Wastewater plant faces scrutiny
The two-year process of the Bell Island Wastewater Treatment Plant’s resource consent application is coming to a head at a hearing today.
The plant is owned jointly by the Nelson City and Tasman District councils, run by their combined Nelson Regional Sewerage Business Unity (NRSBU), and treats wastewater from Tahunanui, Stoke, Richmond, Mapua, Brightwater and Wakefield.
In 2017, the NRSBU applied for resource consent to continue its operation, including the ongoing discharge of odour into the air and up to 25,000 cubic metres of treated wastewater into the Waimea Inlet, for the next 35 years.
The existing discharge permits expired in February last year, but the plant has been able to continue functioning until a decision is made, as the consent application was made more than three months before the permits expired.
At the time the application was lodged, there was strong opposition in the public submissions. The three-day hearing beginning today includes several submissions both for and against the application.
Leif Pigott’s report to the commissioner of the hearing identified nine
‘‘key issues’’ in the application, the first three being growth in the region, odour control, and the discharge of wastewater into the sea.
Pigott, the coordinator of natural resources consents for the Tasman council, said the projected growth of the region meant the treatment plant’s ability to accommodate the population would be at ‘‘significant’’ risk after 20 years.
He highlighted five public submissions which raised the issue of smell coming from the plant, and said this had the potential to cause ‘‘significant adverse effects on people’s lives’’. His own visit to the site showed that the containment of smell was not satisfactory.
‘‘In my professional opinion, [the plant] fails good practice in several areas. Regular maintenance did not seem to be being undertaken.’’
An example of the failings was bark being removed from a biofilter that ‘‘had not been replaced for several months over the summer’’.
In January, the NRSBU began working through a list of recommended steps to reduce odour. Pigott said these were ‘‘sensible’’, but the list was ‘‘quite extensive’’.
‘‘It is currently unclear how these recommendations will be implemented.’’
He also noted that the weather conditions in the area were a complicating factor, and recommended adding a condition to the consent requiring a meteorological station on the site and an ‘‘odour diary’’ to be kept by the operator.
The discharge of wastewater into the estuarine and coastal water was another issue which drew submissions, several from concerned iwi.
In Pigott’s summary of the submission from Te A¯ tiawa o Te Waka-a-Ma¯ ui Trust, the discharge of effluent into water was described as ‘‘culturally abhorrent’’, with ‘‘adverse cumulative effects that are more than minor’’ and ‘‘adverse cultural and spiritual issues on significant cultural resources’’.
Te A¯ tiawa o Te Waka-a-Ma¯ ui Trust, Nga¯ ti Rarua Atiawa Iwi Trust and Wakatu Incorporation all said the length of the consent, 35 years, was too long.
Cultural effects was another of the key
Tasman District Council issues raised by Pigott’s report, including the existence of five archaeological sites on Bell Island, and the fact it was a ‘‘significant occupation site’’ before James Cook’s arrival.
Despite the nine issues, Pigott’s ultimate recommendation was that the application be granted, subject to conditions.
At the hearing, submissions from the NRSBU and public submitters, including several iwi, will be heard by a commission panel made up of chair Sharon McGarry and members John Iseli and Dr Ngaire Phillips.
‘‘[The plant] fails good practice in several areas.’’ Leif Pigott,