Environmental Performance Committee 12 March 2014

1. Environmental Performance Committee12 March 2014

2. Apologies

3. Confirmation of Agenda • THAT the agenda of the Environmental Performance Committee of 12 March 2014 as circulated be confirmed as the business for the meeting.

4. Disclosures of Interest

5. Resolution to Exclude the Public • Recommended that in accordance with the provisions of Standing Orders NZS 9202:2003 Incorporating Amendment No 1, Appendix A&B (p40/42) and Section 48 of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, the public be excluded from the following part/s of the meeting.

6. Consent, Incident Response and Enforcement Statistics

7. Recommendation • That the report “Consent, Incident Response and Enforcement Statistics” (Doc # 2964693 dated 24 February 2014) be received for information.

8. Background to Water Allocation in the Waikato RegionEdmund Brown

9. Issues pre V6 50% of NZ’s peak electricity produced in Waikato – direct line to Auckland. Conflict between demand for irrigation and hydro and little guidance for decision makers Auckland's future water source. Some town supplies have been at risk of losing their allocation on the first in first served basis Importance for dairying and horticulture Many of the shed wash and stock water takes have not been properly managed and consented where necessary

10. Issues pre V6 con’t Many catchments reaching allocation limits but little guidance on how consents should be processed No water shortage provisions Limited criteria on water use efficiency No ability to prioritise applications for the same resource Poor understanding of water use due to limited recording of meter readings No accounting of net-take No government guidance, NPS, NES etc

11. V6 development process Discussion document to the public 2004 V6 Notified 20 October 2006 Council Hearings Committee Decision released November 2008 – In use since this time 37 appeals to Environment Court 9 weeks hearing time - February to August 2011 Environment Court’s decision released 30 Nov 2011 No High Court appeals – Operative 10 April 2012

12. National Guidance • NPS – Freshwater Management • Safeguard life supporting capacity • Avoid & phase out over allocation • Improve & maximise efficiency of allocation & use of water • NZ Energy Strategy • 90% NZ’s electricity generated from renewable sources by 2025 • NPS – Renewable Electricity Generation

13. National Guidance cont’d • Vision and Strategy for the Waikato River • Establishes co-management of Waikato River (whole catchment) • Addresses health and wellbeing of river • Primary direction setting document for the River and its catchment • Unique to this Region (at this stage) • Water measuring and reporting regulations • Hauraki Gulf Marine Park Act • Applies to Waihou, Piako and Coromandel Catchments

14. V6 Objectives - Operative • Giving effect to the Vision and Strategy to restore and protect the health and wellbeing of the Waikato River • Availability of water for reasonably justified domestic or municipal supply • The efficient allocation and use of water • Protection of water used for the generation of electricity from renewable energy resources • Protection of Huntly Power Station • Importance of existing takes to social and economic wellbeing

15. V6 Objectives cont’d • Sufficient water is retained to safeguard the life supporting capacity of the water bodies • Allocation decisions need to avoid further degradation of water quality • Sets allocation limits and minimum flows • Protects aquatic life while providing for human use • Some protection of existing users, e.g. electricity generation, agriculture, domestic, industrial takes • Provides for transfer of water permits • Rules for the use of water – including efficiency

16. Surface Water Allocation Limits • limits set for every catchment in one table in V6 • Primary allocable flow – high reliability • Secondary allocable flow – lower reliability • Default allocations applied where no specifically assessed primary allocable flow set • Allows allocation without investigating in stream needs • Range of statistics used by different councils – WRC uses Q5 • Information on flows available on Council’s website • Level of cumulative allocation triggers different consent status

17. SW allocation regime

18. Amount of the Primary Allocable Flow allocated

19. Freshwater Use In The WaikatoChanging with time

20. Irrigation demand

21. Management Tools: Surface Water Take Council Process Consent Process Council process for setting minimum and allocable flows Consent Application Assessment Criteria Condition for consents Determination of activity status for consents - dependent on allocation level Policy 1: Establish Allocable and Minimum flows for Surface Water Policy 2: Determining the Level of Minimum Flows, Primary, Secondary and Water Harvesting Allocable Flows Water harvesting when flow exceeds median flow Policy 3: Determining the Combined Level of Surface Water Allocation Within a Catchment Policy 11: Consent Application Assessment Criteria – Surface water Policy 13 : Non-complying Activities within the Waikato River Catchment above Huntly and Karapiro. Policy 14: Non-complying Activities outside Waikato River Catchment and below Huntly with the Waikato River Catchment Policy 15: Consent Duration for the Taking of Water Policy 16: Water Take Recording and Reporting Policy 17: Water Shortage Conditions Policy 18: Levels of Priority to Apply During Water Shortages Policy 21: Shared Use and Management of Water Policy 20: Surface Water Harvesting Policy 7: How surface takes will be Classified in catchments above Table 3-5 limits Policy 8: How surface takes will be Classified in catchments within Table 3-5 limits Policy 9: How Surface Water Takes will be Classified – Takes for Domestic and Municipal Increasing flow Secondary Allocable flow 0-30% Q5 Combination cannot exceed 30% of Q5 Primary Allocable flow 0-30% Q5 Minimum Flow % Q5 Limits as listed in Table 3-5 Policy 19: Phasing out Exceedences of the Table 3-5 Allocable Flows

22. Management Tools: Groundwater Take Council Process Consent Process Consent Application Assessment Criteria Condition for consents Determination of activity status for consents - dependent on allocation level Council process for setting Management Level and Sustainable Yields Policy 4: Establish Sustainable Yields from Groundwater Policy 5: Determining Sustainable Yields Policy 10: How Groundwater Takes will be Classified Policy 12: Consent Application Assessment Criteria – Groundwater Policy 15: Consent Duration for the Taking of Water Policy 16: Water Take Recording and Reporting Policy 17: Water Shortage Conditions Policy 18: Levels of Priority to Apply During Water Shortages Policy 21: Shared Use and Management of Water

23. Implementation • Ensure only the water needed is allocated –irrigation demand guidelines / metering • Develop water shortage restriction mechanisms – review of hydrology network • Assess Council’s role in managing transfers • Set and review flow limits for surface waters • Set initial sustainable yields for aquifers

24. Tools: Water Allocation Calculator

25. Tools: Being within limits by 2030

26. Jane McMullan Tools: Monitoring water use (Pressure Analysis)

27. Summary: • Operative since April 2012 but much of it in use since 2006. • Very detailed and is leading water allocation in NZ • Two broad strings to Variation 6: • Managing the physical needs of the environment e.g. Managing impacts on fish and water quality from allocation decisions • Enabling and managing the allocation of water • Main council projects linked to water allocation: • Water Allocation Plan Implementation – D1003 • Pressure Analysis project – S1003

28. Recommendation • That the report “Background to water allocation in the Waikato Region” (Doc # 2151161 dated 25 February 2014) be received for information.

29. Update on Consents and Monitoring Activity under Variation 6

30. Variation 6 • V6 has provided substantive policy guidance and rule framework for water take and use consent processes since 2006 • Oct 2006 Notified version • Oct 2008 Hearings committee report version • Aug 2011 End of Environment Court Hearings version • Nov 2011 Version incorporating Environment Court decision • March 2012 Adoption, is now Chap 3.3 Water Allocation and Chap 3.4 Efficient Use of the WRP

31. Summary of current allocation • >1300 consented water takes across region (February 2014) • ≈ 570 surface water ≈ 1.64 million m³/day • ≈ 761 groundwater ≈ 472,000 m³/day • These consents contain terms and conditions derived from pre-V6 era through all its versions • Increasing complexity over that time • Many consents based on former more generous allocation regime, no allied use consent or conditions relating to efficient use

32. Consent process activity • 149 take applications received 2010/2011 • 213 take applications received 2011/March 2012 • > 1450 applications February 2014 (Majority of these for dairy shed use, but still a very significant number for extensive range of other end uses)

33. Some influences of Variation 6 on consent process • Surface water allocation supported by allocation calculator updated from consents database, can incorporate permitted and s14(3)(b) takes • Systematically used for every application • Existing allocation plus application quantum determines consent activity status (i.e. Controlled, Restricted, Discretionary or Non-Complying) • Allocation determined at point of take, and all downstream catchment locations • Most onerous activity throughout catchment applies • Can only be determined at processing, as allocation is dynamic (expiries, new consents both surface and groundwater, other authorised uses) • Allocation varies, greater summer than winter demand

34. Influences of Variation 6 on consent process (continued) • Water shortage conditions apply to all surface water take consents, may require reduction or cessation of take, or both • Interconnectivity of surface and groundwater requires close consideration (and application of the separate assessment and management criteria of both if applicable) • Some parts of region require use consent (monthly and annual water balance). Permitted activity elsewhere

35. Influences of Variation 6 on consent process (continued) • RMA ‘adverse effect’ codified; adverse environmental effect >minor if allocable flow exceeded/minimum flow impinged (irrespective of quantum/rate sought) • Requires definition for notification purposes within 5 working days; a complete process/work flow required, involving different council functions and roles

36. Some influences of Variation 6 on monitoring • Conditions now more complex, costly, extensive for consent holder and Council: • Continuous recording of take rate and volume • Electronic facility or requirement for recording and reporting • Continuous monitoring and measurement of source water at point of take (or water level monitoring for groundwater takes) • Daily reporting, including days when no water taken • Measuring system/device independently calibrated, minimum 5-yearly interval • Cease take, or take throttling, provisions, may include both of these (water shortage conditions, may be based on >1 flow site) • Telemetry, web access, links to Council’s hydrological facilities, >120 sites now on telemetry

37. Allocation status • Some catchments over allocated e.g. Piako, Pukekohe streams • Primary allocation gone in some catchments e.g. Waihou • All allocation gone in parts of some catchments e.g. Upstream of Huka Falls • Waikato catchment upstream of Karapiro is over subscribed i.e. demand from existing consents plus new applications, if granted, would exceed the allocable flow; this situation has existed since 2006, bar a few days in Dec 2011 when Environment Court Decision increased primary allocable flow of the Waikato upstream of Karapiro from 3.6% Q5 (5.328m³/s) to 5% (7.4m³/s)

38. Resource priority • Where demand exceeds supply of a finite resource, applications require to be processed in order of receipt i.e. first in-first served. This has been the case upstream of Karapiro since 2006 • Each application therefore requires separate and sequential processing to completion • Indefinite time for each process, as each subject to objections and appeals provisions (in addition to other processing events) • History of s357 RMA and Environment Court appeals suggests there may likely be more of same

39. Watercare application • Watercare Services Ltd application lodged December 2013, 200,000m³/day (150,000 existing) • Total 350,000 = 4.05 m³/s • Allocable flow = 18.81 m³/s • Preceding applications if granted plus WSL if granted would exceed allocable flows of the full catchment (10% Q5, or 18.81 m³/s)

40. Watercare application (continued) • Domestic and municipal supply do not get priority in queue but do have more favourable Discretionary activity status if have complying water Demand Management Plan • First in first served queue extends to whole Waikato Catchment (as for Piako, Pukekohe Streams and u/s Karapiro)

41. Implications of over allocation • Non-Complying activity status for most activities, domestic and stock drinking water require resource consent • Enhanced demand for transfer consents • Phase out by 2030 under NPSFW and Regional Plan • Via ‘passive’ means e.g. encourage harvest, voluntary reduction, catchment groups • Via regulatory means e.g. condition review, rostering, decline application • Review allocable flows via Plan Change (Sched 1 process)

42. Annual growth in land area consented* for irrigation in the Waikato Region

43. Recommendation • That the report “An update on consents and monitoring activity under Variation 6” (Doc # 2976064 dated 17 February 2014) be received for information.

44. Update on Farm Dairy Water Consenting under Variation 6

45. Background • Variation 6 process identified few existing dairy farmers held consent or aware of requirements • EC decision included rules to “grandparent” dairy shed water takes existing prior to October 2008 • Two specific and preferential rules require: • Application before 1 January 2015 for many • Volume of water taken prior to October 2008 (cow numbers surrogate) • Exclusion of stock and riparian enhancement • Leak detection mechanisms

46. Background • “Grandparenting” rules do not relate to: • Increased water needs from herd increase after 15 October 2008 • New Conversions water needs after 15 October 2008 • Future increased water needs • Other water use on farm (feedpad, irrigation etc) • These takes governed by same rules for all other water users

47. Background • Approx 2600 farms estimated to require consent • Close liaison with Dairy Sector Partners • Dairy shed water take project set up to: • Raise awareness of need for consent • Promote and manage receipt of applications • Process applications within Statutory Requirements • Develop Compliance Monitoring Strategy

48. Catchment Group Processing • Promote staggered receipt of processing in catchment groups • Efficient processing, therefore reducing cost • Seven catchments in total • Catchment closing dates have passed for five • Upper Waikato and Piako catchments close this year

49. Summary of Applications

50. Processing of Consents • ~200 groundwater consents in Waihou Catchment • Cost $829.50 + GST • Consent valid for 15 years • Under estimated $1000 and significantly less than $1500 - $3000 historically case for similar applications • Anticipate future catchment group processing costs similar • Other catchment groups being processed • Expected to have completed more groups by this time • Intent of rules simple, complexity in implementation • Significant time spent interacting with farmers • This year expect to complete processing significant number • A number of individual applications received