Executive, Audit and Risk Committee Minutes 28
5. June 2021 Meeting Dates 32
6. Draft Submission on "Phasing Out Fossil Fuels in Process Heat" Consultation Paper 33
7. Adoption of the 2021/2031 Long-Term Plan 51
8. Setting of Rates 2021/2022 246
9. Representation Review: Timetable and Process 253
10. Public Excluded 256
11. Public Excluded Consents and Regulatory Minutes 257
12. Public Excluded Executive, Audit and Risk Committee Minutes 260
Ordinary Meeting - Agenda
2
Manganui River residual flow 13
Table 3 Details of consents and special conditions in relation to abstraction rates, discharge rates and
water levels and the recording 14
Table 4 Summary of summer Manganui River daily water temperatures (°C) prior to the increase in
residual flow to 400 L/s (1992-2002) and for the years since, upstream and downstream of the
Motukawa HEP weir 16
Table 5 Summary of maximum daily water temperatures in the Manganui River, upstream and
downstream of the
extent of compliance by the consent holders,
this report also assigns a rating as to each Company’s environmental and administrative performance during
the period under review. The rating categories are high, good, improvement required and poor for both
environmental and administrative performance. The interpretations for these ratings are found in
Appendix II.
For reference, in the 2021-2022 year, consent holders were found to achieve a high level of environmental
performance and
under consent conditions and this showed that daily
volume limits and instantaneous abstraction rates were complied with for the majority of the monitoring
period. Self-monitoring of the Inglewood discharge showed that the discharge generally complied with
consent conditions.
During the year, NPDC demonstrated a high level of environmental and administrative performance with the
resource consents.
For reference, in the 2020-2021 year, consent holders were found to achieve a high level
Policy & Planning Committee agenda February 2022
achieved. A further 27 (3%) of consents monitored required improvement
in their performance, while the remaining one (<1%) achieved a rating of poor.
In terms of overall environmental and compliance performance by the consent holder over the last several
years, this report shows that the consent holder’s performance remains at a high level.
This report includes recommendations for the 2023-2024 year.
page
i
Table of contents
Page
1 Introduction 1
Compliance
and dust and loss of amenity value of air
d) Imposition of limits on or relating to discharge or ambient
concentrations of contaminants, or on or relating to mass discharge
rates
e) Best practicable option to prevent or minimise any adverse effects on
the environment
f) Any matter contained in Appendix V
g) Review of the conditions of consent and the timing and purpose of
the review
2.2 Appendix V of the RAQP is titled “Good management practices for
is also measurable nitrate recorded. The fire pond discharges into the Inaha Stream
year round, irrespective of the flow conditions in the Inaha Stream.
The dilution rate of the wastewater discharge to the Inaha Stream was compliant for the duration of the
discharge. The analysis of the oxygen and the sodium absorption ratio of the wastewater were compliant
when assessed.
The application of wastewater and fertiliser to land was limited to below 250 kg N/ha across all irrigation
extent of compliance by the consent holders,
this report also assigns a rating as to each Company’s environmental and administrative performance during
the period under review. The rating categories are high, good, improvement required and poor for both
environmental and administrative performance. The interpretations for these ratings are found in
Appendix II.
For reference, in the 2021-2022 year, consent holders were found to achieve a high level of environmental
performance and
environmental and administrative performance
Besides discussing the various details of the performance and extent of compliance by STDC, this report also
assigns them a rating for their environmental and administrative performance during the period under
review.
Environmental performance is concerned with actual or likely effects on the receiving environment from the
activities during the monitoring year. Administrative performance is concerned with the STDC’s approach to
demonstrating consent