Waterways Ireland: Appropriate Assessment Screening Determinations

Dear AIE Officer

Request under the AIE Regulations for an electronic copy of the following documentation

1) Any communication related to the decision not to conduct environmental assessment related to bank vegetation removal for the following four projects

2) Any communication with OPW related to project funding / resources for the (4) projects

https://www.waterwaysireland.org/Pages/Appropriate-Assessment-Screening-Determinations.aspx

AIE (28/2/22)

EPA System for Tracking KPIs for the River Basin Management Plan

Request under the AIE Regulations for an electronic copy of the following documentation outlining the mechanism to track KPIs for the RBMP

On pg 34 of the report entitled “REVIEW OF THE LOCAL AUTHORITY WATERS PROGRAMME” the author Dr Matt Crowe notes:

In 2019, the EPA commenced developing a system for tracking the main KPIs for the River Basin Management plan and this would have included a mechanism for tracking progress with the two PAA targets mentioned above so it is possible that a mechanism and information exists within the overall State system but it does not appear to be publicly accessible.

Dr Crowe’s report was published in Jan 2021

A key commitment in the Programme for Government, is launching a new strengthened River Basin Management Plan to help Ireland protect, improve and sustainably manage our water environment to 2027.

A public mechanism to track KPIs underpins the RBMP

Under the current RBMP there are no public KPIs for LAWPRO, ASSAP, the related regional/national committees, the water related roles within local authorities, or the implementation bodies

AIE (25/3/22)

Blue Dots Programme: Steering Committee


The protection of high-status water bodies is one of the main priorities of the current River Basin Management Plan.

The Plan sets out several actions to protect and improve high status waters including the establishment of a blue dot catchment programme.

A coordinator for the programme has been appointed by LAWPRO and a steering committee established, chaired by Kerry County Council.

Blue Dot National Steering Group had its inaugural meeting in January 2019.

Chairman: John Breen, Director of Services for Water, Environment, Fire and Library Services, Kerry County Council

Members unknown but representatives from:

Blue Dot Working Group
Local Authority Waters Programme
Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government
Kerry County Council
Wicklow County Council
Donegal County Council
Mayo County Council
Coillte
Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine – Agriculture & Forest Service
Environmental Protection Agency
Irish Water
National Parks and Wildlife Service
Office of Public Works

The Steering Group met three times between January and May 2019.

Work programme drafted and presented for review to the Steering Group and other bodies for feedback in 2019.

Adopted the work programme in September 2019

“Visioning” workshop was held on 5th March 2020

LAWPRO have also formed an internal Blue Dot working group to support the role of the Blue Dot Scientist and develop guidance on local catchment assessments in high status objective water bodies.

AIE:

Dear AIE Officer

The Blue Dot Catchments Programme aims to protect and restore high status waters in Ireland

Request under the AIE Regulations for an electronic copy of the following documentation

1) List of members of the Blue Dots Programme Steering Committee (Chaired by John Breen, Kerry CoCo)

2) Agendas/minutes of the meetings of the Blue Dot steering committee for 2021-2022

3) Work programme as adopted for 2021-22

Note

This AIE has been cc’d to Kerry CoCo and Tipperary CoCo as unclear which authority is the appropriate authority for managing the Blue Dot programme

Blue Dot Steering Group Minutes

Update on Red Dot+ Programme presented by EPA

Proposed Red Dot approach is to identify where there are issues, notify the relevant ROCs, and then investigate and address the issues
• 8 site notifications in 2020: 2 red dot sites (Ara and Sruhanagarve), 3 toxic impact sites (all on the Dawros river), 1 fish kill site (Nore) and 2 sites that declined by two status classes (Carhoo and Camlin).
• End of 2016-2018, there were seven red dot sites. All have improved but remain unsatisfactory (6 poor and 1 moderate).
• The 2 new Red Dot sites in 2019 improved to Poor in 2020.
• 2 new Red Dot sites in 2020

Forest Service: planning to join a field assessment following a Red Dot notification in Longford in an area with forestry.

RED DOT + Notifications 2020 update
Dr Catherine Bradley, Ecological Monitoring & Assessment Unit, Environmental Protection Agency

Blue Dot Communications and Engagement Plan

Incorporating Blue Dot into Community & RBMP operational work

Presentation: Wild Western Peatlands (Coillte)

Shortlisted Sites
01 Glentornan Co. Donegal
02 Glennamong, Co. Mayo
03 Derryclare, Co. Galway
04 Cappaghoosh, Co. Galway
05 Derrynafulla, Co. Cork

Blue Dot Forestry

Ken Bucke, Forestry Inspector, DAFM

11% of total land area, aiming for 18% by 2046

Almost half of forests (49.2%) in private ownership (21,000 owners, 85% of which are farmers)

Export-oriented forest products sector, with over 80% of wood-based panels being exported

Coillte is the major forest owner in Blue Dot catchments

Waters of Life -IP
Blue Dot Steering Committee Meeting 3rd Dec 2021

Blue Dot Scientist’s Updates (Dec 2021)

64 Blue Dots across 45 PAA
– 13 returned to high Ecological Status 13-18
– 4 returned to High Biological Status, failing for Hymo (1 lake also for total phosphorous)
• LCA complete in 34 waterbodies
Referrals
• 18 Blue Dots have ASSAP referrals
• 6 Blue Dots have referrals for other bodies on the app
• ~ 10 Protect referrals for Forestry

Pressures
– Close to even split between the three main pressures, Hymo, Ag and Forestry

Maximising the potential of the LEADER for Blue dot catchment management

Bord na Mona excision policy (land acquisitions and disposals) 2018 – 2022

Under the AIE Regulations for an electronic copy of the following

Bord na Mona excision policy (land acquisitions and disposals (including excision of lands from the certified estate))

List of land acquisitions and disposals for 2018 to 2022

Please provide the data in a format similar to https://www.coillte.ie/land/

Sale Ref
Townland
County
BAU
Area Ha
Reason for Excision

AIE Request: 25/3/22

REVIEW OF THE LOCAL AUTHORITY WATERS PROGRAMME (LAWPRO)

Dr. Matt Crowe
January, 2021

This review is presented in two parts.

Part 1 presents an assessment of the overall strategic landscape within which LAWPRO sits, together with some implications for the future direction of LAWPRO.

Part 2 presents the assessment of LAWPRO drawing on some of the key learnings from the strategic review set out in Part 1.

The main objectives of the assessment were:

  1. Assess the role and contribution of LAWPRO to the current level of progress in implementing the actions outlined in the second-cycle River Basin Management Plan (RBMP).
  2. Complete a full review of the LAWPRO operation, building on work already completed, to consider its effectiveness in delivering on its objectives and to identify opportunities for improving and strengthening its operation during the next RBMP, taking into account the ambition of the third RBMP.
  3. Examine the opportunities for integrating and delivering on water policy, Climate Change, Biodiversity and broader economic, social and environmental sustainability objectives and identify the role that LAWPRO might play in achieving this during the third RBMP cycle.
    The review is based on an assessment of the documents provided by The Department for Housing, Local Government and Heritage (DHLGH), in particular, the external review of LAWPRO, LAWPRO’s submission to the DHLGH, the research conducted by the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), the business cases for both the Local Authority Waters and Communities Office (LAWCO) and the Local Authority Support and Advice Team (LAWSAT), the 2018 and 2019 Annual Reports for LAWPRO, the Agricultural Sustainability Support and Advisory Programme (ASSAP) internal report, Significant Water management Issues consultation submissions and the current river basin management plan.

Notes

“the 3rd cycle plan must explicitly deal with any exemptions being applied in accordance with the provisions of the Directive, including where natural conditions are being invoked as a reason for aiming for less stringent objectives”

clarity about the respective roles of LAWPRO and local authorities

“if the 3rd cycle plan makes it explicit through prioritisation and goal setting that protecting and improving waters are of equal importance, then LAWPRO should have a lead role in both strategies. Currently, LAWPRO’s primary focus is on the Priority Areas for Action (PAA) which are mainly about seeking improvement in water quality. This is fine for the remainder of the second cycle but will not be enough for the 3rd cycle which will require clear and fully integrated catchment strategies for protecting and improving all water bodies.

“more emphasis should be placed by both LAWPRO and ASSAP on how the various steps in the process translate into the ‘right action in the right place at the right time’ actually happening, how it is verified and recorded that it has happened and the subsequent impact on water quality. This will be the real acid test of how the entire LAWPRO/ASSAP process is working

“Progressing the blue dots catchment programme objective has been very slow”

Set “clear and straightforward objectives” for LAWPRO – “These high level KPIs will need to include both quantitative and qualitative indicators”

“LAWPRO’s role in converting advice into action is also worth considering as there have to be consequences for either Implementing Bodies or land owners not taking action once the ‘right action in the right place at the right time and by the right person or organisation’ has been identified and agreed”

“Ideally, local authority staff would also engage on a regular basis with local agricultural advisors when it comes to engaging with local farmers so that a level of consistency is brought to providing farmers with advice about what to do”

The five regional operational committees have broad representation from the various implementation bodies and are perfectly positioned to facilitate a ratcheting up of collaborative implementation at catchment and sub-catchment levels

“It is difficult to nail down in precise terms the ‘stated objectives’ of LAWPRO” – Clarify the precise objectives set for LAWPRO for the third cycle. They will not necessarily be the same as for the second cycle. Without clear and straightforward objectives, it is difficult to track progress and to evaluate relative success over time.

LAWPRO currently use indicators to track meeting numbers and levels of participation. These provide evidence of ‘showing up’ but say little about the quality of participation, buy-in and engagement or how people feel about the engagement.

Under the current arrangements, neither LAWPRO or ASSAP can force the problem owner, be they another public body, a body corporate or a private citizen, to take the right action in the right place at the right time but are relying on the goodwill and cooperation of the problem owner to take the necessary action.

A key ‘de-minimus’ purpose for the blue dots catchment programme was to coordinate activities across all Implementing Bodies to ensure that actions were undertaken at these 141 water bodies to maximise the chances of their meeting their high-status objective. Ideally, the programme would also maintain a watching brief of the 243 water bodies deemed not at risk to ensure they remained so and did not deteriorate in quality

Growing need for up to date information about both water quality and the actions being taken (the right action in the right place) so that as dynamic and up to date a system of information as possible is available for both practitioners and the public

The key outcome is ‘an improvement in water quality in the priority areas for action (PAAs)’.

Note: author unable to locate EPA KPI mechanism, first created in 2019

Urban Waste Water Agglomerations Impacting on Freshwater Pearl Mussel

This shows all urban areas where improvements to waste water discharges are required to protect freshwater pearl mussel.

The standards set in each EPA waste water discharge licence have been set to achieve the requirements of the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive and the Water Framework Directive, including the requirement to protect freshwater pearl mussel.

This data set shows all waste water treatment plants in agglomerations (towns/cities) where improvements are required to protect freshwater pearl mussel.

https://gis.epa.ie/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/8af256f3-0f92-4d6f-9828-f93042f873a2

Note:

Formats provided do not obviously display the list of sites, needs checking

eg Kanturk Wastewater Treatment Plant

Does not include private/commercial waste waste treatment sites impacting on FPM

AIE: Licensed Peat extraction installation boundary

Under the AIE Regs to request the following GIS data

Licensed Peat extraction installation boundary

This dataset demonstrates the location name and area of bogs licensed for the extraction of peat by Bord na Mona under nine separate licences.

https://gis.epa.ie/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/c5625402-64d0-4275-ade9-b2d0fd53b366

Resource identifier AM.IE.EPA.BORDNAMONA_BOGBOUNDARIES

AIE Request: 24/3/22

AIE: OEE Waste Crime Project Sites

Under the AIE Regs to request the following dataset

OEE Waste Crime Project Sites

Resource identifier is AM.IE.EPA.WST_IllegalWasteSites

This is a points dataset of locations logged in Excel by Local Authorities in the OEE waste crime project.

The Excel, held by OEE, has all the locations logged by LA’s.

https://gis.epa.ie/geonetwork/srv/eng/catalog.search#/metadata/7ab670d0-ca1a-4660-aa94-927834ade700

Please provide the data in

a) the format as logged in Excel, to include the illegal waste site locations and attributes including size, waste type etc (where available), and

b) in the GIS format created by the EPA based on the excel files (GIS layer is just the locations that could be mapped with confidence, so obviously may differ from the Excel documents)

EPA notes on the file:

Legal constraints / Use constraints Restricted Other constraints

The EPA must be notified if any errors or emissions are found. This data is for internal use only. It must not be shared on public websites, and it must not be distributed as open data.


AIE Request 24/3/22

AIE: Site locations of domestic waste water inspections

Under the AIE Regs to request the following dataset of geographic locations of national septic tank inspections

As per EPA website

https://gis.epa.ie/geonetwork/srv/api/records/8a5209fe-554e-4f09-952c-2e596f813292

The following link (as above) is a dataset that “represents the site locations of Domestic Waste Water Treatment Systems where inspections have been carried out under the National Inspection Plan.

These locations have been captured by Local Authority Inspectors as part of the process of logging inspection details within the Domestic Waste Water Application

The dataset is used by EPA to create various pdf reports but the actual GIS data does not appear to be in the public domain

Statement on the dataset suggests that the locations in this dataset are captured using an integrated map part within the Domestic Waste Water Application whereby the Inspector selects the location on the map. Alternatively, the Inspector can enter the coordinates manually at which point the application then displays the location on the map for verification.

Please provide the data in the GIS format as collected

Note this is not a request for the inspection plans themselves, the annual reports or a breakout by Local Authority areas. It is a request for the mapping data of the inspections

If the dataset includes additional non-confidential fields along with the inspection locations (like the date of the inspection) please include in the file

AIE Request, (24/3/22)