of the production station and the wellsites were undertaken on the same day and were found to
be in full compliance with the consent conditions. The production stormwater system was noted to be
managing the stormwater well in light of heavy rain the night before. No hydrocarbon sheens were
observed on the skimmer pits, and there was no smoke or odour from the pilot flare. The well sites were
observed to be tidy and in good order. Stormwater discharges were well managed at the time and there
three leachate 23
Table 3 Results of analysis of under liner drainage 23
Table 4 Chemical analysis of the Manganaha Stream 24
Table 5 Chemical analysis of the Puremu Stream, sampled on 7 September 2011 25
Table 6 Chemical analysis of the Puremu Stream, sampled on 16 March 2012 26
Table 7 Results of rain event monitoring samples taken on 16 May 2012 28
Table 8 Results of rain event monitoring samples taken on 21 June 2012 29
Table 9 Chemical analysis of Colson Rd
site was going to be scraped to remove proppant, and to also level out the site post drilling campaign.
Heavy rain earlier in the week had carried sediment into the ring drains and down to the wetland. Some of
the ring drains were visibly turbid, while others contained clear water as the sediment had been filtered
since the rain event. The bank separating the wetland from the site had undergone major works to stabilise
it and had been covered with coconut matting and hydroseed. The wetland had
14 of the Resource Management Act stipulates that no person may take, use,
dam or divert any water, unless the activity is expressly allowed for by a resource
consent or a rule in a regional plan, or it falls within some particular categories set
out in Section 14.
Approximate
site
boundary
Unnamed tributary
NNNN
page
7
As Taranaki Ventures Limited was unable to estimate the rate or volume of the take,
and as such, might exceed the limits of the
Revised Assessment of Environmental Effects (AEE) - June 2020
and suspended solids.
page
6
2 Results
2.1 Water
2.1.1 Inspections
07 December 2020
An inspection was undertaken to assess compliance with resource consent conditions. It was raining at the
time of the inspection. Four samples were obtained; one downstream (clear), one upstream (clear), one from
the storm water discharge pipe (turbid) and one form the head waters adjacent to the storm water
discharge pipe, at this location there was a visible sheen. The
elevated soil
moistures in the range of 44 and 45 %. Conversely, prior to January 8th 2015, Uruti received only 1
mm of rain in the previous eight days, with soil moistures at 32 %, this would have resulted in
minimal outflow ‘gaining’ from the Haehanga Stream to the groundwater table.
page
14745-1
Commercial in confidence
6 6/2015
Table 2.4:Stream and Groundwater Elevations (msl)
Date Bore Bore elevation Stream Elevation GW elevation Groundwater
station, but a large
puddle was present between the pump station and camp sites after heavy rain preceding. The flow book
was sighted and current. The trenches were not inspected due to high winds. The camp appeared to be
operating in compliance with its consent conditions at the time of inspection.
Inspection 2 – 10 January 2022
The camp was busy at the time of the inspection with lots of people on site and staying in the converted
containers. The baches were also busy with lots of groups
be worse than it was due to rain earlier. The site manager advised this
would be cleaned up.
4 May 2022
The site was busy with normal operations. Traffic was particularly busy within the scrap area and some swarf
was observed tracking to the drains. All drain screens were in place and appear to be regularly maintained
to prevent blocking. All hazardous chemicals were appropriately contained. Rainwater within bunding was at
a low level. Spill kits were in place throughout the site and