow Determination for R Maigue system Results of Water Quality Monitoring in R Maigue system

4 Kerry Ingredients (Ireland) Limited Charleville March 2017 Proposed Upgrade to WWTP Discharge Arrangements 1. Introduction Kerry EMEA Charleville (Kerry Charleville) engaged OES Consulting to undertake an assessment on the proposed relocation of the outfall point for treated effluent discharged from the site to the River Maigue located to the north of the site. The report (R1_1195_05) assessed the impact of proposed amendments to the discharge emission limit values associated with the treated effluent in the context of Environmental Quality Objectives for Surface Water Regulations (S.I 272 of 2009). Following a meeting with the Environmental Protection Agency (Agency) on the 25th of February 2016, the Agency requested a cumulative impact assessment of pressures on the wider catchment of the River Maigue to be undertaken. A meeting was held with Limerick County Council on April 18 th to ascertain the views of the Local Authority in relation to the proposal and the manner in which the assessments would be undertaken. The current report assesses the impacts on the water quality of the River Maigue arising from other sources including regulated discharges in the region, agricultural contributions and from confluences of the River Maigue. In addition, the proposed emission limit values for direct discharge in the context of the currently and impending levels in the current license (IE Reg. No. P ) are assessed. 1.1 Background to Assessment Schedule B.2 Emissions to Water of Kerry Charleville s IE Licence specifies the reduction in current emission limit values (ELV s) for treated effluent by January 1, The current discharge regime is based on retention of treated effluent (in storage lagoons) prior to discharge when specified flow conditions are met in the receiving water Charleville Stream. Kerry Charleville proposes to modify the current regime (of storage and batch discharge) and discharge directly to the larger watercourse of the River Maigue, thereby enabling discharges to be made throughout the year irrespective of background flow conditions and removing the requirement to store treated effluent. The EPA has requested a catchment wide assessment to be undertaken to demonstrate the impact of the change on the wider riverine catchment. 1.2 Scope The scope of the assessment is outlined under two headings below Cumulative Assessment Undertake evaluation of the potential assimilative capacity of receiving water at Bruree, Co. Limerick located downstream of both the proposed discharge locations. OES Consulting P a g e 4

5 Kerry Ingredients (Ireland) Limited Charleville March 2017 Proposed Upgrade to WWTP Discharge Arrangements Evaluate the impacts on the River Maigue as a result of additional licensed discharge facilities upstream of the proposed discharge locations. As part of this assessment a review will be undertaken of the assimilative capacity of the receiving waters as a result of discharges from the Kerry Charleville site and the additional licensed discharge facilities. An appraisal of the impact of the water quality of the River Maigue on the larger Maigue system will also be undertaken Licensed Scenarios Undertake a review of the emission limit values for ammonia, orthophosphate and BOD to be achieved post the 1 st of January As part of the review outlined above a comparative study will be carried out with respect to current licensed emission limit values, the emission limit values due to come into force on the 1st of January 2018 and those requested at the proposed outfall location. OES Consulting P a g e 5

6 Kerry Ingredients (Ireland) Limited Charleville March 2017 Proposed Upgrade to WWTP Discharge Arrangements 2. Cumulative Assessment The following section describes an assessment of the issues affecting water quality in the wider catchment area around the Kerry Charleville site. These include contributions to the River Maigue from the Charleville urban Waste Water Treatment Plant (uwwtp), the River Maigue (at the confluence of the River Loobagh) and additional pressures predominantly due to agriculture (as identified in the River Maigue Water Management Unit Action Plan). 2.1 Assimilative Capacity The proposed discharge location is to the Rover Maigue, downstream of Charleville Stream and River Loobagh confluence. Using updated flow and water quality monitoring data provided by the EPA and Limerick Co. Council respectively, the Assimilative Capacity (AC) at the discharge location was calculated Data from monitoring point Ref. RS24L at Garroose Bridge was provided by Limerick Co Council and covers to period Data for the River Maigue over the period at Fortbridge East provides an indication of water quality in the R. Maigue upstream of the confluence with the Charleville Stream (Station Ref. RS24C020001). The resultant downstream conditions were assessed using data from Howardstown Bridge (Station Ref. RS24M010400), which is downstream of Bruree and Bruree uwwtp discharges. The available assimilative capacity at the proposed discharge location is presented in Table 1. Table 1 AC River Maigue Parameter Assimilative Capacity (AC) (kg) Ammonia 4.74 BOD 70.6 Orthophosphate 2.05 Note: The AC has been determined using 95%-ile flows (Source EPA Attachment 1) and mean concentrations based on actual monitoring data at Fortbridge East (Source LCC Attachment 2) for all parameters except Ortho Phosphorus, for which the adjusted background value is used. Fortbridge East is upstream of the Charleville Stream and therefore of Kerry Charleville/ Charleville uwwtp discharge contributions. Owing to elevated levels of Ortho P in the river, which are likely due to the range of diffuse pressures on the catchment upstream of that point, it is considered reasonable to use the adjusted background concentration for that parameter (0.03mg/l) (Ref: Application for a Licence to Discharge to Surface Waters Guidance to the Applicant. Water Services Training Group). The contribution of the Charleville Stream has been added based on actual background monitoring values, upstream of and therefore excluding the contribution of, both Kerry Charleville/Charleville uwwtp from the assessment of projected discharges from both sources on background river water quality. OES Consulting P a g e 6

7 Kerry Ingredients (Ireland) Limited Charleville March 2017 Proposed Upgrade to WWTP Discharge Arrangements In addition to the above, the EPA requested during discussions on February 25, 2016, the assimilative capacity (AC) is assessed at a second point further downstream at Bruree. The assessment is for the purpose of assessing the impact of the proposed discharge and assessing the available capacity for the River Maigue to accept further discharges downstream of Bruree. Table 2 AC River Maigue at Bruree Parameter Assimilative Capacity (AC) (kg/day) Ammonia BOD Orthophosphate 2.08 Note: The AC has been determined at Howardstown Bridge using estimated 95%-ile flows (Source EPA Attachment 1) and mean concentrations based on actual monitoring data at Howardstown Bridge (Source LCC Attachment 2) for all parameters except Ortho Phosphorus, for which the adjusted background value is used.. Owing to elevated levels of Ortho P in the river, it is considered reasonable to use the Adjusted Background concentration for that parameter (0.03mg/l) (Ref: Application for a Licence to Discharge to Surface Waters Guidance to the Applicant. Water Services Training Group). 2.2 Charleville Urban WWTP Assessment The Urban Wastewater Treatment Plant (uwwtp) serving the Charleville municipal area was constructed on a green field site in the townland of Ballincolly, to the north east of Charleville, in the early 1980s and is licensed by the EPA (Register No. D ). The plant discharges treated effluent to the Charleville Stream approximately 3km upstream of where it converges with the River Maigue, and downstream of the Kerry Charleville facility. In order to establish the impact of the discharge from the uwwtp on the wider river system, the mass emission of Orthophosphate, Ammonia and BOD were established from the ELV s assigned on the basis of complying with the Surface Water Regulations (S.I. 272 of 2009) in the Charleville Stream. On this basis, ELV s have been assigned to Ammonia (0.35 mg/l) Ortho-P (0.19 mg/l) and BOD (6.5 mg/l). As Assimilative Capacity is developed on the basis of the 95%-ile flow in the receiving waters, the dry weather flow (0.0135m 3 /s) included in the review application submitted to the Agency (2011) has been used as a basis for establishing the daily mass emission (Table 3). OES Consulting P a g e 7

8 Kerry Ingredients (Ireland) Limited Charleville March 2017 Proposed Upgrade to WWTP Discharge Arrangements Table 3 Mass Emissions from Charleville uwwtp Parameter Charleville uwwtp Mass Emission (kg/d) Ammonia 0.41 BOD 7.58 ORP Assessment Although it is assumed that the discharge from the Charleville UWWTP would remain in the Charleville Stream, given the distance between the outfall point and the Maigue (~3km) and background water quality of the Charleville stream, in order to provide a conservative assessment, it is assumed that the Charleville stream provides no assimilative capacity for the discharge. It is noted that an urban wastewater treatment plant serving the village of Bruree discharges to the R. Maigue north of the village. Although Bruree treatment plant is licensed by the EPA, the dry weather flow from this plant represents 0.6% of the 95%ile flow at Bruree and is considered not significant in assessing the overall impact of discharges to the catchment. The flow from Charleville uwwtp and Kerry Charleville are therefore considered to be the primary licensed point discharges in this region of the Maigue river system. According to the River Maigue Water Unit Management Plan, point sources (such as the uwwtp and Kerry discharges) account for a small proportion of total nutrient loading in the catchment, the predominant contribution 95% - originating form diffuse and other pressures. In the absence of an established methodology to determine the impact of a poorer waterbody on a larger downstream system, the flows were assessed at the 95%ile flow condition. Based on data provided by the EPA Hydrometric Section, the following flow data is relevant: River Location 95 %-ile Flow (m 3 /sec) Loobagh Garroose Bridge 0.44 Charleville Prior to joining River Maigue (Est.) 0.03 Stream Maigue Immediately u/s Loobagh confluence 0.15 Maigue Immediately d/s Loobagh confluence 0.6 Maigue Downstream of Bruree (Est) On review of the estimated flows, it was found that the Charleville stream and Maigue account for between 5.6% and 24.7% of the total 95%ile flow at Bruree. A midpoint between both estimations would suggest that the Maigue channel upstream of the confluence with the Charleville stream represents ~15% of the flow in the 95%ile flow condition at Bruree and therefore has limited influence on the overall water quality within the larger Maigue river system. OES Consulting P a g e 8

9 Kerry Ingredients (Ireland) Limited Charleville March 2017 Proposed Upgrade to WWTP Discharge Arrangements Therefore in order to assess the impact of Kerry Charleville s proposal, the remaining assimilative capacity at the three locations was established after the permitted mass emissions from Charleville s UWWTP and the proposed mass emissions from the Kerry Charleville were introduced. Table 4 summarises the remaining assimilative capacity at the two locations in the river system. OES Consulting P a g e 9

10 Kerry Ingredients (Ireland) Limited Charleville March 2017 Proposed Upgrade to WWTP Discharge Arrangements Table 4 Remaining Assimilative Capacity in River Maigue River System Receiving Water R Maigue d/s Charleville Stream/Loobagh Confluence Discharges Assessed at R Maigue d/s of Bruree Input Calculation Parameter AC (kg/d) Proposed Kerry Charleville M.E. (kg/d) Remaining AC (kg/d) %-age AC remaining Charleville UWWTP Mass Emission (kg/d) Remaining AC (after cumulative discharge) Remaining AC (%) (after cumulative discharge) Ammonia % % BOD % % Ortho P % % Ammonia % % BOD % % Ortho P % % OES Consulting P a g e 10

11 Kerry Ingredients (Ireland) Limited Charleville March 2017 Proposed Upgrade to WWTP Discharge Arrangements As set out in Table 4, significant residual assimilative capacity remains within the downstream river system after both the proposed mass emissions from Kerry Charleville and the licensed mass emission from Charleville uwwtp have been taken into account. Based on this conservative assessment, and not taking account of additional flows into the river system downstream of Bruree, which will increase the available assimilative capacity further, there is significant residual assimilative capacity to allow for other discharges to be made, while maintaining compliance with the water quality standards Good status values the parameters covered under the Surface Water Quality Regulations The assessment demonstrates that the discharges derived from utilisation of a maximum of 75% of available assimilative capacity, after both Kerry Charleville and Charleville uwwtp discharges, can be accommodated within the waterbody. OES Consulting P a g e 11

12 Kerry Ingredients (Ireland) Limited Charleville March 2017 Proposed Upgrade to WWTP Discharge Arrangements 3. Catchment Improvement Kerry Charleville s proposal to discharge treated effluent on a continuous basis and discontinue temporary storage of wastewater in lagoons will result in a significant improvement to the overall Maigue catchment through balanced discharge of treated water over the entire year, avoiding increasing flows to river systems whilst in flood and will remove the discharge from the Charleville stream which is currently of poor water quality status. Notwithstanding the hydrological benefits to the Maigue system, the proposed amendments will result in a reduction of the permitted daily nutrient loading which Kerry Charleville are licensed to emit at present. An appraisal of current and impending licensed emissions to the River Maigue has been undertaken to establish the change brought about by the current licence. 3.1 Catchment Loading Currently the Kerry Charleville site is licensed to discharge a maximum of 18,000 m 3 of treated effluent per day which is contingent on a 1:6 dilution being available in the receiving water (Charleville stream). Discharges normally occur during Q4 and Q1 periods, when river flows are higher. It is noted that this discharge arrangement also coincides with higher flows from the Charleville UWWTP and storm water runoff entering municipal sewers as a result of rainfall. Kerry Charleville is proposing to amend the discharge rate from the site, to a maximum of 5,000m 3 per day. In order to establish the changes in loading brought about by making a direct discharge to a larger watercourse, the daily mass emissions permitted under the current licence have been determined. A summary of the findings are set out in section 3.2 below. 3.2 Maximum Daily Mass Emission The daily mass emission limit for the nutrients (orthophosphate and ammonia) and organics (BOD) has been calculated from the volumetric limit and concentration limit values. It is noted that in accordance with the conditions of the licence (Condition of IEL P ), the 2018 concentration limit values associated with ORP, ammonia and BOD can be two times the ELV s so long as the annual average remains below the concentration limit. This has been factored into the calculation of the daily emission limit value. The calculated mass emissions are presented in table 5 and are compared to the proposed emission limit values at each of the proposed discharge locations. Table 5 Daily Mass Emission Limit Parameter M.E. to Dec (kg/d) M.E. Post Jan (kg/d) Maigue (kg/d) Ammonia BOD OrthoP OES Consulting P a g e 12

13 Kerry Ingredients (Ireland) Limited Charleville March 2017 Proposed Upgrade to WWTP Discharge Arrangements At the River Maigue, when comparing the 2018 ELV s requested by the EPA to those currently being proposed by Kerry Ingredients in the current planning applications, ammonia, BOD and orthophosphate daily loading will be reduced by approximately 71%, 67% and 78% respectively compared to the EPA 2018 values. It is acknowledged that the current and 2018 mass emission is only possible if a 1:6 dilution is available in the river, which only occurs when the river is in flood. However, it is nonetheless a dramatic reduction in the permitted daily mass emission to the Maigue catchment. OES Consulting P a g e 13

14 Kerry Ingredients (Ireland) Limited Charleville March 2017 Proposed Upgrade to WWTP Discharge Arrangements 4. Conclusion Kerry Charleville proposes to relocate the discharge point for treated effluent from the site to the River Maigue at a point located to the north of the site. The current regime (of storage and batch discharge) will be modified to one of direct discharge to the River Maigue, thereby enabling discharges to be made throughout the year irrespective of background flow conditions and removing the requirement to store treated effluent. The proposal has been assessed in the context of the available assimilative capacity in the River Maigue system and takes account of the cumulative impacts of other sources including Charleville uwwtp. The findings of the assessment are as follows: There is sufficient Assimilative Capacity within the River Maigue system to accept discharges from Kerry Charleville under the proposed amendment. Assessed based under 95 %-ile flow conditions, using both actual water quality data and adjusted background values where considered reasonable, there remains a minimum headspace of 25% in the available AC in the river, thereby meeting both criteria for low flow and underutilisation of AC. Discharges can be made in full compliance with the Surface Water Regulations (S.I. 272 of 2009). When evaluated in the context of other sources, the (cumulative) assessment shows that: The cumulative discharge from Kerry Charleville and the Charleville uwwtp can be accommodated without utilising all of the available Assimilative Capacity in the river system at the point of discharge. Point discharges represent a minor influence on water quality in the overall catchment. Other improvement measures within the wider catchment (further implementation of the Nitrates Directive and actions for achievement of Water Framework Directive commitments) should lead to further improvement in water quality across the Maigue river system. The Maigue channel upstream of the confluence with the River Loobagh and the Charleville stream represents approximately 15% of the flow in the river at Bruree during the 95%ile flow condition and therefore has limited influence on the overall water quality within the larger Maigue river system. Based on the assessment, the Kerry Charleville proposal to discharge directly to the River Maigue system has a number of benefits over the current arrangement in that: The proposal involves treated waste water discharge throughout the year, with reduced maximum daily volumetric flows. Discharges, assessed at the 95 %-ile flow condition for compliance with the Surface Water regulations, will now be made during periods where river flows are significantly higher (mean and flood conditions) further reducing the contribution of loadings to the system. Based on proposed emission limit values, the maximum daily mass emissions to the River Loobagh represent a 97%, 91% and 89% reduction in ammonia, BOD and when compared to current licensed levels. OES Consulting P a g e 14

15 Kerry Ingredients (Ireland) Limited Charleville March 2017 Proposed Upgrade to WWTP Discharge Arrangements Proposed emissions represent a reduction of 77%, 71% and 83% of ammonia, BOD and ORP when compared to 2018 mass emission. Proposed annual mass emissions will be significantly lower that the levels permitted in the current licence until Therefore, based on the assessment undertaken, the proposed relocation of the Kerry Charleville discharge point, together with the modification in the discharge regime to continuous direct discharge can be expected to contribute to actual improvement to water quality within the catchment. OES Consulting P a g e 15

16 Attachment 1 Flow Determination for R Maigue System

17 Kerry Group Charleville Proposed Discharge Locations - Estimation of 95%tile Location A: E N Location B: E N Waterbody: Loobagh Maigue Date of evaluation: 17/12/2015 Evaluation carried out by: Rebecca Quinn Figure 1: Location of proposed discharge locations and nearest hydrometric stations. Available hydrometric data: There is an OPW hydrometric station, Garroose, at location A with continuous flow data. There is also a station on the Maigue, Creggane, with a limited number of flow measurements but no continuous flow data. Result: The estimated 95%tile for Location A: E N on the Loobagh River is 0.44m 3 /s. The estimated 95%tile for Location B: E N127807on the Maigue River is 0.6m 3 /s. Note: The above estimate of 95%ile flow is based on available data to date. This value may be revised in the future when more hydrometric data becomes available. 1

18 Method of estimation: Location A Direct Measurement All available continuous flow data (01/01/1972 to 10/09/2010) for the station Garroose were evaluated. A flow duration curve was derived from continuous flow data from 01/01/1972 to 10/09/2010. The hydrometric years 01/10/1995 to 30/09/1996 and 01/10/2002 to 30/09/2007 were omitted from analysis as greater than 3 months of data were missing. From this flow duration curve the 95%tile value for station Garroose is 0.44m 3 /s. The catchment area to the station is 129km 2. Method of estimation: Location B Synchronous Spot Flow Measurements Location B is just downstream of the confluence of the Loobagh and the Maigue rivers. The estimated 95%tile of the Loobagh river to this confluence was taken as the estimated 95%tile at station (Location A). In order to get an estimation of the 95%tile of the Maigue to the confluence, flow measurements from the station were used. This is a water level only station and there are no records of continuous flow available. However, a number of historic spot flow measurements, (taken from 12/03/1946 to 29/07/1993), were used and compared to flow data at a station, Croom, which has long-term good quality continuous flow data with similar catchment and climatic characteristics located further down the Maigue catchment. Flow duration statistics can be derived by assigning exceedence percentiles to spot flow measurements. Exceedence percentiles are derived from the flow percentile corresponding to the flow measured at a suitable gauged natural analogue catchment on the day of measurement. The flows at the two sites are assumed to be synchronous. To enable an approximation of the flow duration curve to be made the flow measurements should be made at a wide range of flows. However, if the specific query is in the low flow range then more metering should be carried out at low flows. There are three sources of error that must be considered within this method: 1. the hydrometric error associated with the current meter measurements at the ungauged site; 2. the assumption that the measurement is representative of the average flow within the day; 3. the errors associated with assuming that the flows within the ungauged and analogue catchments are synchronous. All available continuous flow data (01/01/1977 to 30/11/2015) for the station Croom were evaluated. A flow duration curve was derived from continuous flow data from 01/10/1977 to 30/09/2015. Based on this analysis the 95%tile for station Croom is 1.6m 3 /s. The catchment area to the station is 770.2km 2. The flow measurements taken at Creggane were linked to the exceedence values for flow data on the same dates as the Croom (Table 1). These were then plotted as shown in Figure 2 and a regression line of best fit was drawn to estimate a Flow Duration Curve for Creggane. 2

19 Table 1: Synchronous flow data at stations and Date CREGGANE Flow Measurements [m 3 /s] CROOM Daily Mean Flow [m 3 /s] Percentage of time is equal or exceeded [%tile] 23/08/ /09/ /07/ /09/ /07/ /09/ /07/ /08/ /07/ /07/ /08/ /08/ /06/ /06/ /10/ /10/ /05/ /05/ /06/ /08/ /05/ /07/ /07/ /05/ /05/ /09/ /07/ /08/ /07/ /03/ /05/ /04/ /05/ /01/ /05/ /03/ /06/ /09/ /09/ /03/ /02/ /02/ /06/

20 Flow [m 3 /s] Date CREGGANE Flow Measurements [m 3 /s] CROOM Daily Mean Flow [m 3 /s] Percentage of time is equal or exceeded [%tile] 25/11/ /03/ /12/ /01/ /11/ /05/ /01/ /03/ /11/ /01/ /11/ /10/ /01/ /03/ /11/ /01/ /12/ /11/ /03/ /01/ /12/ Percentile Flow of Analogue Station Croom [%tile] Figure 2: Estimated Flow Duration Curve Creggane y = e x R² = CREGGANE Cmd.Gaugings Using the formula from the regression the estimated 95%tile flow at Creggane is 0.13m 3 /s. The model HydroTool was also used at the location of station and returned an estimated 95%tile of 0.11m 3 /s. The estimated catchment area to station Creggane is 83km 2. The estimated catchment area to the confluence with the Loobagh River is 105km 2. Increasing this estimate based on catchment ratio gives an estimated 95%tile of 0.15m 3 /s at the confluence. Adding the estimated 95%tile of 0.15m 3 /s for the Maigue to the estimated 95%tile for the Loobagh to the confluence (0.44m 3 /s) gives an estimated 95%tile flow of 0.6m 3 /s just downstream of the confluence at Location B. 4

21 Attachment 2 Results of Water Quality Monitoring in R Maigue system

22 Parameter Ammonia NH3-pH Biological Oxyg Dissolved Oxyg Ortho-PhosphaNitrate NO3-N Temperature PhosphorAmmonia NH3 Nitrate NO3 Suspended SoliDissolved Oxygen Max Target Min Archived Category Entity Entity ReferencStation Station ReferenStation Easting Station NorthinLaboratory River Basin DistWater ManagemWater Body Sample TemplaSample ReferenSample Date Sample Time Sample MethodReason Comments Analyst Conclus mg/l ph units mg/l % O2 mg/l mg/l Degrees C µs/cm mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l mg/l Yes River Quality Maigue 24C02 Fortb RS24C Limerick City & Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaMiscellaneous T May :25 Grab Investigative - - < < Yes River Quality Maigue 24C02 Fortb RS24C Limerick City & Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaMiscellaneous T June :10 Grab Investigative - - < < Yes River Quality Maigue 24C02 Fortb RS24C Limerick City & Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaMiscellaneous T July :00 Grab Investigative - - < < Yes River Quality Maigue 24C02 Fortb RS24C Limerick City & Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaMiscellaneous T Aug :00 Grab Investigative - - < < Yes River Quality Maigue 24C02 Fortb RS24C Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaMiscellaneous T Sep :00 Grab Investigative Yes River Quality Maigue 24C02 Fortb RS24C Limerick City & Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaMiscellaneous T Oct :45 Grab Investigative - - < 0.03 < < 1 Yes River Quality Maigue 24C02 Fortb RS24C Limerick City & Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaMiscellaneous T Nov :20 Grab Investigative < Yes River Quality Maigue 24C02 Fortb RS24C Limerick City & Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaMiscellaneous T Dec :45 Grab Investigative < Yes River Quality Maigue 24C02 Fortb RS24C Limerick City & Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaMiscellaneous T Jan :30 Grab Investigative < Yes River Quality Maigue 24C02 Fortb RS24C Limerick City & Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaMiscellaneous T Feb :00 Grab Investigative < Yes River Quality Maigue 24C02 Fortb RS24C Limerick City & Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaMiscellaneous T Mar :45 Grab Investigative - - < 0.04 <

23 Parameter Ammonia NH3-N ph Biological OxygDissolved OxygOrtho-PhosphaNitrate NO3-N Temperature Total Solids Target 6-9 Max Mean Min Archived Category Entity Entity ReferencStation Station ReferenStation Easting Station NorthinLaboratory River Basin DistWater Manage Water Body Sample TemplaSample ReferenSample Date Sample Time Sample MethodReason Comments Analyst Conclus mg/l ph units mg/l % O2 mg/l mg/l Degrees C mg/l µs/cm mg/l Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Jan :00 Grab Compliance Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Feb :00 Grab Compliance < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Mar :00 Grab Compliance - - < < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Mar :00 Grab Compliance - - < < < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Apr :00 Grab Compliance - - < < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W May :00 Grab Compliance - - < < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W June :00 Grab Compliance - - < < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Aug :00 Grab Compliance - - < < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Sep :00 Grab Compliance - - < < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Oct :00 Grab Compliance - - < < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Nov :00 Grab Compliance < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Nov :00 Grab Compliance Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Jan :00 Grab Investigative < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Feb :00 Grab Compliance < < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Mar :00 Grab Surveillance < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Apr :00 Grab Operational - - < < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W May :00 Grab Operational - - < < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W June :00 Grab Surveillance - - < < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W July :00 Grab Operational - - < < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Sep :00 Grab Operational - - < < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Oct :00 Grab Operational - - < < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Nov :00 Grab Operational - - < < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Jan :00 Grab Investigative < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Feb :00 Grab Investigative < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Mar :00 Grab Surveillance < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Apr :00 Grab Surveillance - - < < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W May :00 Grab Investigative < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W June :00 Grab Compliance - < < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W July :00 Grab Surveillance - - < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Aug :00 Grab Compliance - < < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Aug :00 Grab Compliance - < < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Sep :00 Grab Compliance - < < Yes River Quality Loobagh 24L01 Garroose Bridg RS24L Limerick Co Co Shannon RBD Maigue SH_Maigue_MaWFD Surface W Oct :00 Grab Compliance < WFD Surface Water Monitoring29-Nov :00 Grab Compliance WFD Surface Water Monitoring12-Dec :00 Grab Compliance < WFD Surface Water Monitoring9-Jan :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring7-Feb :00 Grab Compliance < WFD Surface Water Monitoring12-Mar :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring3-Apr :00 Grab Investigative - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring1-May :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring29-May :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring26-June :00 Grab Compliance < WFD Surface Water Monitoring23-July :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring28-Aug :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring24-Sep :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring23-Oct :00 Grab Compliance < WFD Surface Water Monitoring27-Nov :00 Grab Compliance < WFD Surface Water Monitoring7-Jan :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring5-Feb :00 Grab Compliance < WFD Surface Water Monitoring5-Mar :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring30-Apr :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring28-May :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring24-June :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring23-July :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring17-Sep :00 Grab Compliance - - < WFD Surface Water Monitoring15-Oct :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring12-Nov :00 Grab Compliance - - < WFD Surface Water Monitoring26-Nov :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring10-Dec :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring14-Jan :00 Grab Investigative < WFD Surface Water Monitoring11-Feb :00 Grab Compliance < WFD Surface Water Monitoring11-Mar :00 Grab Compliance < WFD Surface Water Monitoring8-Apr :00 Grab Surveillance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring6-May :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring3-June :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring1-July :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring29-July :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring26-Aug :00 Grab Investigative - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring23-Sep :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring21-Oct :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring18-Nov :00 Grab Compliance < WFD Surface Water Monitoring9-Dec :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring6-Jan :00 Grab Compliance WFD Surface Water Monitoring3-Feb :00 Grab Compliance < WFD Surface Water Monitoring3-Mar :00 Grab Compliance < WFD Surface Water Monitoring31-Mar :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring28-Apr :00 Grab Compliance - - < < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring26-May :00 Grab Compliance - - < WFD Surface Water Monitoring23-June :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring21-July :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring18-Aug :00 Grab Compliance - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring15-Sep :00 Grab Surveillance WFD Surface Water Monitoring13-Oct :00 Grab Surveillance - - < < < 1 WFD Surface Water Monitoring10-Nov :00 Grab Investigative - - < < WFD Surface Water Monitoring8-Dec :00 Grab Compliance < WFD Surface Water Monitoring19-Jan :00 Grab Investigative < WFD Surface Water Monitoring16-Feb :00 Grab Investigative < WFD Surface Water Monitoring22-Mar :00 Grab Investigative - - < <

24 1195_05 Kerry EMEA Charleville February Physiochemical Monitoring Ammonia-Total (as N) ortho-phosphate (as P) BOD - 5 days (Total) North Br d/s North Br d/s Kilmallock North Br d/s Kilmallock (M48) Date Upstream Date Upstream Date Upstream 07/01/ * 07/01/ /01/13 1* 05/02/ /02/ /02/13 1* 05/03/ /03/ /03/13 1* 30/04/ * 30/04/ /04/13 1* 28/05/ * 28/05/ * 28/05/13 1* 24/06/ * 24/06/ /06/13 1* 23/07/ * 23/07/ /07/ /09/ * 17/09/ /10/13 1* 15/10/ /10/ /11/ /11/ * 12/11/ /12/13 1* 26/11/ * 26/11/ /01/14 1* 10/12/ * 10/12/ /03/14 1* 14/01/ /01/ /04/14 1* 11/02/ /02/ /05/14 1* 11/03/ * 11/03/ /06/14 1* 08/04/ * 08/04/ /07/14 1* 06/05/ * 06/05/ /07/14 1* 03/06/ * 03/06/ /07/14 1* 01/07/ * 01/07/ /08/14 1* 08/07/ * 08/07/ /09/14 1* 29/07/ /07/ /10/14 1* 26/08/ * 26/08/ /11/14 1* 23/09/ * 23/09/ /12/14 1* 21/10/ * 21/10/ /11/ /11/ /12/ /12/ Mean= Mean= Mean= *Transposed for summation purposes as 0.5*LoQ OES Consulting Page 1 of 1

25 Ambient -Upstream GZ127 GZ297 GZ448 GZ605 GZ792 GZ961 GZ1239 GZ1505 GZ1709 GZ1985 IA Flow: 95%-ile EQS 11/02/ /03/ /04/ /05/ /06/ /07/ /08/ /09/ /10/ /11/ /02/ /03/2016 Mean 95%ile 0.34 Mean 95%ile 340 D.O % O 2 80%<95%ile<120% Temperature C o 1.5 C o increase ph 6 < ph < BOD mg/l Orthophosphate (P) mg/l Ammonia (N) mg/l TN (N) mg/l n/a Ambient -Downstream GZ128 GZ298 GZ449 GZ606 GZ793 GZ962 GZ1238 GZ1506 GZ1710 GZ1986 IA %-ile 11/02/ /03/ /04/ /05/ /06/ /07/ /08/ /09/ /10/ /11/ /02/ /03/2016 Mean 95%ile D.O % O 2 80%<95%ile<120% Temperature C o 1.5 C o increase ph 6 < ph < BOD mg/l Orthophosphate (P) mg/l Ammonia (N) mg/l TN (N) mg/l n/a Ambient Monitoring Summary Irish Grid Reference EPA Code Upstream Monitoring Point E N RS24CO20440 Downstream Monitoring Point E N RS24CO20450 EQS Mean 95%ile

26