3.1 Meeting held 5 December 2000

5.1 Ngatea STP Consent Renewal

5.2 Waihi Sewerage Jetflote Trial

5.3 Waihi Water Consent Renewal

5.4 Paeroa Sewerage Wet Weather Overflows

5.5 Whiritoa Sewerage Treatment

5.6 Waitakaruru Sewage Discharge Consent

5.7 Waihi Bore Water Investigation

5.8 Water Take Resource Consents

5.9 Water Conservation Measures

Pursuant to Section 46A(7) of the Local Government Official Information and Meetings Act 1987, the Chairman is to call for late items to be accepted.

In the event of a late item, an explanation must be given as to why the item was not on the agenda and why discussion cannot be delayed for a subsequent meeting.

3.1 MEETING HELD 5 DECEMBER 2000 1-4

THAT the minutes of the meeting of the Water and Wastewater Consultative Committee held on Tuesday 5 December 2000 be taken as read and confirmed.

5.1 NGATEA STP CONSENT RENEWAL (42.002.017)

Nothing further to report.

5.2 WAIHI SEWERAGE JETFLOTE TRIAL (42.601.017)

Further testing was carried out in December to establish optimum chemical dosing. A report detailing the results of these tests has recently been received. Based on the report it is now possible to more accurately determine running costs. The next stage is to accurately estimate the annual operating and capital costs associated with the Jetflote process, and then these can be compared with the option of land disposal of the effluent.

5.3 WAIHI WATER CONSENT RENEWAL (43.603.017)

To date there has been no formal response from Ngati Tamatera regarding the latest proposals for the Walmsley water take resource consent.

5.4 PAEROA SEWAGE WET WEATHER OVERFLOWS (42.301.020)

Nothing further to report.

5.5 WHIRITOA SEWAGE TREATMENT (42.602.017)

Nothing further to report.

5.6 WAITAKARURU SEWAGE DISCHARGE CONSENT (42.004.017) 5-19

Attached is a review of the options for the Waitakaruru sewage treatment plant undertaken by Bruce Wallace Partners Ltd.

Waitakaruru is a very small sewage scheme, and due to economics of scale has a very high cost per property. The Government is currently looking at the funding difficulties associated with small communities being able to install sewerage schemes and the possibility of subsidies has been discussed. Until they release their guidelines, it is not known if Waitakaruru would be eligible for a subsidy.

Included in the treatment options is the inclusion of the effluent from the school. To date there has been only preliminary discussions with the school regarding the possibility of their combining with a Council scheme. If the school does not join, then it is likely they will have to upgrade their current treatment plant.

The issue of the level of capital contribution paid by the school needs to be debated. Under the current rating system with depreciation, interest and operating being included in the annual sewer rate, it can be argued that a capital contribution does not need to be charged as the costs will be recovered as part of the annual rates. It can also be argued that the school is not part of the current scheme and will be producing 25% of the total sewage loading, therefore adding 25% to the development cost and should pay its fair share towards this additional cost. With the school joining the scheme, through economics of scale, the unit cost to treat the effluent will reduce.

The report concludes with three possible options:

1. Pump the effluent to Ngatea

2. Effluent only treatment and disposal at Waitakaruru.

3. Raw wastewater treatment and disposal at Waitakaruru.

1. Pump to Ngatea.

This is the most expensive option. It has the advantages of not requiring the purchase of land, avoids the costs of obtaining resource consents and allows for the expansion of the Waitakaruru sewage scheme. This option will provide the best long term benefits.

2. Effluent only treatment and disposal at Waitakaruru.

This is the cheapest option. It provides a good short term solution to the existing situation. It has the disadvantages of requiring land purchase, the costs associated with cleaning septic tanks, the costs and changing conditions associated with resource consents. It is the least appropriate treatment option should the sewage scheme be expanded.

3. Raw wastewater treatment and disposal at Waitakaruru.

This is the middle cost option. It will provide a good medium term solution. Has the advantages of eliminating the septic tanks and is more appropriate for future expansion of Waitakaruru. It has the disadvantages of requiring suitable land purchase and the costs and changing conditions associated with resource consents.

The issue of which treatment option Council proposes for Waitakaruru needs to be resolved before improvements works can progress. There is no recommendation accompanying this report as it is considered there needs to be further debate relating to the possible treatment options and funding issues.

5.7 WAIHI BORE WATER INVESTIGATION (43.603.003)

Awaiting Consultants report.

5.8 WATER TAKE RESOURCE CONSENTS (43.000.017)

The majority of the water take consents will require renewal this year. The consultancy firm Meritec has been engaged to prepare and lodge the resource consent applications. Representatives from Meritec will be attending this meeting to provide a short presentation of each consent and the issues relating to them. Meritec also wish to discuss with the Committee any issues relating to the proposed water take resource consents and to establish how best to undertake appropriate consultation.

5.9 WATER CONSERVATION MEASURES (43.000.101)

Nothing further to report.