Figure 1 Configuration of the HWWTP (adapted from NIWA 2012) 5
Figure 2 Compliance of DO concentration (g/m3) with consent conditions in the
primary and secondary oxidation ponds 2015-2016 13
Figure 3 Faecal coliform numbers in the HWWTP effluent, 1992 to 2016 16
Figure 4 Daily discharge volumes (m3/day) from the HWWTP and daily rainfall
data (mm) from a Council rainfall station approximately 5 km east of the
site, 1 July 2015 to 30 June 2016. Inset: Rainfall and outflow data from
Summary of performance for consent 7520-1 24
Table 12 Evaluation of environmental performance over time 25
List of figures
Figure 1 Configuration of the HWWTP (adapted from NIWA, 2012) 4
Figure 2 Daily hours where DO is greater than 0 g/m3 in Pond 1 and 2 8
Figure 3 Daily discharge volumes (m3/day) from the HWWTP and daily rainfall data (mm) from a
Council rainfall station located approximately 5 km east of the site (2018-2019) 13
Figure 4 Location of intertidal survey
created no noticeable visual effects in the
receiving environment. The site was deemed compliant at the time of inspection.
11 December 2023
The inspection occurred during fine weather; there had been heavy rainfall during the previous day. Upon
arrival, the site gates were shut and locked. There was no change to the site since the last inspection as no
new material had been discharged. The swale contained water which was not discharging to the tributary.
No dust or odour issues were noted
irrigation was high. Most irrigation had
commenced by the middle of December.
Over the five month summer irrigation period, Mount Taranaki recorded between 69% and
88% of normal rainfall which meant that rivers were running well below mean flows for the
entire period. The low stream flows necessitated close and frequent monitoring by the Council
to ensure ecological flows were maintained in those waterways being used to supply water for
irrigation. During the period under review compliance with
the frequency of sample collection earlier in the period. Sampling commenced in
early November 2010 with three of the sampling surveys performed prior to January
2011. The majority of the surveys were performed over the latter half of the summer
period. Bathing water samples were normally taken between the hours of 0900 and
1800 hours (NZDST) with none collected within a three day period following
significant river fresh conditions. [NB: regional differences in rainfall patterns have
caused
the
second inspection there had been 16.5mm of rainfall at the Waiwhakaiho meteorological station. The
pond was full and flowing slowly to the vegetated swale. The flow into the farm drain was a trickle and
could not be sampled.
The consent also imposes contaminant limits on water quality of the farm drain beyond a mixing zone
of approximately 7m. During each inspection there was no water flow in the farm drain. The second
inspection noted a few puddles in the drain. The drain is well
infiltration expenditure during the 2021-2022 monitoring year consisted of:
• $3,325 spent on pipeline renewals
• $891 spent on CCTV.
The expenditure for pipeline renewals was entirely on project management, investigation and design. No
construction occurred.
A wastewater network modelling project is underway which uses rainfall and flow data to create a calibrated
digital model of the entire Inglewood wastewater network. The calibrated model will be used to assess
network performance
Council meeting agenda November 2019
incorporating
odour surveys and four surface water samples collected for physicochemical analysis.
The water samples from the unnamed tributary of the Waiongana Stream indicated that the Company were
in compliance with consent defined conditions on the four occasions they were collected. It is noted that the
stormwater facility discharge to surface water, only occurs during significant rainfall events.
The Company continues to be proactive in their response to objectionable odour
d) Construction timetable for the erosion and sediment control works and the bulk earthworks
proposed;
e) Maintenance, monitoring and reporting procedures;
f) Rainfall response and contingency measures including procedures to minimise adverse effects in
the event of extreme rainfall events and/or the failure of any key erosion and sediment control
structures;
g) Procedures and timing for review and/or amendment to the erosion and sediment control
measures listed in the ESCP; and,