Inspections 16
2.2.2 Discharge monitoring 17
2.2.2.1 Effluent volume 17
2.2.2.2 Nitrogen application rates 17
2.2.3 Soil and herbage monitoring 18
2.2.3.1 Spring 2022 soil and herbage survey 19
2.2.3.2 Autumn 2022 deep soil leaching profiles 19
2.2.4 Groundwater monitoring 19
2.2.4.1 Electromagnetic induction survey 19
2.2.4.2 Groundwater monitoring in relation to effluent irrigation 20
2.2.4.3 Groundwater monitoring in relation to the FECB ammonia plume 22
development of the
region’s resources.
Evaluation of environmental performance
Besides discussing the various details of the performance and 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
programmes, while for another 96 (10%) of the consents a good level of environmental
performance and compliance was 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
(<1%) achieved a rating of poor.
In terms of overall environmental and compliance performance by the consent holder over the last several
years, the consent holder’s performance remains at a high level.
This report includes recommendations for the 2023-2024 year.
page
page
i
Table of contents
Page
1 Introduction 1
1.1 Compliance monitoring programme reports and the Resource Management Act 1991 1
1.1.1 Introduction 1
1.1.2 Structure of
achieve a high level of environmental
performance and compliance for 878 (87%) of a total of 1007 consents monitored through the Taranaki
tailored monitoring programmes, while for another 96 (10%) of the consents a good level of environmental
performance and compliance was 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
applications relating to the continued operation and
maintenance of the Mangorei HEPS.
Is a structure on, under, or over a river bed required? No
What is the maximum rate of taking proposed
(litres/second)?
10000
What is the maximum rate of taking proposed (cubic metres
per day)?
864000
What is the maximum volume proposed to be taken in a 7-
day period (m3)?
6048000
Please indicate below how your taking will vary through a typical year
Maximum or near to
their resilience too, and as a
region, we’ll continue to rise to the challenge.
page
4
The bottom line
The changing environment has impacted our budget with spending now forecast to be $46.8m (compared with
$45.2m signalled in the 2021/2031 Long-Term Plan). As a result, general rates will move from the proposed 5.5%
to 7.9% for 2022/2023, which for most ratepayers will be less than $20 per annum extra. Targeted rates remain
consistent with those
administrative compliance
Besides discussing the various details of the performance and 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 2020-2021 year, consent
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 compliance for 88% of the
maintenance of the Motukawa HEPS.
Is a structure on, under, or over a river bed required? No
What is the maximum rate of taking proposed
(litres/second)?
8000
What is the maximum rate of taking proposed (cubic
metres per day)?
345600
What is the maximum volume proposed to be taken in a
7-day period (m3)?
2419200
Please indicate below how your taking will vary through a typical year
Maximum or near to maximum: Jul
May
Jun
Less than