Under the AIE Regs to request any records related to a specific fish kill at the following location: 3km stretch of the river near Coats Bridge, downstream from Aughrim village, Wicklow
Please provide any records / correspondence between IFI and the following
1) Company involved in aquaculture called IDAS
2) Uisce Éireann
3) Wicklow CoCo
Notes:
https://www.farmersjournal.ie/news/news/some-2-000-fish-killed-in-wicklow-river-829279
Note: FAC DAFM meetings are effectively unminuted
Matters Discussed
The Chairperson concluded the meeting.
Ruth Kinehan
Secretary to FAC
Matters Discussed
The information / data contained in this file has been generated from the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) Water Abstraction Registration Database.
Summary: The register contains information on water abstractions of 25 cubic meters (25,000 litres) or more per day that have been registered with the EPA. Further information on the data is contained in the read me tab of this file.
EPA file with Easting / Northing co-ordinates converted to Lat / Long
Thanks to @conoro
http://www.agriland.ie/farming-news/seefa-urges-next-minister-to-address-forestry-licensing/
342 licences have been approved for the Native Area Tree Scheme (NTAS) relating to 369ha.
201 licences for the Deer Tree Shelter scheme (DTS) for 860ha
180 licences under the Woodland Improvement Scheme (WIS) relating to 1,001ha
10 licences for the Native Woodland Conservation Scheme covering 79ha
Re: AIE Request COSEC00473
Dear Sir/Madam,
I refer to your request under the European Communities (Access to Information on the Environment) Regulations 2007 to 2018 (S.I. No. 133 of 2007, S.I. No. 662 of 2011, S.I. 615 of 2014 and S.I. No. 309 of 2018) (hereafter referred to as the AIE Regulations), for access to the following records in relation to peat extraction on the Bord na Móna landbank for the timeframe 2023 – 2024 YTD.
For the purposes of this AIE please include records related to the following sites:
By email dated 22nd October 2024, you provided clarification that the request relates to third party extraction only, applies to sites regardless of authorisation or rights and applies to the named bogs.
Decision Maker
By acknowledgement letter dated 22nd October 2024, you were advised that Ms. Ciara O’Loughlin, Legal Services Manager, would be the officer handling your request. However, due to annual leave, I have now been appointed in her place to make a decision in respect of your request.
The following records were identified as coming within the scope of your request:
Schedule of Records
Decision
Record 1)
Firstly, as a preliminary point you should note that the only bogs of the five you specified in your request, upon which Bord na Móna is aware of peat extraction having taken place in 2023/2024 by third parties, are Derryounce Bog and Codd 2/Sheridan Bog. In such circumstances, only information in respect of these two bogs is within the scope of your request. However, neither Codd 2/Sheridan Bog nor the section of Derryounce Bog upon which such extraction apparently occurred are in the occupation or control of Bord na Móna plc. or any of its subsidiaries.
Record 1) is only partially within the scope of your request, with a considerable amount of information outside of scope. In respect of the information that is within scope with regard to Derryounce Bog and Codd 2/Sheridan Bog, exemptions under Article 8(a)(i) (adverse effect on the confidentiality of personal information relating to a natural person who has not consented to the disclosure of the information, and where that confidentiality is otherwise protected by law; Article 8(a)(iii)(adverse effect on the protection of the environment to which that information relates) and Article 9(1)(b)(adverse effect on the course of justice (including criminal inquiries and disciplinary inquiries)), are applicable.
Article 8(a)(i)
Record 1) contains the identities of third parties, which constitute personal information in accordance with GDPR/the Data Protection Act 2018. These individuals have not consented to the disclosure of their identities by Bord na Móna plc. and disclosure is likely to have an adverse effect on the confidentiality of such personal information.
Article 8(a)(iii)
Record 1) also contains confidential information regarding the investigations/actions Bord na Móna is taking on foot of apparent peat extraction in Derryounce and Codd 2/Sheridan Bogs. The record also contains maps which would enable the location of such alleged extraction activities to be identified.
Knowledge of Bord na Móna actions/investigations on foot of apparent peat extraction on these bogs, together with the specific location/(s) of such extraction activities, would be of interest to persons engaged in such activities and/or persons who may be contemplating engaging in such activities. Such knowledge could influence decisions by such persons as to whether or not to cease/ not engage in such activities or to persist/ commence same. In addition, knowledge of specific location/(s) on which peat extraction is apparently taking place could prompt persons seeking to engage in such activities to seek out such locations, with a view to themselves engaging in unauthorised peat extraction activities in the vicinity.
Any peat extraction on boglands, particularly if on an industrial level, has the potential to damage such lands possibly irreparably or to a degree that will require considerable remediation. Therefore, in such circumstances I believe the exemption in Article 8(a)(iii) is applicable – adverse effect on the protection of the environment to which the information relates.
Article 9(1)(b)
Unauthorised extraction of peat is the subject of current investigations by the EPA and could potentially be the subject of criminal prosecutions and/or civil injunctive proceedings in due course. Further, such unauthorised extraction may in the future be the subject of enforcement action brought by the relevant local authority/(ies).
Disclosure of the information contained within Record 1) may prejudice ongoing investigation/(s) into alleged unauthorised activities and in turn any future criminal prosecution and/or civil proceedings instituted and may hinder the detection and identification of persons engaged in such activities, by alerting such persons to information in the possession of Bord na Móna, which may assist such persons in evading detection. Therefore, I am of the view that disclosure of the information would adversely affect the course of justice in accordance with Article 9(1)(b).
Record 2)
I have decided that you should be granted access to Record 2) in full.
Public Interest
I have considered the public interest in accordance with Articles 10(3) and (4) of the AIE Regulations. The interests in favour of disclosure include the public interest in making environmental information publicly available, in facilitating members of the public in exercising their rights of access under the AIE Regulations and in enabling members of the public to be informed in respect of peat harvesting by third parties on bogs within the State.
However, the public interest in ensuring the right of access to environmental information is not unlimited and the AIE Directive and in turn the AIE Regulations, recognise that there are situations where environmental information should not be disclosed in the public interest. There is a public interest in the protection of personal information and in its disclosure only in accordance with the provisions of the Data Protection Act 2018/GDPR. Further, there is also a public interest in the safeguarding and protection of the environment. Where disclosure of information could potentially lead to an increase in and/or persistence of activities which may be unauthorised and/or unlawful and which have the potential to damage and harm that environment, the public interest against disclosure must outweigh that in favour. Additionally, there is a public interest in ensuring that investigations into apparent unauthorised and/or unlawful activities are not prejudiced or impeded by disclosure of information.
Weighing up the competing public interests, I am of the view that the public interest is best served by refusal of Record 1).
Right of Review
Under Article 11 of the AIE Regulations you have a right to request an internal review of this decision. An internal review involves a complete reconsideration of the matter by a member of the staff of Bord na Móna plc, unconnected with the original decision, of the same or higher rank than the original decision-maker, who may affirm, vary or annul the original decision.
If you wish to request an internal review, you can do so in writing to InformationOfficer@bnm.ie, referring to this decision and quoting the AIE reference number. This request must be made within one month of the date of receipt of this decision. The decision of an internal review will be communicated to you within one month of receipt of your request for an internal review.
You can contact InformationOfficer@bnm.ie if you require any assistance in relation to your request.
Yours sincerely,
John MacNamara
Internal review, appealed to OCEI 20/1/25
Nature Restoration Regulation (EU2024/1991) came into force in August 2024
The Regulation is the first continent-wide, comprehensive law of its kind, and sets binding targets to restore degraded ecosystems, in particular those with the most potential to capture and store carbon and to prevent and reduce the impact of natural disasters.
The National Parks & Wildlife Service (NPWS) have been appointed by Government to coordinate the development of a national Nature Restoration Plan (NRP) arising from the Regulation, to be submitted to the EU Commission by 1 September 2026.
Preliminary work is already underway and an Independent Advisory Committee has been established to advise on the developments and the contents of the NRP. The Committee will be supported by technical thematic working groups and a Stakeholder Participation Programme.
The programme will contain two key elements; a Leaders’ Forum and Community Conversations.
The Leaders’ Forum will be a cross-sectoral dialogue at the most senior level, to discuss the overall trajectory of the NRP and identify key risks and opportunities. It will see senior leadership of all stakeholder groups invited to participate in exchanges of views and progress briefings. The Leaders Forum will be convened in the Spring of 2025 and discussions from the forum will feed directly to the Independent Advisory Committee. Further follow-up Leaders’ Forums will be held throughout 2025.
The Community Conversations will be a locally-led, participatory engagement model that aims to inform and hear the views of groups and individuals around the country. This will provide opportunities at all levels for genuine exploration and dialogue and to create a country-wide conversation about what EU Nature Restoration Law (NRL) means for all citizens.
EPA OEA AIE 2024 17
This an initial AIE to scope the extent of ASSAP data held by EPA. For the purposes of the AIE, please restrict to 2024 for Waterford, Wexford and Wicklow. RTK would request that EPA release all ASSAP records via EPA website, LEAP Online or similar.
The EPA will be completing its WFD Characterisation process in 2025; this process will include assessing all the relevant records on the WFD App after WFD Status is updated, which will likely take place in Q2 2025.
WFD Status will be based on an assessment of 2022, 2023 and 2024 monitoring data. As part of our WFD Characterisation process, we will consider the most appropriate form and manner for releasing additional information into the public domain as these materials are completed and assessed.
Record B – part-refusal
The part-refusal is related to one line in Document B that relates to the geographic position of a drinking water abstraction. The location of any drinking water abstraction being released into the public domain is not in the public interest and the threat to public security and our obligations under EU Directive 2016/1148 outweigh the public interest in favour of release. There is a publicly available water abstractions register available on the EPA website; see
Update, provided outside AIE
Above are completed ASSAP referrals (i.e. where a report is available) within those specific counties.
Looking at referrals nationally, that have been made by LAWPRO to ASSAP, these are the current figures:
Please note:
AIE: Information related to any instructions / guidance / clarification given to administrative staff and Agriculture Appeals Officers working on behalf of the FAC, on the acceptance / refusal of appeals against forestry licences. This includes general information and information specific to individual licences…”
Background
The FAC has provided no detailed or specific reasoning for its reliance on article 9(2)(a) of the AIE Regulations. Despite estimating that examining 555 appeal files in order to extract the information sought by the appellant would take four months, the FAC did not explain how it reached this conclusion or why this would impose an unreasonable level of work on the FAC in processing the request. As set out above, the burden in on the public authority to demonstrate the unreasonableness of the task entailed by the request, and this requires the public authority to provide a satisfactory level of detail regarding the time it would take to process the request. This detail should include how many staff members would be required, what steps would be involved in answering the request and how much time would be spent on each
of these tasks.
I find it difficult to understand how the appellant could have successfully narrowed the actual subject matter or description of the environmental information further, without any specific guidance from the FAC.
The FAC has not indicated whether it has written procedures in place for the processing of submitted forestry licence appeals
I note in its brief submissions to this Office, wherein the FAC commented that “much of [the information sought by the appellant] may not even be environmental information”. It did not provide any reasons to support this view and in this regard, I would remind the FAC that whether information is “environmental information” is one of the threshold issues to be considered when processing an AIE request.
Note: Paragraphs 22, 25 and 29 in OCEI decision
AIE Request 24 794
1) All requests made to traders and information received under Article 5 of the Regulations.
2) Details of any “Monitoring Organisations” operating in Ireland
3) Notifications received under Article 8 (1)(c)
4) Information on checks carried at regular intervals under Article 8 (4) to verify that the monitoring organisations operating within the competent authorities’ jurisdiction continue to fulfil the functions laid down in paragraph 1 and comply with the requirements laid down in paragraph 2.
5) Information on checks carried out (Article 8 (4)) where DAFM is in possession of relevant information, including substantiated concerns from third parties or when it has detected shortcomings in the implementation by operators of the due diligence system established by a monitoring organisation.
6) A report of any checks in 4 & 5 which have been made available in accordance with Directive 2003/4/EC.
7) Checks to verify if operators comply with the requirements set out in Articles 4 and 6 (see Article 10). This to include copies of the periodically reviewed plans and any related risk- based assessment.
8) Any notices of remedial actions to be taken by the operator issued under Article 10 (5); including any immediate interim measures undertaken.
9) Records of the checks referred to in Article 10(1), indicating in particular their nature and results, as well as of any notice of remedial actions issued under Article 10(5).
Response
Q1. Article 5 of the EU Timber Regulation 995/10 places certain obligations on traders of relevant wood products set out in the Annex of this same regulation. Furthermore, Article 11 of EUTR 995/10 requires Member State Competent Authorities to keep and maintain a record of checks conducted. Article 20 of EUTR 995/10 requires Member States to submit an annual DECLARE report to the European Commission and to make this report publicly available via the department website.
Q2. No monitoring organisations are headquartered in Ireland. A list of approved monitoring organisations is maintained by the European Commission
Q3. 0
Q4. 0
Q5. 0
Q6. 0
Q7. Publicly accessible (gov.ie – EU Timber Regulation (EUTR) & Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT))
Q8. Publicly accessible (gov.ie – EU Timber Regulation (EUTR) & Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT))
Q9. Publicly accessible (gov.ie – EU Timber Regulation (EUTR) & Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade (FLEGT) also for your convenience please see the attached document relating to this request mentioned above.
