WESTERN WWTP CONTINUOUS DISCHARGES TO THE CMA. Application under section 127 of the RMA to cancel condition 24 of WGN [33277] February 2018

Transcription

1 WESTERN WWTP CONTINUOUS DISCHARGES TO THE CMA Application under section 127 of the RMA to cancel condition 24 of WGN [33277] February 2018 Western WWTP s127 Application - February 2018

2 Document Control Document Information Document data Document ID Document Owner Application under section 127 of the RMA to cancel condition 24 of WGN [33277] Ulvi Salayev Issue Date 2 February 2018 Document History Version Issue Date Changes 1 8/12/17 Template for WWL review 2 18/1/18 Draft application for WWL review 3 27/1/18 Final draft for review Document Sign-Off Name Role Sign-off Date Richard Peterson Author 27 January 2018 Paula Hunter / David Cameron Reviewers 27 January 2018 Ulvi Salayev Approver 2 February 2018 Western WWTP s127 Application - February 2018

3 CONTENTS 1. Introduction Context Background to the condition Reasons for seeking the cancellation of condition Management and monitoring of the outfall pipeline Condition of the outfall pipeline Cost of requiring the pipeline replacement Future work to assess the options for the intermittent discharges to Karori Stream Assessment of Environmental Effects Iwi and stakeholder consultation Background Feedback Summary Assessment against relevant provisions Introduction Tangata whenua, kaitiakitanga & cultural relationships Benefits of regionally significant infrastructure Water quality Ecosystems and habitats with significant biodiversity values Part 2 RMA Conclusion List of Abbreviations Appendix A: Application Forms Appendix B: Option Assessment Report Appendix C: Pipeline Condition Assessment Appendix D: Management and Monitoring Plan Appendix E: Consultation Graphic LIST OF TABLES Table 2 - Summary of consultation feedback Table 3: Part 2 Assessment Western WWTP s127 Application - February 2018

4 1. Introduction Resource Consent WGN [33277] (hereafter the Consent ) is a Coastal Permit which provides for the continuous discharge of secondary treated and UV disinfected wastewater from the Western Wastewater Treatment Plant (WWTP) to the coastal marine area (CMA) in the vicinity of the Karori Stream mouth via an existing outfall. The Consent was granted in July 2010 and conditions 1 and 10 were changed in November In this application, Wellington Water Limited (WWL) seeks the cancellation of condition 24 of the Consent (See Appendix A for GWRC Form 1c). Condition 24 requires the following New pipeline design and construction: a) The permit holder shall brief the CLG on its preliminary project plan for the design, construction and commissioning of the new pipeline before the seventh anniversary of the commencement of this permit. b) The permit holder shall, before the tenth anniversary of the commencement of this permit, provide to the Wellington Regional Council a summary of its project plan for the design, construction and commissioning of the new pipeline, from the Western Wastewater Treatment Plant to the coast by 31 December c) The permit holder shall apply for all necessary resource consents to construct and operate the new pipeline from the Western Wastewater Treatment Plant to the coast no later than eleven years from the commencement of this permit. d) The permit holder shall construct and commission a new pipeline, which will have sufficient capacity to eliminate discharges to the Karori Stream, from the Western Wastewater Treatment Plant to the coast by 31 December The application also seeks the consequential deletion of the following advice notes which are on associated resource consents WGN [25228] and [25229]: Advice note: As a result of Condition 24 of Coastal permit WGN60283 [25226], which requires replacement of the pipeline from the Western Wastewater Treatment Plant to the coast, this permit will not be required from 31 December 2023 at the latest. The application also seeks the following amendments to condition 27 of the Consent. These amendments are required to ensure the ongoing involvement of local Tangata Whenua and the Community Liaison Group (CLG) in the development and assessment of options associated with discharges from the WWTP and options for the pipeline replacement and to confirm that the Monitoring and Technology Review Report (MTRR) will include consideration of the environmental effects associated with any ongoing leaks from the outfall pipeline. Within six months of the 9th and 19th anniversaries of the commencement of this permit, the permit holder shall provide to the Manager, Environmental Regulation, Wellington Regional Council, a Monitoring and Technology Review Report. The assessment required by the report shall be undertaken by a suitably qualified and experienced New Zealand specialist or specialists in wastewater treatment and disposal. The report and particularly the assessment in clause (g) below shall be undertaken in consultation with representatives of local Tangata Whenua and the Community Liaison Group. 1 Prior to the change of conditions in 2015, the Consent was numbered Consent No. WGN [25226]. The change to condition 1 related to the dates on which further information had been provided. The change to condition 10 related to the effluent quality criteria. 2 The reference to 2033 is an error and should instead be 31 December 2023, consistent with condition 24(d). P a g e 1

5 The report shall be to the satisfaction of the Manager, Environmental Regulation, Wellington Regional Council. The scope of the assessment should address, but not necessarily be limited to, the following: a) Ongoing compliance with the requirements of this permit particularly in relation to any reported non compliance with consent conditions; b) An assessment of compliance/consistency with any relevant national, or regional water quality policies, standards or guidelines in effect at the time; c) An assessment of the results of the permit holder's monitoring undertaken in accordance with this permit including the adequacy and scope of such monitoring; d) A summary of any improvements made to the reticulation, treatment or disposal system since the granting of this permit; e) A summary of any residual actual or potential effects of the discharge and leaks from the main outfall pipeline, irrespective of whether those effects are in accordance with the conditions of this permit; f) An outline of technological changes and advances in relation to wastewater management, treatment, disposal and beneficial use technologies, which may be available to address any residual adverse effects; and the potential for reducing or eliminating these effects; and g) An assessment of whether any such options or combination of options represent the Best Practicable Option to avoid, remedy or further mitigate the effects of the discharge and whether the permit holder intends to incorporate such changes. Note: It is not intended that separate reports be produced in relation to this condition under resource consents WGN [25226], [25227], [25228] and [25229], but that one report shall encompass all the discharge permits. In respect of condition 27(b) this shall include an assessment of any relevant standards or guidelines with respect to endocrine disrupting chemicals, pharmaceuticals and persistent organic pollutants. P a g e 2

6 2. Context 2.1 Background to the condition Condition 24 was imposed as a result of the settlement of appeals to the Environment Court on the Consent and associated resource consents. The parties to the appeals were: New Zealand Forestry Group Limited and Action for the Environment Inc. and West Wellington Environment Protection Society Inc.(appellants) Wellington City Council (applicant and appellant) and Greater Wellington Regional Council (GWRC) (respondent). On 30 June 2010, following the settlement of appeals, the Environment Court issued a report to the Minister of Conservation recommending that the Consent and associated resource consents be granted. 3 It is noted in that report that: 4 The parties to the appeals and notices of inquiry engaged in a series of mediations. In a final meeting in October 2008 they came to an agreement which satisfied the concerns of all. Most significant among the terms of that agreement was that the City Council undertook to upgrade the pipeline from the treatment plant to the coast with a sufficient capacity to eliminate the necessity for having emergency stream discharges. That work is to be completed by 31 December 2023, which will be within the expected lifetime of the existing pipeline. Implementation of that agreement has been delayed because the City Council has so far not been able to negotiate terms of access with the affected landowners to enable it to upgrade the pipeline. The City Council has nevertheless confirmed its commitment to replace the pipeline and, if necessary, it will take the steps available to it to oblige the affected landowners to allow access for that purpose. It is noted that the explanation regarding condition 24 from the Environment Court focuses on the emergency stream discharges, i.e. the consented discharges of treated and partially treated wastewater that occur just downstream of the WWTP. 2.2 Reasons for seeking the cancellation of condition 24 Approximately 18 months ago WWL initiated investigations to enable it to comply with condition 24. These investigations have included the preparation of an Options Assessment Report (Appendix B) and the completion of investigations into the condition of the existing pipeline (Appendix C). In addition, in order to comply with various conditions of the Consent, initially Wellington City Council (WCC) and more recently WWL have undertaken a range of effluent quality and receiving water monitoring and have also implemented an outfall pipeline management and monitoring plan (MMP), as required under condition 22 of the Consent. As a result of the above, WCC and WWL consider that condition 24 is no longer appropriate and seek that it be cancelled. In summary the reasons for this are that: 1. The implementation of the MMP required under condition 22 has resulted in a marked improvement in the management of the pipeline. See section 2.3 below for more detail. This means that a new pipeline is not required in order to address effects arising from existing pipeline leaks. 3 New Zealand Forestry Group Ltd v Wellington Regional Council [2010] EnvC 220 ( Report to the Minister of Conservation ). 4 Report to the Minister of Conservation, paras [26] [27]. P a g e 3

7 2. Knowledge about the condition of the pipeline has significantly improved since condition 24 was imposed. It is now considered that the pipeline has a serviceable lifespan which is significantly longer than 2023, as contemplated in condition 24, and does not need to replaced in the short term. Therefore it is considered that WCC and WWL have a responsibility to maximise the use of this existing asset, consistent with sound asset management, efficient use of physical resources (s7(b) of the Resource Management Act 1991) and the purpose and principles of local government set out in the Local Government Act 2002 (s10 and s14 of the LGA). See section 2.4 for more detail about the assessment of the pipeline s condition. 3. Replacing the pipeline now would commit WCC and WWL to a course of action and expenditure in advance of catchment priorities being set through the up-coming Whaitua process. WCC and WWL would expect to have some direction from the Whaitua process in advance of lodging replacement consents for WGN [25228] and [25229] (discharges to the Karori Steam) in It is possible that this direction will have priorities other than the impact of intermittent discharges of treated wastewater to the Karori Stream. 4. Condition 24 precludes consideration of the full range of options to address the environment effects arising from the operation of the pipeline, and the selection of the best practicable option. 5. The pipeline replacement would be likely to cause substantial damage to the bed of the Karori Stream and wider environment in the course of its construction, including in order to provide access to the pipeline. These adverse effects should not occur unless the pipeline replacement is shown to be the best practicable option; 6. Recent work to estimate the cost of replacing the pipeline, undertaken as part of the Option Assessment Report, has shown that the cost of pipeline replacement will be approximately $40m (See Appendix B). This very high capital cost will have a very significant opportunity cost for WCC and its residents and ratepayers. It is therefore appropriate, in determining how best to address the issues arising from the existing outfall pipeline, that WWL is able to assess all options and is not constrained by a condition that was established on now outdated information. In addition to these points, WCC and WWL consider that the cancellation of condition 24 will not in itself have any adverse effects on the environment. If condition 24 is cancelled this will not authorise any discharge to Karori Stream. Instead, discharges to Karori Stream will continue to be authorised under WGN [25228] and [25229] until 2023 when those consents expire. The key environmental effect 5 intended to be addressed by condition 24, i.e. the effects of the emergency stream discharges will be comprehensively assessed under a separate resource consent process, when new resource consents are applied for in anticipation of resource consents WGN [25228] and [25229] expiring. In addition the ongoing implementation of the MMP will ensure that the leaks which occur from the pipeline are appropriately managed. Based on the engagement undertaken to date (see section 4) WCC and WWL understand that, in the main, iwi and key stakeholders accept that the cancellation of condition 24 is the appropriate course of action given the findings of the recent investigations. As discussed later in this application, the proposed changes to condition 27 are intended to: confirm WCC and WWL s intent to consult with iwi and stakeholders as part of future decisions relating to the discharges from the WWTP 5 See extract from Environment Court report to Minister of Conservation above P a g e 4

8 confirm that any residual effects of the leaks from the main pipeline will be addressed in the MTRR. 2.3 Management and monitoring of the outfall pipeline Since the Consent was granted there has been marked improvement in the management of the pipeline. This has resulted from the co-ordinated and regular pipeline monitoring, maintenance and reporting activities which are now undertaken in accordance with conditions 22 and 23 of WGN [33277]. Conditions 22 and 23 require that: The MMP sets out a schedule and procedure for 3-monthly and annual inspections of the pipeline. The MMP was updated in 2015 as part of separate resource consents 6 to enable maintenance works in the bed of the Karori Stream. Under the MMP, if any defects are found during inspections a Defect Record Form must be completed. The MMP also outlines the appropriate follow up 6 WGN [34178] & [34179] P a g e 5

9 actions required depending on the nature of the issue detected. A copy of the MMP is included in Appendix D. Conditions 22 and 23 were imposed as the key measures under the consent to address leakages from the pipeline 7. These conditions have resulted in a more systematic approach to the management of the pipeline condition and leaks. The additional inspections which WWL has introduced through the MMP over the consent period, and in consultation with GWRC, have resulted in leaks being discovered much earlier, which may have previously once gone undiscovered for quite some period. Further the first response to leaks or faults once discovered has been a focus under the MMP. WWL with its contractor have spent considerable time researching and introducing suitable front end products and developing techniques to substantially improve the first response. Initial inspection teams to act in accordance with best practice and inline with WWL s core environmental principles. 7 See section of the Decision of Hearing Committee, dated 22 December 2006 P a g e 6

10 2.4 Condition of the outfall pipeline As part of the on-going options assessment work, WWL commissioned GHD to evaluate the condition of the pipes which make up the pipeline. The work undertaken follows a similar investigation carried out on the pipes in The conclusions of this investigation are that deterioration of the pipeline concrete has occurred and that the pipes will become progressively more fragile with age, requiring more major replacement works overtime. Notwithstanding this the Report considers that the majority of pipeline is likely to remain sufficiently serviceable as a conduit for wastewater until 2035 with periodic inspection and maintenance as required. The inspection and maintenance needs are considered to be consistent with the requirements of the MMP. The full report is included in Appendix C. 2.5 Cost of requiring the pipeline replacement In 2016 and 2017 WWL undertook an options assessment exercise to determine the most appropriate way to comply with condition 24. The Option Assessment Report is included in Appendix B. This work included a relatively detailed assessment of five replacement pipeline route options. The cost of these options was one of the criterion considered in the multi criteria assessment process undertaken to assist in determining the preferred pipeline route option. The cost of the options ranged from approximately $40m for an option following the current pipe alignment to approximately $110m for a route option with new tunnelled sections. Even at the lower end of this range this cost is significantly higher than was anticipated when WCC agreed to the imposition of condition 24. It would generate significant opportunity costs for local rate payers. Commitment to funding the replacement of the existing pipeline will mean that other significant infrastructure projects, e.g. water supply resilience projects may need to be deferred. Given this new cost information, the improved management of the pipeline under conditions 22 and 23, and latest estimates on the lifespan of the pipeline, WCC and WWL consider condition 24 is no longer appropriate. Instead, a full options assessment should be undertaken to identify an appropriate solution to implement prior resource consents WGN [25228] and [25229] expiring in WCC and WWL remain open to replacing the pipeline if, following a full assessment of all options and their associated environmental effects, it proves to be the best practicable option. However, it is premature to make that decision now, and in the meantime, condition 24 constrains a proper assessment of all relevant options. 2.6 Future work to assess the options for the intermittent discharges to Karori Stream If condition 24 is cancelled, this will enable an assessment of a full range of options to address the environmental effects of the intermittent discharge of treated wastewater which currently go to the Karori Stream. However, if condition 24 remains these effects can only be addressed through the replacement of the pipeline, regardless of whether this option is the most appropriate. There is a range of other options and combinations of options that could be considered (including inflow and infiltration management, increased storage, increased treatment, continued intermittent discharges to the Karori Stream and pipeline refurbishment. If condition 24 is cancelled, WWL will be able to fully investigate these options in order to determine what new resource consents should be applied for to replace resource consents WGN [25228] and [25229], which are due to expire in An application of this nature will require an appropriate assessment of alternatives under s105 and Schedule 4 to the RMA. P a g e 7

11 In addition to these general requirements, condition 27 of the Consent requires the completion of a MTRR. This requires that the MTRR be undertaken by an appropriate specialist or specialists in wastewater treatment and disposal, and that: Clauses (e), (f) and (g) require an assessment of options to address the residual environmental effects of the discharges from the WTTP (i.e. those environmental effects not already addressed through the improvements identified in clause (d)). Condition 27 requires the MTRR to be completed within six months of the 9 th and 19 th anniversaries of the Consent (i.e. by 28 January 2020 and 28 January 2030). If condition 24 remains, then the scope of options able to be considered as part of the MTRR will be restricted. If condition 24 is cancelled this will enable the MTRR to consider a wider range of options. 3. Assessment of Environmental Effects Schedule 4 to the RMA requires that an application must include an assessment of the activity s effect on the environment. Section 127 (3) of the RMA states that, where the application is for the cancellation of a condition, references to an activity shall be read as references only to the proposed change or cancellation of a condition and the effects of that change or cancellation. Consequently this assessment is only required to assess the effects of cancelling condition 24 and changing condition 27. As previously discussed the cancellation of condition 24 will not result in any further adverse effects on the Karori Stream. Cancelling the condition will not authorise intermittent discharges to the Karori Stream. Instead, these activities will continue to be authorised by resource consents WGN [25228] and [25229] until they expire in Before that time, new resource P a g e 8

12 consents will need to be applied for, and this will require a comprehensive assessment of alternatives (options) and their associated effects. The proposed change to condition 27 will require the MTRR to assess the effects of leakages from the outfall pipeline. This will ensure that all discharges to the Karori Stream are appropriately assessed and where necessary mitigation measures put in place. The main adverse effect associated with the cancellation of condition 24 is the loss of certainty for parties that the existing pipeline will be replaced with a new pipeline by 31 December 2023 and that any discharge of treated wastewater to the Karori Stream will cease at that point. However, as set out in section 4, the feedback from the consultation undertaken to date with iwi and stakeholders has in many instances been supportive of the proposal to cancel the condition. WWL is very committed to ensuring ongoing engagement continues with iwi, the CLG and other stakeholders in any future consent processes for discharges to the Karori Stream. Therefore, WWL is also proposing an amendment to condition 27 requiring the assessment of options under the MTRR to be undertaken in consultation with representatives of local Tangata Whenua and the CLG. As discussed in section 2 above there are a number of positive effects associated with the deletion of condition 24. These are as follows: a) WCC and WWL will be able to undertake a comprehensive assessment of alternative options based on the most up to date information and new technologies including the findings of the MTRR required by condition 27 and discussed in section 2.6 above. b) WCC and WWL will have the opportunity to continue to utilise an existing asset that is considered sufficiently serviceable for the reticulation of treated wastewater for a period significantly longer than 2023, as contemplated in condition 24. This approach: - represents sound asset management; - is in accordance with the purpose of local government 8 which is to meet the current and future needs of communities for good-quality local infrastructure in a way that is most cost-effective for households and businesses; and - is in accordance with s7(b) of the RMA, which requires the efficient use and development of natural and physical resources to be had particular regard to. c) WCC and WWL will have the opportunity to explore other methods and approaches to manage the effects associated with discharges to the Karori Stream that may be more appropriate than building a new pipeline. If a new pipeline is not required, this will enable other works that are of a higher priority for the community of Wellington (e.g. water supply resilience projects) to be undertaken. 4. Iwi and stakeholder consultation 4.1 Background Following the 2006 consenting process and as a requirement of a proposed consent condition a CLG was formed to represent the interests of key stakeholders. This group includes members who live or own land along the pipeline alignment and those who have previously displayed an interest in the pipeline management. This group meets annually but can meet more often if desired. 8 Section 10, Local Government Act 2002 P a g e 9

13 To support the preparation of the present application a Communication and Engagement Plan (CEP) has been prepared and implemented. In summary, the overarching objectives of the engagement for this project are to: Communicate with, inform and liaise with stakeholders who are affected by or have an interest in the project in order to increase the likelihood of mutually acceptable outcomes and better decisions; Identify the values and priorities of stakeholders and the reasons for their position; Provide adequate opportunities to stakeholders, and the public to become involved in the project by utilising a variety of communication methods; Ensure that all factors affecting the project are adequately considered and documented after engaging with the community and stakeholders. 4.2 Feedback Summary Consultation was undertaken between WWL representatives, iwi and key stakeholders between Thursday 23 November 2017 and Monday 11 December During this time, one on one meetings were held with each of the parties, generally for one hour per meeting. Iwi and stakeholders were presented with a graphical representation, depicting the story of the pipeline from a wet weather status quo scenario. The pipeline story (See Appendix E) was used to provide context to WCC and WWL s proposal to remove condition 24 from the consent. The table below demonstrates the nature of the discussions held with stakeholders accompanied by their questions or concerns. P a g e 10

14 Table 1 - Summary of consultation feedback Stakeholder Iwi: Taranaki Whānui Wednesday 6 December Iwi: Ngati Toa Monday 11 December Makara Community Group Thursday 23 November Karori Residents Association Thursday 23 November Terewhiti station Thursday 23 November Points raised by stakeholder Raised concerns on coastal outputs and impact on commercial and customary fishing No customary fishing occurring in the Karori Stream No issues raised regarding intent to remove condition General discussion regarding project and projects in the wider Porirua area Raised concerns on coastal outputs and impact on commercial and customary fishing No issues raised regarding intent to remove condition, however position reserved until final details of measures to address discharges have been considered and presented. Makara and Ohariu residents: Road to South Makara (past Meridian) is of concern as it is narrow. It currently has to service trucks for construction and maintenance purposes, this triggers a community notice as there is an interface with horses and residents Horse club is a priority Makara doesn t have any colleges for school children which results in large traffic flows out of the area each morning Concerns about how the pipeline would be constructed given the lack of roading infrastructure and access as well as many residents have Bachs in the zone of construction Stakeholder would like to distribute information through her network General commentary on Karori: o Residents association opposed to high density housing proposal due to lack of infrastructure o A greater strategic approach to infrastructure needs to be adopted o Public transport is insufficient for growth A systematic approach needs to be used when approaching the issue Group is in total agreement with project team, work together to solve the issue with increased storage and greater investigation into Infiltration and Inflow (I&I) Group vocal on the impact of I&I on the system particularly related to private laterals issues regarding property access and the impact of unlocked gates (access to keys) has had on the property, of note is the access by recreational users Not in favour of a new pipeline being built They are not really users of the downstream water Discussion regarding the capacity of Karori catchment P a g e 11

15 Stakeholder Residents Thursday 23 November NZ Forestry Group Tuesday 28 November Points raised by stakeholder Stakeholder questioned condition of the pipe Quantification of an I&I program Capacity upstream makes sense but what does this look like Research into enforcement of an I&I program Exposure to risk and liability due to the pipeline being deemed to be on stakeholder property Stakeholder wished to have the property issue rectified, if this is achieved they definitely see the merit in the projects objective Stakeholder reported that he would prefer that the pipeline was removed, he does not want another pipeline constructed Stakeholder reported that the project team is following the logic with their objective, a greater strategic approach needs to be adopted for Karori and its wastewater Stakeholder believes that an extensive I&I program needs to be initiated and delivered before spending ratepayers money P a g e 12

16 5. Assessment against relevant provisions 5.1 Introduction Schedule 4, clause 2 to the RMA requires that the application must include an assessment of the cancellation of condition 24 and changes to condition 27 against any relevant provisions of a national environmental standard, other regulations, a national policy statement, a New Zealand coastal policy statement, a regional policy statement, a plan or proposed plan. To comply with this requirement an analysis against the relevant objectives and policies of the following documents has been undertaken: The National Policy Statement for Freshwater Management (NPS-FM) The Regional Policy Statement (RPS) The Regional Freshwater Plan (RFP) The Proposed Natural Resources Plan (PNRP). While condition 24 is on a coastal permit, the New Zealand Coastal Policy Statement and Regional Coastal Plan, and the coastal provisions of the RPS and PNRP have not been considered. It is considered that these provisions are not relevant to condition 24, which essentially addresses freshwater issues. Based on a review of the objectives and policies in the documents listed above, it is considered that the key policy directions relevant to this application relate to: the role of local iwi as tangata whenua and kaitiaki, and their cultural relationships with the receiving environment the benefits that arise from the use and development of Regionally Significant Infrastructure water quality ecosystems and habitats with significant biodiversity values. 5.2 Tangata whenua, kaitiakitanga & cultural relationships Throughout the policy statements and plans there are a significant number of objectives and policies which address the resource management issues of relevance to tangata whenua, their role as kaitiaki and their cultural relationships to the environment. Directions common to the policy statements and plans include the need to: take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi recognise the role of tangata whenua as kaitiaki recognise and protect the cultural relationships of tangata whenua to water, sites of significance sustain the mauri of water maintain water quality consistent with tangata whenua values consult with tangata whenua. P a g e 13

17 In recognition of their role as kaitiaki and their values held in relation to water, WWL has consulted with representatives of both Ngāti Toa Rangatira and Taranaki Whānui ki te Upoko o te Ika a Maui as part of the preparation of this application. Neither iwi representative raised concerns regarding the proposal to cancel condition 24. It is noted that the Karori Stream is not identified as a site of significance to iwi in the PNRP. As discussed in section 3 above, WWL is proposing an amendment to condition 27 that requires the options assessment that is to be carried out as part of the MTRR to be undertaken in consultation with representatives of local Tangata Whenua and the CLG. This will ensure the ongoing involvement of both Ngāti Toa Rangatira and Taranaki Whānui ki te Upoko o te Ika a Maui in the development and assessment of options or combination of options that represent the Best Practicable Option to avoid, remedy or further mitigate the effects of the discharge. 5.3 Benefits of regionally significant infrastructure The RPS and PNRP include objectives and policies which recognise the benefits of use and development of resources generally, and infrastructure in particular. In relation to these objectives and policies it is relevant to note that the Western wastewater system is defined as regionally significant infrastructure in the Regional Policy Statement. The main outfall pipeline and its associated discharges are part of the wastewater system. 5.4 Water quality The common directions in the objectives and policies relating to water quality are: maintain water quality and enhance where it is degraded avoid significant adverse water quality effects on ecosystems and habitats safeguard life-supporting capacity maintain aquatic ecosystem health. It is considered that this application is consistent, or at least not contrary to these provisions. The main reason for this is that the cancellation of condition 24 will not increase the extent of intermittent discharges to the Karori Stream. Instead, these discharges will continue to be authorised under resource consents WGN [25228] and [25229]. When these consents expire in 2023 the discharges will be unlawful, unless GWRC grants consent to a replacement application. This scenario is unchanged by the cancellation of condition 24. As already noted, if condition 24 is cancelled, WWL will be able to undertake an assessment of a full range of options to address discharges to the Karori Stream and will have the opportunity to select the most appropriate option. With respect to the water quality effects arising from the intermittent leakage of treated wastewater from the pipeline, as set out in section 3, WWL is proposing an amendment to condition 27 that will require the MTRR to assess the effects of leakages from the outfall pipeline. This will ensure that all discharges to the Karori Stream are appropriately assessed and where necessary mitigation measures put in place. P a g e 14

18 5.5 Ecosystems and habitats with significant biodiversity values The common direction in the objectives and policies relating to habitats of significant value includes the requirement to protect, maintain and restore these areas. The Karori Stream is identified in the PNRP as a River with significant indigenous ecosystems (Schedule F1). These values arise due to the Stream containing habitat for six or more migratory indigenous fish species, and habitat for threatened or at risk fish species. The PNRP identifies that the following fish species have been recorded in the Stream (Migratory species are indicated in italics and the conservation status of At Risk and Nationally Vulnerable species are underlined and in bold, respectively): Banded kokopu black flounder brown mudfish common bully common smelt giant kokopu Inanga Koaro Lamprey longfin eel redfin bully shortfin eel shortjaw kokopu torrentfish upland bully Policy 41 of the PNRP directs that: In order to protect the ecosystems and habitats with significant indigenous biodiversity values identified in Policy P40, in the first instance activities, other than activities carried out in accordance with a restoration management plan, shall avoid these ecosystems and habitats. If the ecosystem or habitat cannot be avoided, the adverse effects of activities shall be managed by: a) Avoiding more than minor adverse effects, and b) Where more than minor adverse effects cannot be avoided, remedying them, and c) Where more than minor adverse effects cannot be remedied, mitigating them, and d) Where residual adverse effects remain it is appropriate to consider the use of biodiversity offsets. Proposals for mitigation and biodiversity offsets will be assessed against the principles listed in Schedule G (biodiversity offsetting). A precautionary approach shall be used when assessing the potential for adverse effects on ecosystems and habitats with significant indigenous biodiversity values. Where more than minor adverse effects on ecosystems and habitats with significant indigenous biodiversity values identified in Policy P40 cannot be avoided, remedied, mitigated or redressed through biodiversity offsets, the activity is inappropriate. The Karori Stream is a habitat with significant indigenous biodiversity values identified in Policy P40. The discharges to the Stream from the existing pipeline do not avoid this habitat. However, as outlined above, the cancellation of condition 24 will not lead to additional effects on the Stream. Rather, the discharges will continue to be authorised under resource consents WGN [25228] and [25229]. In addition, the proposed changes to condition 27 will ensure that mitigation measures are explored in response to leaks from the main outfall pipes. In addition a 2017 survey of habitat types and fish communities of the Karori Stream identifies that although the catchment has been extensively grazed and includes the urban area of Karori, the Stream maintains moderate instream habitat quality and continues to support a moderately diverse fish community. P a g e 15

19 6. Part 2 RMA Schedule 4, clause 2 to the RMA requires that an application assesses the proposed cancellation of condition 24 and changes to condition 27 against the matters set out in Part 2 of the RMA. Within Part 2, Section 5 outlines the Act s purpose. Section 6 sets out matters of national importance, section 7 outlines other matters and section 8 requires those exercising functions and powers under the RMA to take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. To meet the requirements of Schedule 4, the table below provides an assessment of the effects of cancelling condition 24 against the requirements of Part 2 of the RMA. Table 2: Part 2 Assessment Provision Assessment Section 5 In this Act, sustainable management means managing the use, development and protection of natural and physical resources in a way or at a rate that allows people and communities to provide for their social, economic and cultural wellbeing and for their health and safety, while The pipeline is an important physical resource. Recent investigations indicate that, with appropriate asset management, the pipeline has a serviceable lifespan well beyond the 2023 replacement date in condition 24. Condition 24 limits the continued use of this physical resource. It is considered appropriate that condition 24 be deleted and that an assessment of a full range of options be undertaken. Section 5(2)(a) Sustaining the potential of natural and physical resources (excluding minerals) to meet the reasonably foreseeable needs of future generations Cancellation of condition 24 will not prevent this goal from being achieved. Section 5(2)(b) Safeguarding the life-supporting capacity of air, water, soil, and ecosystems Cancellation of condition 24 will not jeopardise the lifesupporting capacity of air, water, soil and ecosystems. See section 3 for the assessment of environmental effects. Section 5(2)(c) Avoiding, remedying or mitigating any adverse effects of activities on the environment Cancellation of condition 24 will not lead to additional effects that need to be avoided, remedied or mitigated. Section 6(c), 7(d), 7 (f) The protection of areas of significant indigenous vegetation Cancellation of condition 24 will not be contrary to these directions. The Stream s habitat, ecosystem and environmental values will need to be fully considered and P a g e 16

20 Provision and significant habitats of indigenous fauna. Intrinsic values of ecosystems Maintenance and enhancement of the quality of the environment Assessment addressed as part of any proposal to replace the discharge consents, which will expire in WWL is proposing an amendment to condition 27 that will require the MTRR to assess the effects of leakages from the outfall pipeline. This will ensure that all discharges to the Karori Stream are appropriately assessed and where necessary mitigation measures are put in place. Section 6(e) and Section 7(a) The relationship of Maori and their culture and traditions with their ancestral lands, water, sites, waahi tapu, and other taonga. Kaitiakitanga In recognition of the directions in section 6(e) and 7 (a) WWL consulted with relevant iwi about the proposal to delete condition 24. Neither iwi raised concerns about the proposal to delete condition 24. WWL is proposing an amendment to condition 27 that requires the options assessment that is to be carried out as part of the MTRR to be undertaken in consultation with representatives of local Tangata Whenua and the CLG. Section 7 (b) The efficient use and development of natural and physical resources The recent pipeline condition assessment (see Appendix C) shows that the serviceable lifespan of the pipeline is well beyond 2023, the timeframe anticipated in condition 24. Deleting condition 24 would therefore enable a consideration of all options for replacing the existing Consent and associated consents so that the most efficient option can be selected. If appropriate, this may include options that seek to efficiently manage the asset for its full functional lifespan. Section 8 In achieving the purpose of this Act, all persons exercising functions and powers under it, in relation to managing the use, development, and protection of natural and physical resources, shall take into account the principles of the Treaty of Waitangi. In recognition of the Treaty principle of participation, WWL consulted with the relevant iwi about the proposal to delete condition 24. Neither iwi raised concerns about the proposal to delete condition 24. WWL is proposing an amendment to condition 27 that requires the options assessment that is to be carried out as part of the MTRR to be undertaken in consultation with representatives of local Tangata Whenua and the CLG. P a g e 17

21 7. Conclusion This application seeks the cancellation of condition 24 to the Consent, which is a Coastal Permit providing for the continuous discharge of secondary treated and UV disinfected wastewater from the WWTP to the CMA in the vicinity of the Karori Stream mouth, via an existing outfall. The application also seeks the consequential deletion of the advice notes which are on resource consents WGN [25228] and [25229]. It is considered that the cancellation of condition 24 will not change the environmental effects arising from the intermittent overflow discharges of treated wastewater to the Karori Stream. This is because these discharges are separately consented under WGN [25228] and [25229]. Both of these consents expire on 31 December WWL also seeks to change condition 27 so that the MTRR is required to assess the effects of leakages from the outfall pipeline. This will ensure that all discharges to the Karori Stream are appropriately assessed and where necessary mitigation measures put in place. The main adverse effect associated with the cancellation of condition 24 is the loss of certainty for parties that the existing pipeline will be replaced with a new pipeline by 31 December 2023 and that any discharge of treated wastewater to the Karori Stream will cease. However, as set out in section 4, the feedback from the consultation undertaken to date with iwi and stakeholders has in many instances been supportive of the proposal to cancel the condition. In addition, WWL seeks a change to condition 27 that requires the options assessment that is to be carried out as part of the MTRR to be undertaken in consultation with representatives of local Tangata Whenua and the CLG. This will ensure the ongoing involvement of both Ngāti Toa Rangatira and Taranaki Whānui ki te Upoko o te Ika a Maui and the CLG in the development and assessment of options or combination of options that represent the Best Practicable Option to avoid, remedy or further mitigate the effects of the discharge. The cancellation of condition 24 will result in a number of positive effects that include: a) The ability for WWL to undertake a comprehensive consideration of alternative methods to implement prior to the discharge consents expiring, based on the most up to date information and new technologies b) The utilisation of an existing asset that is sufficiently serviceable for the conveyance of wastewater for a period significantly longer than 2023, as contemplated in condition 24 c) The opportunity for WWL to adopt other more cost-effective methods and approaches to address the issues associated with discharges to the Karori Stream, thereby freeing resources for other works which may be of a high priority for the people and community of Wellington (e.g. water supply resilience projects). For the reason set out in sections 5 and 6 above cancellation of condition 24, and the proposed changes to condition 27, are considered to be consistent with relevant objectives and policies, and Part 2 of the RMA. In the preparation of the application WWL has consulted with iwi and relevant stakeholders, including landowners and the parties to the application for the existing Consent. Feedback from these groups has indicated that while there is strong interest in being involved in the planning of the WWTP, there is little concern about the immediate proposal to delete condition 24. WWL has undertaken to facilitate iwi and stakeholder involvement in the planning of the WWTP going forward and this commitment is reflected in the proposed amendments to condition 27. P a g e 18

22 For all of these reasons it is considered that the application to cancel condition 24 of the Consent (and consequentially delete the related advice notes on consents WGN [25228] and [25229]) and to change condition 27 should be granted. P a g e 19

23 List of Abbreviations AEE BOD CEP CLG CMA GWRC MMP MTRR NPS-FM PNRP RFP RPS WCC WWL WWTP Assessment of Environmental Effects Biochemical Oxygen Demand Communication and Engagement Plan Community Liaison Group Coastal Marine Area Greater Wellington Regional Council Management and Monitoring Plan Monitoring and Technology Review Report The National Policy Statement For Freshwater Management The Proposed Natural Resources Plan The Regional Freshwater Plan The Regional Policy Statement Wellington City Council Wellington Water Western Wastewater Treatment Plant P a g e 20

24 Appendix A: Application Form

25 Appendix B: Option Assessment Report

26 Appendix C: Pipeline Condition Assessment

27 Appendix D: Management and Monitoring Plan

28 Appendix E: Consultation Graphic