Looking At It From Both Ends Of The Pipe...

Key Points  My Background.  Development of a 3 waters bylaw at New Plymouth District Council (NPDC) –Current situation - what are other councils doing? –Rationale for quality management.  Working together –Allowing the process to work.  Completing the Loop –Communication, Communication. –The importance of understanding the whole process.  Looking for the Opportunities –Balancing Environmental Limits and network restrictions.  The Takeaways. 2

My Background 3  I have 7 years experience in a variety of compliance/regulatory roles...  Spent 600 days at sea (not all at once) as a Fisheries Observer for Ministry of Primary Industries (formerly Mfish).  Led beach clean-up teams at the Rena Response and worked at all levels of government (both fairly messy).  Currently I’m working as a Trade Waste Officer at New Plymouth District Council (NPDC). I have previously worked as an Environmental Protection Officer for Greater Wellington Regional Council.  My last job had me looking at what comes out the bottom of pipes and now I look at what goes into the top of pipes hence the title of this presentation.

 New Plymouth District Council 3 Waters Bylaw: –Passed by council and effective 29 September  No unauthorised discharges No person shall allow the discharge of contaminants, either directly or indirectly, into any part of the public stormwater network unless: a) The discharge is permitted by a rule in a regional plan; OR b) Is authorised by a resource consent. Note: Rules and requirements to ensure the quality of stormwater and prevent contamination and pollution are required, monitored and enforced by the Taranaki Regional Council through the Taranaki Regional Freshwater Plan.  The wording of this clause is fairly similar to a number of other bylaws including Tauranga and Nelson as well as the Auckland Councils proposed bylaw. 4 The Development of a Bylaw

Current Situation- What Are Other Councils Doing?  Councils have a number of regulatory and non regulatory pathways available to them and can use: –Regulation via Bylaws of various disguises. Or –Non regulatory methods with community education and management plan development.  Only a very small number of councils have no (searchable) mention at all of water quality.  An increasing number have both regulatory and non regulatory information available.  On the scale of it New Plymouth is just at the beginning stages. 5

6

The development of a stormwater bylaw which deliberately addresses the overlap in jurisdiction was seen as beneficial for a number of reasons: 1.To proactively work with the Regional Authority (RA) to ensure that there is a more comprehensive approach to stormwater management. 2.To aid the RA in applying those restrictions that protect the network from being used as a convenient disposal system. 3.There is also a synergy between protecting assets and protecting the environment, stormwater systems are built to transfer rainwater and to protect communities from flood damage, and not to dispose of: 7 Rationale For Development Of A Bylaw ContaminantEffects NetworkEnvironment Sedimentblocks pipes, damages pumps smothering invertebrates, damaging to fish Paintcan clog pipesReduces clarity, reduces photosynthesis Hydrocarbonsdangerous for council personnel Eco toxic

More Rationale  To address the dual areas of risk/responsibility, under both the Resource Management Act and the Local Government Act. –The Resource Management Act regulates discharges into and out of stormwater networks, and –The LGA makes territorial authorities responsible for managing, that network. ›Prior to the bylaw the RA was responsible for setting standards and regulating discharges into the stormwater network and through a suite of Resource Consents for stormwater discharges it held the TA responsible for the discharges from that network. ›Prior to the bylaw coming into force there was little control over the Type/Quality/Quantity of discharge occurring into our stormwater network (while through the trade waste bylaw there was rules concerning the quality of discharges into the sewer). 8

 With the current focus on freshwater quality, there is an increasing demand on appropriate water use and recognition that: ›We need to maximise any opportunities to better manage water through integrated decision-making in catchments. ›Continuous improvement of management practices is needed if we want to improve water quality. ›Better management of stormwater has been shown elsewhere to result in increased efficiencies, with a holistic approach a decrease in network related issues, through better allocation of resources, has been the result. 9 Why The Change?

Working Together  Currently in Taranaki stormwater discharges are consented by the RA and the TA is notified as part of the consent process as an “affected party”. 10

Completing The Loop  What we have learn as the new bylaw has come into effect is: –Ensuring there are robust systems and open lines of communication. –Make sure those involved in a multi jurisdictional process understand the whole process, no matter where they start in that process. –The right boxes need to be ticked in the right order. 11

Looking For The Opportunities  Already seeing an increased awareness across the teams that are involved more willingness to share information and look for those solutions that work best for all parties resulting in: –Less cost to customer or more bang for buck. ›E.g. if a truck wash is covered the discharge can all go to sewer as it doesn’t contain stormwater and more easily meet trade waste requirements. –Less environmental effect. ›As with example above the sewer is not in risk of being inundated with stormwater and the risk of release into a stream environment via stormwater is eliminated. –Easier for the RA to see that their requirements are being met. –Easier for TA to know the network is secure. 12

Telling One End Of The Pipe From Another  Important to know where it comes from,  What’s in it AND... Remember 13

 Where it goes to... 14

The End 15