Environment Directorate Cork County Council

1. Environment Directorate Cork County Council Protection of Source Water Used For Drinking Water Purposes Jacinta Reynolds, Senior Scientist

2. Issues to be covered • CONTEXT OF SOURCE PROTECTION • CORK COUNTY COUNCIL INITIATIVES • “CULTURE CHANGE”

3. WATER SAFETY PLAN • Protecting Water Supplies from catchment to tap - Concept adopted by WHO • UK DWI • “A WSP is the most effective way of ensuring that a water supply is safe for human consumption and that it meets the health based standards and other regulatory requirements. • It is based on a comprehensive risk assessment and risk management approach to all the steps in a water supply chain from catchment to consumer”

4. 2007 EPA Report: The Provision & Quality of Drinking Water in Ireland • SAFE Drinking water supply – if it meets quality standards each time the supply is tested • SECURE supply - if there is in place a management system that has identified all potential risks to the source & supply and reduction measures to manage these.

5. CORK COUNTYc230 public supply sources in CountySize & organisational structure

6. Cork County – Water Quality Pressures • Rivers 1,200km main channel, 2,000km strms • Farms c14,000. • Area Farmed 539,000 ha (12% of the State) • Total Cattle 1,120,600 (14.6% of Nat. herd) • Dairy Cows 313,400 (23.8% of Nat. herd) • Pigs (20 % of Nat. herd) • MWWTPs est 150 • Licensed Industrial discharges >300

7. Traditional Approach to Source Protection • Sectoral • Insufficient coordination & partnership • Lack of cross functional approach • Lack of multidisciplinary thinking • Choice of location -sometimes convenient rather than most appropriate • Lack of information on appropriate buffer zones

8. STARTING PREMISE Quality needs to be the supreme driver TOP DOWN & BOTTOM UP APPROACH

9. BOTTOM UP APPROACH Facilitated through • SI 378 of 2006 – Nitrate Regs – Article 17 • Water Framework Directive Investigative Programme • Risk Assessment Cryptosporidium Screening Tool

10. SI 378 of 2006 Nitrate Regulations Article 17EC (Good Agricultural Practice for Protection of Waters) Regulations 2006 17(2) Organic fertiliser or soiled water shall not be applied to land within – • Subject to sub article (5), 200m of the abstraction point of any surface watercourse, borehole, spring or well used for the abstraction of water for human consumption in a water scheme supplying 100m3 or more water/day or serving 500 or more persons. • Subject to sub article (5), 100m of the abstraction point of any surface watercourse, borehole, spring or well used for the abstraction of water for human consumption in a water scheme supplying 10m3 or more water per day or serving 50 persons.

11. 17(3) Where farmyard manure is held in a field prior to land spreading it shall be held in a compact heap and shall not be placed within – • 250m of the abstraction point of any surface watercourse, borehole, spring or well used for the abstraction of water for human consumption in a water scheme supplying 10m3 or more of water per day or serving 50 or more persons.

12. 1. Article 17 - Drinking Water Buffer Zone Project Phase 1 (April 2007) • Locate public abstraction sources. • 90 sources >100m3 (>500 persons) • Land registry searches in 200m & 250m buffer zones • IFA consultation • Notify c270 landowners Phase 2 (June 2008 - 2009) • 131 sources >10m3 (>50 persons) • Land registry search in 100m & 250m buffer zones • Notify c400 landowners. • Farm inspections within zones

13. Letter & Maps Outlining Obligations under Article 17

14. Initial issues arising in 2007/2008 • 2,791 Agric planning applications 2006/2007 • Lack of definitive GIS county source list • Slow progress of land registry searches to identify legal landowners • Substantial lands not registered – use local knowledge • Access to Dept of Agri land parcel identification system would minimize this • Phased basis – 33%

15. Phase 3 - 2009 • 17(2) & 17(3) - fixed buffer zones • 17(5) - Guidance issued by EPA on amendment of buffer zones (EPA Guidance Note, March 2008, Article 17(5)) • Emerging work by GSI & WFD on ZoC, SPAs Safeguard zones, DWPA • Review fixed zones, EPA consultation process. modify zones as relevant

16. 2. Source Protection- Utilisation of New TechniquesGIS and Small Streams Risk Score tools. 2006 Pilot Projectin collaboration with the SWRBD • SSRS Tool - WRBD/EPA - Rapid field method for risk assessment based solely on macro invertebrates • RBD teams have gathered extensive data in GIS format • Council Staff trained in SSRS • Field trialled - followed up with investigative work. 2007/2008 WFD Investigative Programme • Primary Driver - Protection of surface drinking water abstractions • Criteria - Abstraction & Q value < 4 or Q value deteriorating. • SSRS tool to prioritise within catchment areas • Refocus Prioritised County Farm survey programme.

17. 2008 Preparation of National Guidance for Investigative Monitoring of Agricultural Pollution • SWRBD tasked nationally to prepare Guidance • Harmonise approach by local authorities in enforcing various • laws related to pollution from agricultural activities • Working group convened (LA, DoEHLG, DoAg, EPA & SWRBD) • Develop Guidance & training programmes

18. 3.Use of Cryptosporidium Risk Screening Tool • Large part of RA relates to source protection - Activities in whole catchment important • Focus protection measures - Assist in prioritising work programmes & improvement works. • Opportunity to harness potential of staff on the ground

19. River Clyda SSRS Project 2007 – Mallow Abstraction

20. Inniscarra

21. Charleville Water Groundwater Supply

22. TOP DOWN APPROACH Source Protection is a cross functional issue.Requires multidisciplinary approach & strategic thinking at county level

23. Integrating Source Protection through Cross Functional Initiatives Source protection is something we have always being doing, but no department can work in isolation STRATEGIC REFOCUSING • Single point of responsibility for operational delivery & county coordination of water services, • Now vested in the Northern Divisional Assistant County Manager • Signifying top level commitment • WSIP Project Office formed • Consolidated management of major projects into single office • Single point of responsibility for project delivery is vested in the County Engineer • Maximize efficiencies in delivery • Gives us the efficiency to allow us to move forward strategically • Water Quality Group & Management Team Monthly briefings

24. Forums for Dialogue, Consultation & Planning Harnessing Expertise & Commitment • Protocols: 2003 Environment/Water Services, 2004 HSE, 2008 EPA Protocol • 2006 Needs Assessment • 2007 CDP – SEA, LAPs, CASP - review • Divisional Part 8 applications and Developer partnerships MWWTP upgrades. • Protection through Planning applications 2,532 (2007), 617 (2004) & licensing

25. What works for Source Protection • Culture change – move from sectoral to cross working with other Directorates & Agencies to protect sources – top down commitment • Multidiscipinary teams to bring a range of expertise to bear • Quality needs to be the prime driver when reviewing needs, developing infrastructure & creating policy.

26. THANK YOU