Operation Philosophy Wastewater Treatement Plant

CONTROL PHILOSOPHY
ns en
TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH P+ID PLAN (Rev. 02)

Co
CARLOW COUNTY COUNCIL
Prepared by: Declan Mc Carthy Checked by: George Henchion Approved by: George Henchion
to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny
ot
he
FENNAGH WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT

ru se
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:36
Control Philosophy
1/28
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page No. PRELIMINARY I. II. III. Over view....................................................................................................................... 3 Abbreviations List........................................................................................................... 5 Tags and codes in P+ID plans ....................................................................................... 6
IV. Alarms............................................................................................................................ 7 Treatment Plant 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. Forward Feed Pumping Station.................................................................................... 11 Storm Tank .................................................................................................................. 13 Aeration Tank............................................................................................................... 15 Clarifier and RAS/ WAS Pumps ................................................................................... 17 Sludge Holding Tanks (SHT)........................................................................................ 20 Tertiary Filter Feed Sump............................................................................................. 21 Final Effluent P.S ......................................................................................................... 26
Co ns en to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny ot he
1.
Inlet Works ..................................................................................................................... 8

ru
Tertiary Treatment Filter............................................................................................... 23
10. Ferric Dosing................................................................................................................ 28
Fennagh WWTP Ref No. 1728
May 2008
se
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:36
Control Philosophy
2/28
REVISION TABLE
Index Draft Rev. 1 Date 07 /2007 05/ 2008 Modification First Issue Tertiary Filter Written D.C D.M.C Design App. Contract Eng. App. Client App.
The process control description is based on the following P+ID drawing:

Drawing No. 107417-501 Title / description P&ID Fennagh Waste Water Treatment Plant Revision 2 Date 06/ 2008
Co
ns en
May 2008
ot
he
ru
se
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:36
Control Philosophy
3/28
I.
OVER VIEW
The existing waste water treatment plant at Fennagh Co. Carlow is being upgrade to treat waste water from a population equivalent of 1500. The treated waste water will be pumped to the River burren some 1600m away.
a.
Waste Water Treatment Plant
Waste water enters the treatment plant from the existing local sewer network. The incoming waste water passes through a mechanical spiral screen where solid non-biodegradable objects are removed from the incoming flow and transferred to a waste skip. A sampler automatically collects samples of the incoming waste water for analysis. of the grit chamber. Periodically grit is removed to a classifier where it is dewatered and The waste water gravitates to the forward feed pumping station from where it is pumped to the aeration tank by 2 No. D/ S submersible centrifugal pumps. During storm conditions, flows in excess 11.7 l/s (3 x DWF) overflow the pumping station to the storm tank (Existing aeration tank). If the incoming flows exceed the capacity of the storm tank the excess flows overflow to the nearby stream.
Co ns en to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny ru se .
Following the spiral screen the flows gravitate to the grit trap where grit settles to the bottom compacted prior to disposal into a skip.
ot
May 2008
The contents of the storm tank are pumped back to the forward feed pumping station by 2 No. D/ S pumps at a rate of 5 l/s via a DN100 pipe when storm conditions recede. Oxygen is introduced to the aeration tank by a fixed film aerator on a VSD drive. The drive is controlled by a dissolved oxygen probe located in the tank. Ferric Sulphate is dosed into the inlet pipe to the aeration tank to reduce Phosphorus levels. The effluent flows from the aeration tank to the clarifier. A rotating half bridge cause the sludge to settle to the bottom of the tank where it is pumped to the sludge holding tanks as WAS or returned as RAS to the aeration tank. Clarified effluent overflows a weir in the clarifier and flows by gravity to the tertiary filter feed pumping station. The clarified effluent is pumped to the tertiary filter for final treatment and gravitates to the final effluent pumping station. The tertiary filter is periodically back washed using treated effluent. The wash water is directed back to the forward feed pumping station. A sampler automatically collects samples of the treated effluent for analysis. The treated effluent is pumped to the Burren river at a rate of 13.75 l/s via a DN150 rising main.
he
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
4/28
b.
Waste Sludge
Scum from the clarifier and WAS is stored transferred to the sludge holding tanks. Supernatant is automatically decanted off at a high level and flows to the forward feed pumping station. Settled sludge is periodically removed from the tanks by a road tanker. A flow meter on the bauer connection pipe monitors the sludge removed from the tanks.
Co
ns en
May 2008
ot
he
ru
se
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
5/28
II. ABBREVIATIONS LIST
AB = Air Blower B = Bin / Skip BV = Butterfly Valve CO = Compressor D/S = Duty / Standby DO = Dissolved Oxygen DWF= Dry Weather Flow FEPS = Final Effluent Pumping Station FFPS = Forward Feed Pumping Station GV = Gate Valve M = Motor P = Pump
May 2008
LS = Limit Switch
P&ID = Process & Instrumentation Diagram PLC = Programmable Logic Controller PS = Position Switch SA = Sampler SC = Screen SHT = Sludge Holding Tank SV = Solenoid Valve US = Ultrasonic Level Sensor VSD = Variable Speed Drive WAS = Waste Activated Sludge
Co
ns en
RAS = Return Activated Sludge
ot
he
ru
se
FM = Flow Meter
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
6/28
III. TAGS AND CODES IN P+ID PLANS
Tags for equipment instruments are specified as follows:
01Unit No. (e.g. inlet works, pumping station)
SV
Instrument / equipment (see note 1)
05
Instrument number. / equipment
E R --
Existing Replaced New
Letter codes for identification function of plant / equipment instruments as follows:

Letter B C F I K L M R P Q S T X Z First letter --Succeeding letter(s) Display of state (e.g. motor running) Controlling
Level Moisture or humidity --
Time or time programme
ot
he Co ns en
--
ru
se
Flow
-Indicating ---Recording --Switching Transmitting -Emergency of safety acting
Pressure (analysis, concentration, conductivity, etc.) Quality Speed Temperature On/Off --
Additional specifications (used as first letter; OC = Open / Close
In case of 2 or more succeeding letters, they will be placed one after the other in the sequence I-R-C-T-Q-S-Z-A-B. Note 1: For explanation of tags / symbols, please refer to Process and Instrumentation Diagram Details plan.
May 2008
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
7/28
IV. ALARMS
Priority 1 Event Locally displayed at control panel. Priority 2 Attention (High level detected) Caution Alarm raised locally and at the county councils head office.
ru se .
Urgent (Over flow, pump fail to start, etc)
Alarm raised locally and at the county councils head office.
Where duty / standby pumps are installed. If the duty pump fails to start, the standby pump automatically becomes the duty pump. A priority 2 alarm is raised. All electrical equipment and instruments are wired to the control panel (PL-01) located in the control house.
Co ns en
Priority 3
ot
May 2008
he
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
8/28
1. INLET WORKS 1.1. Process Description
Inlet screening Flow enters the inlet works in a gravity 225 sewer from the local area. The spiral screen & compactor (01-SC01) is automatically controlled on a level-time basis. Control process is detailed as follows:
A high level to be set during commissioning (500 mm variable) is detected by (01US01), located prior (01-SC01).
ru
cleaned by a brush attached to the conveyor spiral. Screenings are compacted in the compaction zone and binned into a wheelie bin. Drained liquid is diverted downstream of (01-SC01).
(01-SV01) (Lower washing valve) starts with (01-SC01) and is controlled on a time basis (2 seconds running / 5 seconds pause) while (01-SC01) is running.
ns en
(01-SV02) (compaction zone cleaning valve) starts with (01-SC01) as well, and it is 120 seconds running time of (01-SC01).
Co
controlled on a time basis while (01-SC01) is running (5 seconds running after every
(01-SC01) and solenoid valves stop 0-5 minutes (to be set during commissioning) after a low level is detected by (01-US01) (100mm variable), or on a time basis if (01SC01) is continuously running after a period based on screen manufacturers recommendations.
Wash water for the screen will be supplied by 2 No D/ S wash water supply pumps (07-P03/ P04) located at the tertiary filter feed sump.. Y type strains 01-YS01/ YS02 will be installed prior to the solenoid valves to prevent dirt particles that affect their functioning. In the event of any kind of failure (power, mechanical, etc), the effluent overflows to the bypass screen (01-SC02), and an overflow alarm is raised. Screening are manually raked and removed by an operator.
Fennagh WWTP Ref No. 1728 May 2008 Rev. 01
ot
Solid matter is removed by the conveyor spiral from the separation screen, which is
he
se
An enable signal is triggered from panel (PL-01) and (01-SC01) is activated.

.
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
9/28
The sampling system (01-SA01) will have variable set point controls which will be calibrated during commissioning. The system is equipped with time and flow proportional manual overrides. The sampler is controlled from its local panel. Screened effluent passes through a 225mm UPVC pipe to the grit trap. Grit trap. The grit trap is a vortex type. Grit settles to the bottom of the chamber and is lifted on an intermittent basis by means of air flow from 01-AB01 to the bottom of the chamber via 2 No air pipes. The settle grit is removed in a two stage timed process. The wash and the lift sequence are
he ru
described as follows (the following time periods may need to be adjusted on commissioning):
May 2008
1.2.
Control Philosophy
(Levels to be set during commissioning)
1.2.1.
(Automatic Operation)
ns en
discharge pipe). A 0-24 hour timer is used to initiate the process timer. (01-AB01) and (01-SC04) starts running for 0-60 minutes. When (01-AB01) is started, air is diverted to the bottom of the chamber where it agitates the settled grit locally, causing it to be suspended in solution. Grit is transferred to the grit classifier (01-SC04) and discharged into a bin after being drained. Drained liquid is diverted to the grit trap inlet pipe. (01-3BV01) into the discharge pipe creates an air lift pump as follows: o o o o After 0-10 minutes, the 3-way valve changes to the air lift position. After 0-10 minutes, the 3-way valve reverts to the air wash position. After 0-10 minutes, the 3-way valve changes to the air lift position. After 0-10 minutes, the 3-way valve changes to the air lift position. 01-AB01 stops.
Co
(01-AB01) and (01-SC04) are off and (01-3BV01) is in air position (i.e. external to the
ot
se
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
10/28
At the end 01-AB01 stops, 01-3BV01 set to air wash position, and (01-SC04) stops 5 minutes after (01-AB01).
The cycle frequency is variable and will be determined during commissioning and adjusted as appropriate by operator. Flow from the grit trap is directed to the forward feed pumping station.
DRIVES PLANT Tag Description Control Control parameter Comment Duty Mechanical spiral 01-SC01 screen and compactor 01-US01 Timer Level Time Controls at PL-01 An ON signal controls wash water pumps (07-P03/ P04) Bypass screen Duty Controls at PL-01 Lower washing valve Compaction zone cleaning valve Duty Controls at PL-01 Duty Controls at PL-01
01-SC03 01-SC04 01-SV01 01-SV02
Grit trap Grit classifier Solenoid valve Solenoid valve
Timer Time Timer Timer Time Time
01-3BV01
3-way actuated valve
Co
ns en
01-AB01
Air blower
Timer
Time
Timer
Time
INSTRUMENTATION Tag 01-US01 Description Ultrasonic level sensor Sampler Signal Analogue Alarm High level Comment LIC Controls 01-SC01 QIR Controlled by local timer
01-SA01
ot
-
01-SC02
Manual screen
Manual
he
May 2008
ru
se
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
11/28
2. FORWARD FEED PUMPING STATION 2.1. Process Description
The pumping station receives flows from: Inlet grit trap via a 225 pipe Waste water from the control house via a 100 pipe Supernatant return flows via a 150 pipe Backwash flows from the tertiary filter via a 225 pipe Return flows from the storm tank via a 100 pipe The pumping station consists of 2 No. submersible centrifugal pumps (02-P01 & 02-P02)
he ru Co ns en to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny ot
May 2008
located in the wet well.
(02-P01 & 02-P02) each have a capacity of 11.70 l/s and operate on a D/ S basis. Automatic pump control is obtained by use of an ultrasonic level sensor in the wet well (02US01) which transmits a 4-20Ma signal to (PL-01).
Pump controls allows for the automatic changeover of duty pumps on a time basis set out at 24 hours initially. The forward flow rate to treatment is monitored and recorded by flow meter (04-FM01), which transmits a 4-20 ma signal to (PL-01). The forward flow rate is restricted to 11.7 l/s. In the event of the incoming flows exceeding the capacity of the forward feed pumps over an extended period i.e. storm conditions, the excess flows overflow to the storm tank (existing aeration tank).
2.2.
Control Philosophy
se
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
12/28
2.2.1.
Automatic Operation
Forward Feed Pumps (02-P01/ P02) In the event of a high level as monitored by level sensor (02-US01), duty pump starts. In the event of a low level as monitored by level sensor (02-US01), duty pump stops. If the level in the pumping station increases as monitored by (02-US01) the duty pump ramps up. If the level in the pumping station decrease as monitored by (02-US01), duty pump ramps down. In the event of a high high level as monitored by (02-US01) an alarm is raised at the local control panel and at the County Councils head office. Excess flows over flow to the storm tank. If the duty pump fails to start the standby pump becomes the duty pump. A priority 2 alarm
ot
DRIVES PLANT Tag 02-P01/ P02 Description Foul Pumps
Control
Control parameter
he
is raised.
ru
se
Comment Duty/ Standby VSD Controls at PL-01
02-US01 / 04-FM01
Level / Flow
INSTRUMENTATION Tag 02-US01 Description Ultrasonic level sensor Signal Analogue Alarm Overflow level Comment Controls 02-P01/ P02, 03P01/ P02
Co
ns en
May 2008
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
13/28
3. STORM TANK 3.1. Process Description
The storm tank receives overflows from the forward feed pumping station during storm conditions (incoming flows >11.70 l/s) via a 225 overflow pipe. Once storm conditions have subsided the storm water is pumped back to the forward feed pumping station by storm return pumps (03-P01 & 03-P02) at a rate of 5l/s. These pumps are controlled by the level sensor (03-US01) located in the storm tank and level sensor (02US01) located in the forward feed pumping station and operate on a duty/ standby basis. If the capacity of the storm tank is reached the incoming flows overflow a weir and discharge The ultrasonic level sensor (03-US01) mounted in the tank records the flow rate over the outfall weir in the tank.
May 2008
3.2.
Control Philosophy
In the event of a high level detected in the storm tank as monitored by level sensor (03US01) and a low level detected in the forward feed P.S as monitored by (02-US01) the duty storm pump starts. In the event of a high level detected in the forward feed P.S as monitored by (02-US01) the duty storm pump stops. In the event of a low level detected in the storm tank as monitored by level sensor (03US01) the duty storm pump stops. If the duty storm pump fails to start the assist storm pump starts. A priority 2 alarm is raised/ The duty pump is alternated after every cycle.
Co
3.2.1.
Automatic Operation
ns en
ot
he
ru
se
to the nearby stream.
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
14/28
DRIVES PLANT Tag 03-P01/ P02 Description Storm Return Pumps Control 03-US01 02-US01 Control parameter Level / Flow Comment Duty/ Standby Controls at PL-01
INSTRUMENTATION Tag 03-US01 Description Ultrasonic level sensor Signal Analogue Alarm Overflow level Comment LIRC (Overflow monitoring) Controls 03-P01/ P02
Co
ns en
May 2008
ot
he
ru
se
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
15/28
4. AERATION TANK 4.1. Process Description
The system consists of an aeration tank, aeration wheel and an aeration wheel drive motor (04-M01). The aeration tank receives incoming flows from the forward feed pumping station via a DN100 pipe and RAS flows from the clarifier via a DN150 pipe. The Aerator wheel is powered by a drive motor (04-M01) using a chain a sprocket transmission. The drive motor is controlled by DO probe (04-DO01) located in the tank, which is maintained within an operating band between 2 and 3 mg/l (levels to be adjusted during commissioning). The drive motor ramps up/ down in relations to the DO level of the activated. Ferric sulphate is dosed in to the inlet pipe from the forward feed pumping station. The ferric sulphate reduces the phosphorus level in the process by causing the phosphorus to coagulate and settle as sludge in the clarifier. tank through a 250 mm pipe. 4.2. Control Philosophy Aerated liquid overflows a weir on the outlet side of the tank and gravitates to the clarifier
to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny ot he ru se
waste water. If (04-DO01) records either a high or low oxygen level, a priority 1 alarm will be
.
4.2.1.
Automatic Operation
Aeration Wheel Drive Motor (04-M01)
In the event of low dissolved oxygen levels as monitored by (04-DO01), the motor ramps up. In the event of high dissolved oxygen levels as monitored by (04-DO01), the motor ramps down. At a high - high dissolved oxygen level the motor stops. The drive motor is also started by the PLC timer if it has not operated with in a set time (60 minutes). On start up the drive motor is configured to operate at full speed for 10 minutes.
Co
ns en
May 2008
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
16/28
DRIVES PLANT Tag Description Aeration wheel drive motor Control 04-DO01 Timer Control parameter Dissolved oxygen Timer Comment Duty VSD Controls at PL-01
04-M01
INSTRUMENTATION Tag 04-DO01 Description Dissolved oxygen Signal Analogue Alarm High / Low Comment Controls 04-M01 FIRC 04-FM01 Flow meter Analogue Controls 05-P02/ P03, 10-P01/ P02, 02-P01/ P02
Co
ns en
May 2008
ot
he
ru
se
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
17/28
5. CLARIFIER AND RAS/ WAS PUMPS 5.1. Process Description
The system consists of a clarifier tank, 2 No. Sludge pumps mounted on a RC plinth (05-P02 & 03), a scum pump (05-P01). Flow from the aeration tank enters the clarifier and is directed to the central diffusion drum, which is designed such that flows will discharge radially at the bottom. As settlement occurs the clarified effluent rises and overflows the peripheral weir. The heavier activated sludge settles to the floor of the tank. The rotating half bridge is supported on a steel tripod and at the perimeter. The drive unit
ru se
(05-M01) is fitted to the wheel at the perimeter of the bridge and is constantly rotating. The rotating bridge is fitted with a series of floor scrappers which continuously direct the settled sludge to a central hopper. At the base of the hopper is the sludge draw off pipe which is directed to the RAS / WAS pumps.
to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny ot he .
Sludge pumps (05-P02/ P03) each have a capacity of 11.7 l/s, operate on a D/S basis, and are controlled by VSDs which ramp up/ down in relation to the incoming flow to aeration tank
Co
as monitored by flow meter (04-FM01). Pump controls allow for the automatic changeover of duty pumps on a time basis set out at 24 hours initially. If duty pump does not cut-in the standby pump becomes the duty pump. Under normal operation the sludge is returned to the aeration tank as RAS. Periodically the operator directs the sludge to the sludge holding tanks as WAS by manually operating the change over valves. Scum on the surface of the clarified effluent is directed to a scum box by a scraper on the top of the half bridge. The scum is pumped by scum pump (05-P01) to the sludge holding tanks. The pump operates on a duty basis. The pump is controlled by a limit switch (05-LS01) located adjacent to the scum pump.
ns en
May 2008
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
18/28
The limit switch is activated by a striker on the rotating half bridge every complete revolution of the half bridge. Clarified effluent overflows the V-notch weir and flows by gravity to tertiary filter feed P.S.
5.2.
Control Philosophy
5.2.1.
Automatic Operation
Clarifier Scraper Motor (05-M01)
The clarifier scraper motors operate continuously. Scum Pump (05-P01)

ru Co ns en to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny
Control On/off 05-LS01 Timer Control parameter On/ Off Position Time
When the position switch (05-LS01) is activated the sludge pump operates for a set period of time.
RAS / WAS Pumps (05-P02/ P03)
The duty RAS / WAS pump operates continuously. In the event of higher incoming flows as monitored by (04-FM01), the duty pump ramps ups.
In the event of lower incoming flows as monitored by (04-FM01), the duty pump ramps down.
DRIVES PLANT Tag 05-M01 05-P01 Description Clarifier drive Scum pump Comment Duty Duty Controls at PL-01 Duty/ Standby VSD Controls at PL-01
05-P02/ P03
Sludge pumps
04-FM01
Flow
ot
May 2008
he
se
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
19/28
INSTRUMENTATION Tag 05-LS01 Description Limit switch Signal Digital Alarm Comment P.C Controls 05-P01
Co
ns en
May 2008
ot
he
ru
se
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
20/28
6. SLUDGE HOLDING TANKS (SHT) 6.1. Process Description
Flow enters the sludge holding tank from the sludge pumps and the scum box in the clarifier. The contents of the tank are the allowed to thicken through the separation of the clear liquid and sludge by gravity. Clear liquid at the top of the tank overflows the high level decant pipe or is manually decanted at a lower level. This liquor is then returned to the forward feed pumping station. The Bauer coupling at the base of the tank allows for sludge to be removed using a mobile tanker. The bauer coupling line is fitted with a flowmeter (06-FM01) to record sludge flows
ru
DRIVES PLANT Tag Description -
Control -
Control parameter -
ot
he
se
taken from the site.
Comment -
Co
Tag 06-FM01
Description Flow meter
ns en
INSTRUMENTATION
Signal Analogue
Alarm -
Comment FIR Records sludge flows
May 2008
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
21/28
7. TERTIARY FILTER FEED SUMP 7.1. Process Description
Clarified effluent enters the tertiary filter feed sump from the clarifier through a DN200mm pipe. The pumping station consists of 2 No. submersible pumps (07-P01/ P02) and 2 No. dry mounted wash water pumps (07-P03/ P04). The wash water pumps supply wash water to the inlet screen at a rate of 4 l/s. Clarified effluent is pumped to the tertiary treatment filter by the 2 No. feed pumps (07-P01/ P02) at a rate of 11.7 l/s. The pumps operate on a duty / standby basis and are controlled by level sensor (07-US01) and by the PLC timer during a back wash cycle. At a high level the pumping station can overflow to the final effluent P.S via a DN 200
ru se Co ns en to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny
May 2008
overflow pipe.
ot he
7.2. 7.2.1.
Control Philosophy
Automatic Operation
Tertiary Filter Feed Pumps (07-P01/ P02).
In the event of a high level as monitored by (07-US01), duty pump starts. In the event of a low level as monitored by (07-US01), duty pump stops. If the duty pump fails to start the standby pump becomes the duty pump. A priority 2 alarm is raised. When a backwash cycle is initiated for the tertiary filter, the PLC prevents the filter feed pumps from operating while the backwash cycle takes place irrespective of level in the sump. The duty pump alternates after every cycle.
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
22/28
Wash Water Pumps (07-P03/ P04). The duty pump is started by an ON signal from the (PLC) when inlet screen (01-SC01) is running. The duty pump is stopped by an OFF signal from the (PLC) when inlet screen (01-SC01) is stopped. In the event of a low level detected in the sump as monitored by level sensor (07-US01), duty pump stops. If the duty pump fails to start the standby pump becomes the duty pump. A priority 2 alarm is raised. The duty pump alternates after every cycle.
07-P01/ P02
Tertiary filter feed pumps
07-US01 PLC
Level Time
ot
Tag
Description
Control
Control parameter
he
ru
DRIVES PLANT
se
Comment
Duty/ Standby Controls at PL-01
(Backwash timer)
07-US01 from 01SC01)
Level
07-P03/ P04
Wash Water pumps
(ON signal
Inlet Screen ON signal
INSTRUMENTATION Tag Description Ultrasonic Level sensor Signal Alarm Comment LIC Analogue Controls 07-P01/ P02/ P03/ P04
07-US01
Co
ns en
May 2008
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
23/28
8. TERTIARY TREATMENT FILTER 8.1. Process Description
The tertiary filter consists of: 1 No. Tertiary Filter. 2 No. Filter Feed Pumps (07-P01/ P02) located in the tertiary filter feed sump (See chapter 7). 1 No. Backwash pump (09-P01) located in the final effluent P.S (See chapter 9). 1 No. DN150mm Actuated Ball Valve (08-BV01) located on the filter outlet pipe. 1 No. DN200mm Actuated Ball Valve (08-BV02) located on the backwash waste pipe. 1 No. DN150mm Actuated Ball Valve (08-BV03) located on the filter rinse pipe.
he ru se .
Filtering Process
Clarified effluent is pumped from the tertiary filter feed pumping station to the tertiary treatment filter by 2 No. Duty/ Standby tertiary feed pumps (07-P01/ P02) at a rate of 11.7 l/s. As the clarified effluent passes down through the filter, suspended solids in the effluent will During the filtering process actuated ball valve (08-BV01) is in the open position and valves (08-BV02 & 08-BV03) are in the closed position. A sampler (09-SA01) automatically collects a sample of the treated effluent in the final effluent P.S. The sampler is controlled by the PLC timer.
Co ns en
be retained in the filter. Following the filter the filtered effluent is directed to final effluent p.s.
Back Wash & Rinse Cycle Periodically the tertiary filter is backwashed (initially set to 4 times/ day) by isolating the incoming flow and pumping filtered water back through the filter by duty pump (09-P01) located in the final effluent P.S at a rate of 47.5 l/s. A back wash only takes place during periods of low incoming flow through the plant. Following a backwash cycle, the filter is rinsed for 30 seconds.
ot
May 2008
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
24/28
When a backwash is scheduled by the PLC timer, and a low level detected in the tertiary filter feed P.S as monitored by level sensor (07-US01), the pumps (07-P01/ P02) are stopped and actuated valve (08-BV02) is opened and valve (08-BV01) is closed. Pumps (07-P01/ P02) are prevented from operating during a backwash even if a high level is detected in the filter feed p.s as monitored by (07-US01), Backwash pump (09-P01) starts for a time (t1) initially set to 180 seconds. Filtered water is pumped back through the filter and gravitates to the FFPS via a 225mm pipe. After time (t1) backwash pump (09-P01) stops. The filter is allowed to settle for a time (t2) set to 60 seconds. After time (t2) valve (08-BV02) closes and valve (08-BV03) opens for the rinse cycle. After the duty filter feed pump operates for time (t3) initially set to 30 seconds, valve (08BV01) opens and valve (08-BV03) closes. Back wash cycle complete.
ot to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny
May 2008
8.2.
Control Philosophy
(All times to be set during commissioning)
8.3.
Automatic operation
Actuated valve (08-BV01)

Co
During normal operation of the filter, actuated valve (08-BV01) is in the open position. When a back wash cycle is initiated by the PLC the valve closes. The valve remains closed until the backwash and rinse cycle is complete. When the rinse cycle is complete the valve opens. Actuated valve (08-BV02)
During normal operation of the filter, actuated valve (08-BV02) is in the closed position. When a back wash cycle is initiated by the PLC the valve opens. The valve remains open until the backwash cycle is complete (270 seconds variable).
ns en
he
ru
se
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
25/28
Actuated valve (08-BV03) During normal operation of the filter, actuated valve (08-BV03) is in the closed position. Following a backwash and filter settling time of 1 minute the valve opens. The valve remains open for 30 seconds while the duty pump (07-P01/ P02) in the FEPS operates. The rinse water is directed to the FFPS. After the rinse cycle the valve closes. Backwash Pump (09-P01) (See chapter 9)
08-BV01
Actuated valve (Filter outlet) Actuated valve (Backwash outlet) Actuated Ball valve (Drain)
PLC
(Back
ot
Tag
Description
Control
Control parameter Time
he
ru
DRIVES PLANT
se
Comment Duty Controls at PL-01 Duty Controls at PL-01 Duty Controls at PL-01
wash)
08-BV02
PLC (Back wash)
Time
08-BV03
PLC (Back wash)
Time
INSTRUMENTATION Tag Description Signal Alarm Comment -
Co
ns en
May 2008
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
26/28
9. FINAL EFFLUENT P.S 9.1. Process Description
Flow enters the pumping station through a 150mm pipe from the tertiary filter and is pumped approximately 1600m to the Burren River. Rising main pumps (09-P02 & 09-P03) each have a capacity of 13.75 l/s and operate on a D/ S basis. The sampling system (09-SA01) operates on variable set point controls which will be calibrated during commissioning. The system is equipped with time and flow proportional manual overrides. The sampler is controlled from its local panel.
9.2.1.
Automatic Operation
(Levels to be set during commissioning) Backwash Pump (09-P01)

Co
The pump is controlled by an ON signal from the PLC during a back wash cycle. The pump runs for 180 second as part of the back wash cycle. In the event of a low level detected in the sump as monitored by level sensor (09-US01) the pump stops. The pump is prevented from running when the filter supply pumps (07-P01/ P02) are operating. Rising Main Pumps (09-P02/ P03) During a back wash cycle the pumps are prevented from operating to ensure sufficient level in the sump for a back wash cycle. In the event of a high level detected in the sump as monitored by level sensor (09US01) the duty pump starts.
Fennagh WWTP Ref No. 1728 May 2008 Rev. 01
ns en
ot
he
ru
9.2.
Control Philosophy
se
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37
Control Philosophy
27/28
In the event of a low level detected in the sump as monitored by level sensor (09-US01) the duty pump stops. If the duty pump fails to start the standby pump becomes the duty pump. A priority 2 alarm is raised. The duty pump alternates after every cycle.
DRIVES PLANT Tag Description Control 09-US01 09-P01 Backwash pump PLC (Backwash timer) 09-US01 (Backwash timer) Time Level Time Duty Controls at PL-01 Control parameter Comment
ru
09-P02/ P03
Rising main pumps
se
PLC
Level
INSTRUMENTATION Tag 09-US01 09-FM01 09-SA01 Description Ultrasonic Level
Signal Alarm
ot
he
Comment LIC Controls 09-P01/ P02/ P03 FIR QIR Timer controlled
Analogue
Co
sensor Flow meter Sampler
ns en
Analogue
May 2008
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:38
Control Philosophy
28/28
10. FERRIC DOSING The Ferric dosing unit consist of a ferric dosing tank and 2 No. dosing pumps (10-P01/ P02). The ferric solution is pumped at a rate of 0-5 l/hr to the inlet to the aeration tank by means of dosing pumps (10-P01/ P02). The Phosphate level is reduced in a chemical reaction and settles as sludge. The dose rate is set manually by the operator based on the incoming effluent. Once the dose rate is set the pumps are controlled automatically based on the incoming flow to the aeration tank as monitored by flow meter (04-FM01).
PLANT Tag
10-P01/ P02
Description
Dosing pump
Control
04-FM01
Control parameter
Comment
Duty / Standby Controls at PL-01
INSTRUMENTATION Tag Description -
Signal Alarm
ot
he
Flow
ru
se
Comment -
Co
ns en
May 2008
Rev. 01
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:38
Co ns en t of co For py in rig sp ht ect ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny ot he ru se .
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:38
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:38
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:38
Co
ns
en t
of
co For py in rig sp ht ect ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny
ot
he ru
se .
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:38
Section C1
The village of Fennagh is serviced by a waste water drainage system and wastewater treatment works (WWTW). The original WWTW was constructed in the early 1970s and was designed for a population equivalent of 180PE. The treatment works consisted of an extended aeration treatment process with settlement and sludge drying beds. The original secondary settlement tank was replaced by a GRP hopper bottomed secondary settlement tank with lamella plates in the mid 90s, as there was hydraulic overloading. There was also disused sludge drying beds. By 2005 the contributing load to the WWTW was determined as 390PE and the WWTW was significantly overloaded, with poor treatment capacity. In 2008 Carlow County Council replaced the old WWTW with a new treatment works with a capacity of 1,500 pe, this works was put into use in Dec 2008 and is being commissioned at present. The new works consists of the following: Inlet 6mm screening and de-gritting on all flows, including storm flows. Storm water holding of 3DWF for 2 hours, providing settlement and a baffled outlet for overflow to the Burren Tributary, with held storm water returned for treatment Flow measurement of flow to full treatment and storm overflow. Secondary treatment using aeration and settlement. Tertiary treatment using a sand filtration system Phosphorous reduction using ferric dosing Sludge holding and thickening tank with flow measurement for sludge removed from site.
Co ns en to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny ot he ru se .
The treatment standards for the new works are: BOD TSS Amm N Total P 10mg/l 10mg/l 5mg/l 1mg/l 95%ile 95%ile 95%ile 95%ile
The old Fennagh WWTW discharged into the Burren Tributary which flows to the Burren River, the confluence with the Burren is about 1.5 km east of the WWTW. The new works will discharge into the Burren River via a new pumping station. The Burren Tributary was considered for discharge however as the 95%ile flow, estimated by the EPA, is 11l/s and the design load for Fennagh is 1,500 pe the dilution in the Burren Tributary was considered to be marginally unacceptable as the BOD in the stream as a result of the works would be about 3.2 mg/l during low flows. Therefore it was decided to pump the final effluent to the Burren River itself as this would allow for future expansion of the works when required.
1
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:38
The 95%ile flow in the River Burren at the discharge point is estimated at about 100 l/s, providing dilution of almost 30:1 and the BOD in the river as a result of the works would be about 0.85mg/l for a discharge standard of 25 mg/l at design loading and would be approximately 0.35mg/l for the consent standard of 10mgBOD/l. The consent standard for the Fennagh WWTW was set to 10:10(BOD:TSS) as there is a water abstraction point about 15km downstream of the works on the Burren River(Sion Cross). The site layout for Fennagh (drawing C2) shows the location of the final effluent pumping station and the storm water overflow, and drawing C1 is a schematic of the WWTW, drawing C3 shows the location of the final effluent discharge point on the River Burren. The treatment works has been operational since Dec 2008 is going through a commissioning period at present.
Co
ns en
ot
he
ru
se
2
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:38
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:38
Co n se nt o f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny ot he ru se .
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:38
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:38
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:38
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:38
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:38
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:38
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:38
Biological Wastewater Treatment with the STHLERMATIC-Aerotor

Proven Aeration System - Combination of Activated Sludge and Fixed Film nearly 30 years of experience, well-engineered, rugged construction
Pipe-Aerotor (RR)
oxygen input at the spillway
rotation
angle of opening oxygen supply of the fixed film
intake of atmospheric air forced conduction and compression of the trapped air
wastewater filling the pipe
running in wastewater aeration from release of trapped air oxygen transfer at the transition zones air / water
Process Description
The wastewater treatment unit combines the advantages of the activated sludge process with those of fixed film in a unique design. The system works like a conventional activated sludge system with activated biological sludge in the mixed liquor and a return sludge circuit. This process is enhanced by working with higher concentrations of suspended sludge as a consequence of the low sludge volume index and by the additional effect of the fixed film. The STM-AEROTOR is designed as a rotor equipped with pipes created by media discs. By rotating the rotor by a motor above water level, surface air is captured by the special design of the fixed film media and consequently the microorganisms in the basin are supplied with oxygen. As soon as a pipe of the rotor emerges above water level during rotation, the mixed liquor inside the pipes flows out. By this it is firstly aerated at the spillway. The pipe will then be filled with atmospheric air. The necessary oxygen for the fixed film dissolves on the wet surfaces of the media discs. During the downward rotation the air is trapped in the pipes and forced into the mixed liquor. Moving downwards to the bottom of the biotank the air is compressed more and more. The compressed air is contacting all inner surface areas of the disc during rotation. The fixed film is supplied with oxygen during the entire rotation in the atmosphere and in the mixed liquor. During rotation parts of the air can escape. The bubbles travelling to the centre of the rotor result in a homogeneous mixing of the biotank. A circular stream in the centre of the rotor increases significantly the detention time of the bubbles so that consequently the oxygen transfer time is much larger compared to a conventional diffuser aeration system. The activated sludge in the mixed liquor is always effectively supplied with oxygen. The STM-AEROTOR is a high-capacity oxygen supply mechanism designed to satisfy high demands while using less power. Zones with different oxygen concentrations are formed in the basin. These zones influence with advantage the processes of nitrification / denitrification and increased biological P-elimination. The system can be flexibly designed and controlled adapted to varying requirements - by appropriately sizing the volume of the biotank - by changing the speed of the rotor (frequency controlled motor) - by adding additional media pipes and scraper blades
Co
ns en
ot
he
scraper blade
ru
se
alternative: additional pipe
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:38
Choosing larger dimensions of the biotank equipped with the same aerotor (expanding the biotank volume) results in a larger treatment volume. Consequently the anoxic environmental zones are increased so that simultaneous denitrification takes place. These anoxic zones are mainly beneath and under the aerotor. At the tank bottom the concentration of the mixed liquor increases too as a result of first sedimentation in consequence of the low sludge volume index created by the fixed film. Here all oxygen is consumted and a anaerobic zone is created so that an increased biological phosphorus elimination (luxury P-uptake) is additionally achieved. To that the sludge in the anaerobic zone becomes septic a scraper and / or additional pipes are to be installed so that the sludge is mixed and get back into the aerated turbulence of the aerotor.
aerobic zone
circular stream
fluctuation zone: aerobic / anoxic
air coming out
anoxic / anaerobic zone
Design
The basic construction of the rotor is a central shaft and a steel cage structure which transfers forces directly to the bearings. The central shaft is significantly less stressed.
Pipe-Aerotor
The pipes are formed by joining discs into cylinders. Several of these pipes are specially arranged to create the rotor. The pipes form hollow chambers which serve both to input oxygen and as fixed film growth surfaces. The discs consist of durable polypropylene. The distance between the discs is 20 mm. Each rotor can be fitted with additional scrapers and pipes.
Co
ns en
ot
he
ru
se
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:38
Wide Applicability
- treatment of domestic and industrial wastewater - partial or basic treatment, advanced treatment with nitrification/denitrification, and increased biological P-elimination - new plants, expansions, and retrofits of existing plants - single home treatment units - containerized and modular plants - large treatment plants in single and compactly designed concrete tanks - separate aerobic sludge stabilisation - treatment of septic and faecal sludges - treatment of liquid manure and other wastewaters from livestock
Advantages
The Sthlermatic-AEROTOR
Using modular construction, it is possible to adapt the process to the requirements of every application or loading. The simple and ruggedly designed construction requires less maintenance. The selected materials guarantee long service life. Only half the power of a conventional diffused-air aeration system is required.
High Process Stability
Highest process stability is achieved through a wide spectrum of microorganisms in the mixed liquor and the fixed film. Oxygen supply is always guaranteed even with increased effluent standards or during excessive loadings.
Smaller Footprint and Volume

The high efficiency and the compact design reduce the needed footprint to nearly 50% of conventional process with the same efficiency.
Low Noise and Odour-Free

Formation of aerosols and emission of odours are minimized due to the special design of the system. The low speed of the rotor requires no additional noise control measures.
Improved Sludge Quality

Less production of waste sludge by the fixed film component, significantly lower sludge volume index, and best sludge settling and dewatering characteristics are the main attributes of the STMAEROTOR-System.
125% 100%100% 100% 75% 52% 45% 50% 25% 0% Sthlermatic Activated Sludge SBR 78% 112%
Co
ns en
The STM-system is very capable and reliable under even the highest demands. By optimally combining activated sludge with fixed film, required effluent concentrations are safely and steadily achieved, both for basic and for advanced treatment.
Total Volume Energy kWh/d
ot
he
ru
Process Stability
se
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:38
Details of Proposed Treatment System The Stahlermatic (STM) process is an advanced process incorporating a combination of fixed film and activated sludge growth mechanisms in a single basin. Each of these processes has their own advantages. Historically, fixed film systems such as RBCs are simple and stable with low maintenance. The activated sludge process is a more flexible process and will produce a higher quality of final effluent. The STM plant combines the advantages of both processes. The system works like a conventional activated sludge system with activated biological sludge in the mixed liquor and with a return sludge circuit to increase the concentration of the suspended sludge. The efficiency of the typical activated sludge system is enhanced by working with higher concentrations of the suspended sludge than usual and by the additional effect of the biofilm. The powerful effects of the STM system results from this significant increase of the total biomass concentration. The STM-system can be used in the same way and with the same process combinations as a conventional activated sludge system. The immersed STM-contact aerators or contactors are attached radially around a large center shaft. The plates and discs in the contactors are formed with a special surface profile. The process uses only a single mechanical drive system. A geared motor above water level rotates a contactor. Through it atmospheric air is dissolved in the mixer liquor to supply the activated sludge sufficiently with oxygen. The biofilm on the contact aerators is supplied with oxygen when the contactors emerge above water level. During the downward rotation the air is trapped in the chambers created by the plates and discs of the contactors, and forced into the water. As it is conducted to the bottom of the biotank the air is compressed more and more. In principle the biofilm is supplied with oxygen during the total rotation of the contactor, in the atmosphere and in the mixed liquor. The trapped air is partially used to reduce the power requirements by buoyancy so that the power consumption of the system is relatively low. In effect, the contactor acts an extremely efficient aerator. The oxygen supply for all microorganisms is ensured by rotating the contactors slowly. As soon as a segment emerges with its chambers above water level during this rotation, the mixed liquor inside the chambers runs out. The segment will then be filled with atmospheric air. The necessary oxygen for the biological wastewater treatment dissolves on the wet surfaces of the fixed biofilm. Because this very large surface area is directly affected by the partial pressure of the air, an immediate saturation of the oxygen concentration is achieved. By diffusion oxygen penetrates into the biofilm due to the concentration gradient. While the segments are submerging again into the mixed liquor the air cannot escape and is trapped in the segments. As the contactor rotates, the air is forced conducted to the bottom of the biotank. In this way the air is compressed more and more. During the downward rotation some of the air can escape and is channelled in the form of middle fine and fine bubbles to the centre of the aerator caused by the shape of the
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:38
segments. Finally the bubbles reach the water surface through the opposite segments. This turbulence combined with the rotation of the wheel effects a homogeneous mixing of the biotank. The activated sludge in the mixed liquor is always sufficiently supplied with oxygen. During the upward rotation of the contact aerator the partially air filled segments provide buoyancy and tremendously reduce the propulsive power required for rotation. Only a few moments before emerging again the rest of the air is released into the water. The fixed film on the surface areas within the segments are supplied with oxygen up to saturation while open to atmosphere at the start of the cycle. The forced conducted air is contacting all inner surface areas of the plates or discs in the segments during rotation. By this all microorganisms of the fixed film are sufficiently supplied with oxygen during rotation in the mixed liquor too.
Co
ns en
ot
he
ru
se
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
Characteristics of the STM Process

Suitable for Population Equivalents of 50 PE to 5,000. ( can go to 25,000PE ) Complete Waste Water Treatment System that needs no chemicals Utilises a very small space. Totally Automatic. Normally no personnel required on site. Combines the process of fixed film contactors and Activated Sludge treatment. Low Cost, saves over 50% of the power requirement on a conventional plant. Low Maintenance (components have 20 year plus life) Automatic Nitrification and de-Nitrification, Automatic Oxygen level control. Simple to Install. Simple and robust construction. Replaces the technology of Rotating Biological Contactors. No odours of any kind. Larger tank operational volume to conventional RBC's Huge area for the growth of active biofilm. Constant mixing without additional equipment. Higher than normal concentration of the suspended sludge biomass. High process stability. Optimal Oxygen transfer Efficiency Can be containerised, mobile Silent operation Better sludge quality giving better dewatering capability Over 500 installations world-wide. Patented and licensed in 66 Countries.
to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny ot he ru se .
For an Equivalent volume of waste water to be treated : Compared to the Sequence batch reactor process (SBR) the Stahlermatic consumes 67% less energy and occupies 26% less volume area. Compared to a conventional Activated sludge system the Stahlermatic consumes 55% less energy and occupies 48% less volume area. Compared to the other two processes the Stahlermatic provides: A lower required treatment volume More advanced degradation of carbon elements More advanced nitrification More advanced de-nitrification More advanced biological P elimination Simultaneous stabilisation of the sludge. The system can handle storm flows and dry weather flows equally well, with automatic DO sensing to speed up or slow down process. The Stahlermatic can work with or without a final clarifier, (depending on plant size)
Co ns en
To summarise, this system has significant advantages over comparable processes. It has lower investment costs, lower running costs, and a complete absence of the use of any chemicals. It has a very small footprint. e.g. a 3000PE plant is just 1000m2 including inlet screens, gravel traps, the Stahlermatic system and final clarification.
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
Section C2 There are no pumping stations in the Fenagh catchment and there are no overflows in the drainage network other than at the new wastewater treatment works. At the treatment works there is a storm overflow discharge, the final effluent is pumped to the primary discharge at Ullard Bridge. The final effluent (3DWF) is tertiary treated to the following standard. BOD TSS Amm N Total P 10mg/l 10mg/l 5mg/l 1mg/l 95%ile 95%ile 95%ile 95%ile
ru se ot he .
The storm water is treated in the following manner:

When flows exceed the capacity of the forward feed pumps, the storm pumps kick in and pump the storm water unto the storm tank. The storm pumps are sited in a sump and the two pumps operate on a duty/standby basis. In the case of one pump tripping out the other pump cuts in. All flows are screened (6mm) and de-gritted and then any storm water flow above 3DWF(35m3/hr) is overflowed to the storm water holding tank. This tank has a storage capacity of 2 hours at 3DWF which equates to a storage volume of over 80m3. If the tank fills up then settled, screened and de-gritted storm water is overflowed to the river, via a baffled overflow pipe, this flow is measured and recorded. The held storm water in the tank is returned to the forward feed pumping station and provided with secondary treatment, as inlet flows permit, this is managed by the operator. The treated storm water is over flowed to the Burren Tributary at the boundary of the WWTW site, as after 2 hours holding there would be higher flow conditions in the stream providing sufficient dilution.
Co ns en
1
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
SITE SYNOPSIS
SITE NAME: RIVER BARROW AND RIVER NORE SITE CODE: 002162
The site is a candidate SAC selected for alluvial wet woodlands and petrifying springs, priority habitats on Annex I of the E.U. Habitats Directive. The site is also selected as a candidate SAC for old oak woodlands, floating river vegetation, estuary, tidal mudflats, Salicornia mudflats, Atlantic salt meadows, Mediterranean salt meadows, dry heath and eutrophic tall herbs, all habitats listed on Annex I of the E.U. Habitats Directive. The site is also selected for the following species listed on Annex II of the same directive - Sea Lamprey, River Lamprey, Brook Lamprey, Freshwater Pearl Mussel, Nore Freshwater Pearl Mussel, Crayfish, Twaite Shad, Atlantic Salmon, Otter, Vertigo moulinsiana and the plant Killarney Fern. Good examples of Alluvial Forest are seen at Rathsnagadan, Murphys of the River, in Abbeyleix estate and along other shorter stretches of both the tidal and freshwater elements of the site. Typical species seen include Almond Willow (Salix triandra), White Willow (S. alba), Grey Willow (S. cinerea), Crack Willow (S. fragilis), Osier (S. viminalis), with Iris (Iris pseudacorus), Hemlock Water-dropwort (Oenanthe crocata), Angelica (Angelica sylvestris), Thin-spiked Wood-sedge (Carex strigosa), Pendulous Sedge (C. pendula), Meadowsweet (Filipendula ulmaria), Valerian (Valeriana officinalis) and the Red Data Book species Nettle-leaved Bellflower (Campanula trachelium). Three rare invertebrates have been recorded in this habitat at Murphys of the River. These are: Neoascia obliqua (Diptera: Syrphidae), Tetanocera freyi (Diptera: Sciomyzidae) and Dictya umbrarum (Diptera: Sciomyzidae).
Co ns en
This site consists of the freshwater stretches of the Barrow/Nore River catchments as far upstream as the Slieve Bloom Mountains and it also includes the tidal elements and estuary as far downstream as Creadun Head in Waterford. The site passes through eight counties Offaly, Kildare, Laois, Carlow, Kilkenny, Tipperary, Wexford and Waterford. Major towns along the edge of the site include Mountmellick, Portarlington, Monasterevin, Stradbally, Athy, Carlow, Leighlinbridge, Graiguenamanagh, New Ross, Inistioge, Thomastown, Callan, Bennettsbridge, Kilkenny and Durrow. The larger of the many tributaries include the Lerr, Fushoge, Mountain, Aughavaud, Owenass, Boherbaun and Stradbally Rivers of the Barrow and the Delour, Dinin, Erkina, Owveg, Munster, Arrigle and Kings Rivers on the Nore. Both rivers rise in the Old Red Sandstone of the Slieve Bloom Mountains before passing through a band of Carboniferous shales and sandstones. The Nore, for a large part of its course, traverses limestone plains and then Old Red Sandstone for a short stretch below Thomastown. Before joining the Barrow it runs over intrusive rocks poor in silica. The upper reaches of the Barrow also runs through limestone. The middle reaches and many of the eastern tributaries, sourced in the Blackstairs Mountains, run through Leinster Granite. The southern end, like the Nore runs over intrusive rocks poor in silica. Waterford Harbour is a deep valley excavated by glacial floodwaters when the sea level was lower than today. The coast shelves quite rapidly along much of the shore.
ot he ru se .
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
A good example of petrifying springs with tufa formations occurs at Dysart Wood along the Nore. This is a rare habitat in Ireland and one listed with priority status on Annex I of the EU Habitats Directive. These hard water springs are characterised by lime encrustations, often associated with small waterfalls. A rich bryophyte flora is typical of the habitat and two diagnostic species, Cratoneuron commutatum var. commutatum and Eucladium verticillatum, have been recorded. The best examples of old Oak woodlands are seen in the ancient Park Hill woodland in the estate at Abbeyleix; at Kyleadohir, on the Delour, Forest Wood House, Kylecorragh and Brownstown Woods on the Nore; and at Cloghristic Wood, Drummond Wood and Borris Demesne on the Barrow, though other patches occur throughout the site. Abbeyleix Woods is a large tract of mixed deciduous woodland which is one of the only remaining true ancient woodlands in Ireland. Historical records show that Park Hill has been continuously wooded since the sixteenth century and has the most complete written record of any woodland in the country. It supports a variety of woodland habitats and an exceptional diversity of species including 22 native trees, 44 bryophytes and 92 lichens. It also contains eight indicator species of ancient woodlands. Park Hill is also the site of two rare plants, Nettle-leaved Bellflower and the moss Leucodon sciuroides. It has a typical bird fauna including Jay, Long-eared Owl and Raven. A rare invertebrate, Mitostoma chrysomelas, occurs in Abbeyleix and only two other sites in the country. Two flies Chrysogaster virescens and Hybomitra muhlfeldi also occur. The rare Myxomycete fungus, Licea minima has been recorded from woodland at Abbeyleix. Oak woodland covers parts of the valley side south of Woodstock and is well developed at Brownsford where the Nore takes several sharp bends. The steep valley side is covered by Oak (Quercus spp.), Holly (Ilex aquifolium), Hazel (Corylus avellana) and Birch (Betula pubescens) with some Beech (Fagus sylvatica) and Ash (Fraxinus excelsior). All the trees are regenerating through a cover of Bramble (Rubus fruticosus agg.), Foxglove (Digitalis purpurea) Wood Rush (Luzula sylvatica) and Broad Buckler-fern (Dryopteris dilatata). On the steeply sloping banks of the River Nore about 5 km west of New Ross, in County Kilkenny, Kylecorragh Woods form a prominent feature in the landscape. This is an excellent example of a relatively undisturbed, relict Oak woodland with a very good tree canopy. The wood is quite damp and there is a rich and varied ground flora. At Brownstown a small, mature Oak-dominant woodland occurs on a steep slope. There is younger woodland to the north and east of it. Regeneration throughout is evident. The understorey is similar to the woods at Brownsford. The ground flora of this woodland is developed on acidic, brown earth type soil and comprises a thick carpet of Bilberry (Vaccinium myrtillus), Heather (Calluna vulgaris), Hard Fern (Blechnum spicant), Cowwheat (Melampyrum spp.) and Bracken (Pteridium aquilinum). Borris Demesne contains a very good example of a semi-natural broad-leaved woodland in very good condition. There is quite a high degree of natural re-generation of Oak and Ash through the woodland. At the northern end of the estate Oak species predominate. Drummond Wood, also on the Barrow, consists of three blocks of deciduous woods situated on steep slopes above the river. The deciduous trees are mostly Oak species. The woods have a well established understorey of Holly (Ilex aquifolium), and the herb layer is
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
varied, with Brambles abundant. Whitebeam (Sorbus devoniensis) has also been recorded. Eutrophic tall herb vegetation occurs in association with the various areas of alluvial forest and elsewhere where the flood-plain of the river is intact. Characteristic species of the habitat include Meadowsweet (Filipendula ulmaria), Purple Loosestrife (Lythrum salicaria), Marsh Ragwort (Senecio aquaticus), Ground Ivy (Glechoma hederacea) and Hedge Bindweed (Calystegia sepium). Indian Balsam (Impatiens glandulifera), an introduced and invasive species, is abundant in places. Floating River Vegetation is well represented in the Barrow and in the many tributaries of the site. In the Barrow the species found include Water Starworts (Callitriche spp.), Canadian Pondweed (Elodea canadensis), Bulbous Rush (Juncus bulbosus), Milfoil (Myriophyllum spp.), Potamogeton x nitens, Broad-leaved Pondweed (P. natans), Fennel Pondweed (P. pectinatus), Perfoliated Pondweed (P. perfoliatus) and Crowfoots (Ranunculus spp.). The water quality of the Barrow has improved since the vegetation survey was carried out (EPA, 1996). Dry Heath at the site occurs in pockets along the steep valley sides of the rivers especially in the Barrow Valley and along the Barrow tributaries where they occur in the foothills of the Blackstairs Mountains. The dry heath vegetation along the slopes of the river bank consists of Bracken (Pteridium aquilinum) and Gorse (Ulex europaeus) species with patches of acidic grassland vegetation. Additional typical species include Heath Bedstraw (Galium saxatile), Foxglove (Digitalis purpurea), Common Sorrel (Rumex acetosa) and Bent Grass (Agrostis stolonifera). On the steep slopes above New Ross the Red Data Book species Greater Broomrape (Orobanche rapum-genistae) has been recorded. Where rocky outcrops are shown on the maps Bilberry (Vaccinium myrtillus) and Wood Rush (Luzula sylvatica) are present. At Ballyhack a small area of dry heath is interspersed with patches of lowland dry grassland. These support a number of Clover species including the legally protected Clustered Clover (Trifolium glomeratum) - a species known from only one other site in Ireland. This grassland community is especially well developed on the west side of the mud-capped walls by the road. On the east of the cliffs a group of rock-dwelling species occur, i.e. English Stonecrop (Sedum anglicum), Sheep's-bit (Jasione montana) and Wild Madder (Rubia peregrina). These rocks also support good lichen and moss assemblages with Ramalina subfarinacea and Hedwigia ciliata. Dry Heath at the site generally grades into wet woodland or wet swamp vegetation lower down the slopes on the river bank. Close to the Blackstairs Mountains, in the foothills associated with the Aughnabrisky, Aughavaud and Mountain Rivers there are small patches of wet heath dominated by Purple Moor-grass (Molinia caerulea) with Heather (Calluna vulgaris), Tormentil (Potentilla erecta), Carnation Sedge (Carex panicea) and Bell Heather (Erica cinerea). Saltmeadows occur at the southern section of the site in old meadows where the embankment has been breached, along the tidal stretches of in-flowing rivers below Stokestown House, in a narrow band on the channel side of Common Reed (Phragmites) beds and in narrow fragmented strips along the open shoreline. In the larger areas of salt meadow, notably at Carrickcloney, Ballinlaw Ferry and Rochestown on the west bank;
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
Fisherstown, Alderton and Great Island to Dunbrody on the east bank, the Atlantic and Mediterranean sub types are generally intermixed. At the upper edge of the salt meadow in the narrow ecotonal areas bordering the grasslands where there is significant percolation of salt water, the legally protected species Borrers Saltmarsh-grass (Puccinellia fasciculata) and Meadow Barley (Hordeum secalinum) (Flora Protection Order, 1987) are found. The very rare Divided Sedge (Carex divisa) is also found. Sea Rush (Juncus maritimus) is also present. Other plants recorded and associated with salt meadows include Sea Aster (Aster tripolium), Sea Thrift (Armeria maritima), Sea Couch (Elymus pycnanthus), Spear-leaved Orache (Atriplex prostrata), Lesser Sea-spurrey (Spergularia marina), Sea Arrowgrass (Triglochin maritima) and Sea Plantain (Plantago maritima). Salicornia and other annuals colonising mud and sand are found in the creeks of the saltmarshes and at the seaward edges of them. The habitat also occurs in small amounts on some stretches of the shore free of stones. The estuary and the other Habitats Directive Annex I habitats within it form a large component of the site. Extensive areas of intertidal flats, comprised of substrates ranging from fine, silty mud to coarse sand with pebbles/stones are present. Good quality intertidal sand and mudflats have developed on a linear shelf on the western side of Waterford Harbour, extending for over 6 km from north to south between Passage East and Creadaun Head, and in places are over 1 km wide. The sediments are mostly firm sands, though grade into muddy sands towards the upper shore. They have a typical macro-invertebrate fauna, characterised by polychaetes and bivalves. Common species include Arenicola marina, Nephtys hombergii, Scoloplos armiger, Lanice conchilega and Cerastoderma edule. The western shore of the harbour is generally stony and backed by low cliffs of glacial drift. At Woodstown there is a sandy beach, now much influenced by recreation pressure and erosion. Behind it a lagoonal marsh has been impounded which runs westwards from Gaultiere Lodge along the course of a slow stream. An extensive reedbed occurs here. At the edges is a tall fen dominated by sedges (Carex spp.), Meadowsweet, Willowherb (Epilobium spp.) and rushes (Juncus spp.). Wet woodland also occurs. This area supports populations of typical waterbirds including Mallard, Snipe, Sedge Warbler and Water Rail. The dunes which fringe the strand at Duncannon are dominated by Marram grass (Ammophila arenaria) towards the sea. Other species present include Wild Sage (Salvia verbenaca), a rare Red Data Book species. The rocks around Duncannon ford have a rich flora of seaweeds typical of a moderately exposed shore and the cliffs themselves support a number of coastal species on ledges, including Thrift (Armeria maritima), Rock Samphire (Crithmum maritimum) and Buck's-horn Plantain (Plantago coronopus). Other habitats which occur throughout the site include wet grassland, marsh, reed swamp, improved grassland, arable land, quarries, coniferous plantations, deciduous woodland, scrub and ponds. Seventeen Red Data Book plant species have been recorded within the site, most in the recent past. These are Killarney Fern (Trichomanes speciosum), Divided Sedge (Carex
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
divisa), Clustered Clover (Trifolium glomeratum), Basil Thyme (Acinos arvensis), Hemp nettle (Galeopsis angustifolia), Borrers Saltmarsh Grass (Puccinellia fasiculata), Meadow Barley (Hordeum secalinum), Opposite-leaved Pondweed (Groenlandia densa), Autumn Crocus (Colchicum autumnale), Wild Sage (Salvia verbenaca), Nettle-leaved Bellflower (Campanula trachelium), Saw-wort (Serratula tinctoria), Bird Cherry (Prunus padus), Blue Fleabane (Erigeron acer), Fly Orchid (Ophrys insectifera), Broomrape (Orobanche hederae) and Greater Broomrape (Orobanche rapum-genistae). Of these the first nine are protected under the Flora Protection Order 1999. Divided Sedge (Carex divisa) was thought to be extinct but has been found in a few locations in the site since 1990. In addition plants which do not have a very wide distribution in the country are found in the site including Thin-spiked Wood-sedge (Carex strigosa), Field Garlic (Allium oleraceum) and Summer Snowflake (Leucojum aestivum). Six rare lichens, indicators of ancient woodland, are found including Lobaria laetevirens and L. pulmonaria. The rare moss Leucodon sciuroides also occurs. The site is very important for the presence of a number of EU Habitats Directive Annex II animal species including Freshwater Pearl Mussel (Margaritifera margaritifera and M. m. durrovensis), Freshwater Crayfish (Austropotamobius pallipes), Salmon (Salmo salar), Twaite Shad (Alosa fallax fallax), three Lamprey species - Sea (Petromyzon marinus), Brook (Lampetra planeri) and River (Lampetra fluviatilis), the marsh snail Vertigo moulinsiana and Otter (Lutra lutra). This is the only site in the world for the hard water form of the Pearl Mussel M. m. durrovensis and one of only a handful of spawning grounds in the country for Twaite Shad. The freshwater stretches of the River Nore main channel is a designated salmonid river. The Barrow/Nore is mainly a grilse fishery though spring salmon fishing is good in the vicinity of Thomastown and Inistioge on the Nore. The upper stretches of the Barrow and Nore, particularly the Owenass River, are very important for spawning. The site supports many other important animal species. Those which are listed in the Irish Red Data Book include Daubentons Bat (Myotis daubentoni), Badger (Meles meles), Irish Hare (Lepus timidus hibernicus) and Frog (Rana temporaria). The rare Red Data Book fish species Smelt (Osmerus eperlanus) occurs in estuarine stretches of the site. In addition to the Freshwater Pearl Mussel, the site also supports two other freshwater Mussel species, Anodonta anatina and A. cygnea. The site is of ornithological importance for a number of E.U. Birds Directive Annex I species including Greenland White-fronted Goose, Whooper Swan, Bewicks Swan, Bartailed Godwit, Peregrine and Kingfisher. Nationally important numbers of Golden Plover and Bar-tailed Godwit are found during the winter. Wintering flocks of migratory birds are seen in Shanahoe Marsh and the Curragh and Goul Marsh, both in Co. Laois and also along the Barrow Estuary in Waterford Harbour. There is also an extensive autumnal roosting site in the reedbeds of the Barrow Estuary used by Swallows before they leave the country. Landuse at the site consists mainly of agricultural activities many intensive, principally grazing and silage production. Slurry is spread over much of this area. Arable crops are also grown. The spreading of slurry and fertiliser poses a threat to the water quality of the salmonid river and to the populations of Habitats Directive Annex II animal species within the site. Many of the woodlands along the rivers belong to old estates and support
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
many non-native species. Little active woodland management occurs. Fishing is a main tourist attraction along stretches of the main rivers and their tributaries and there are a number of Angler Associations, some with a number of beats. Fishing stands and styles have been erected in places. Both commercial and leisure fishing takes place on the rivers. There is net fishing in the estuary and a mussel bed also. Other recreational activities such as boating, golfing and walking, particularly along the Barrow towpath are also popular. There is a golf course on the banks of the Nore at Mount Juliet and GAA pitches on the banks at Inistioge and Thomastown. There are active and disused sand and gravel pits throughout the site. Several industrial developments, which discharge into the river, border the site. New Ross is an important shipping port. Shipping to and from Waterford and Belview ports also passes through the estuary. The main threats to the site and current damaging activities include high inputs of nutrients into the river system from agricultural run-off and several sewage plants, overgrazing within the woodland areas, and invasion by non-native species, for example Cherry Laurel and Rhododendron (Rhododendron ponticum). The water quality of the site remains vulnerable. Good quality water is necessary to maintain the populations of the Annex II animal species listed above. Good quality is dependent on controlling fertilisation of the grasslands, particularly along the Nore. It also requires that sewage be properly treated before discharge. Drainage activities in the catchment can lead to flash floods which can damage the many Annex II species present. Capital and maintenance dredging within the lower reaches of the system pose a threat to migrating fish species such as lamprey and shad. Land reclamation also poses a threat to the salt meadows and the populations of legally protected species therein. Overall, the site is of considerable conservation significance for the occurrence of good examples of habitats and of populations of plant and animal species that are listed on Annexes I and II of the E.U. Habitats Directive respectively. Furthermore it is of high conservation value for the populations of bird species that use it. The occurrence of several Red Data Book plant species including three rare plants in the salt meadows and the population of the hard water form of the Pearl Mussel which is limited to a 10 km stretch of the Nore, add further interest to this site.
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
16.1.2003
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
S.I. No. 12 of 2001
GUIDANCE MANUAL TO LOCAL AUTHORITIES ON PREPARATION AND SUBMISSION OF MEASURES AND IMPLEMENTATION REPORTS
Co ns en
Environmental Protection Agency
ot
he
ru
se
Water Quality (Dangerous Substances) Regulations, 2001

.
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
An Ghnomhaireacht um Chaomhn Comhshaoil
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
Dangerous Substances Regulations, 2001 - EPA Guidance on Report Preparation
MEASURES AND IMPLEMENTATION REPORTS PREAMBLE The Dangerous Substances Regulations, 2001, prescribe water quality standards in relation to certain substances in surface waters, e.g., rivers, lakes and tidal waters. The substances include certain pesticides (atrazine, simazine, tributyltin1), solvents (dichloromethane, toluene, xylene), metals (arsenic, chromium, copper, lead, nickel, zinc) and certain other compounds (cyanide and fluoride). The Regulations give further effect to the EU Dangerous Substances Directive (76/464/EC) and give effect to certain provisions of the EU Water Framework Directive (2000/60/EC). This document sets out a general framework for the Dangerous Substances Measures and Implementation reports along with guidance on what the reports should contain. The purpose of preparing this document is to facilitate a consistent approach to implementation of the Regulations and reporting of same. Reporting obligations set out in the Regulations are attached as Annex A. SUBMISSION OF THE MEASURES AND IMPLEMENTATION REPORTS Each local authority is required to submit a Measures Report to the EPA by 31 July 2002 in line with Article 10(1) of the Regulations. This report should clearly set out the status of dangerous substances in waters in their functional area; the targets to be achieved; an analysis of potential pressures; and a programme of measures to achieve the standards required in the Regulations. In addition, under Article 10(2), each local authority must submit an Implementation Report to the EPA by 31 July 2004 and every two years thereafter. This report should detail the current water quality and targets; any further information gathered on potential pressures; and the progress made in implementing the proposed measures in each local authority area. It is also important that each local authority should provide information on problems that they may have encountered in the implementation of the Regulations and highlight successes. In particular, local authorities should discuss the relative success of measures applied. Only reports prepared specifically for the implementation of these Regulations will suffice. Other reports, such as those by Catchment Management & Monitoring Schemes or River Basin Management System Projects, will not be considered. However, it is strongly recommended that further information on dangerous substances arising as a result of these projects be considered by local authorities in the implementation of the Regulations and be reported on in local authority Measures/Implementation Reports where relevant.
Co ns en to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny ot he
1
The standard for tributyltin applies in relation to tidal waters only and shall be deemed to be met if the results of monitoring for biological effects indicate no reproductive impairment in gastropods. 3
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
ru
se
Measures and Implementation Reports prepared for the purpose of the Dangerous Substances Regulations may be submitted with reports required under the Phosphorus Regulations, 1998. The Report should be concise. The main body of the report should be restricted to approximately 20 pages with maps and data attached as Appendices. In addition to a hard copy of the Report, the main body of the report together with any tabular appendices should also be provided in electronic format. GENERAL APPROACH The EPA recommends the use of an environmental management systems approach to implementation of the Regulations. This approach operates on the basic principle of continual improvement, which is at the heart of the Regulations. The common principles underpinning an environmental management system approach are outlined in Figure 1, adapted to the requirements of the Regulations.
Assessment of Water Quality
Programme Implementation
Review and Fine-Tuning of Programme based on assessment of water quality and results of audit Auditing System Performance
ot
THE MEASURES REPORT
Setting Targets & Objectives/ Planning for Implementation/ Programme Formulation
LOCAL & NATIONAL IMPLEMENTATION REPORTS
Figure 1 Generalised Environmental Management Systems Approach Adapted to Requirements of the Regulations On an operational level the environmental management system consists of: initial review (in this case baseline status of water quality, analysis of pressures on water resources, review of monitoring programmes etc.); formulation of measures and targets; formulating an environmental management programme or, in this case, an implementation programme for achieving the targets; assigning responsibility for achieving targets and implementing actions; implementing the programme; auditing the performance of the programme; and reviewing and fine tuning the programme until the standards are met. The environmental management programme is often described as the engine for continual improvement. However, targets will only be met by keeping the system
Co
ns en
he
ru
se
4
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
dynamic and subjecting the system to periodic auditing to assess the relative success of measures chosen for meeting the targets. Auditing, in turn, provides information that can be used for reviewing and fine tuning the system so that changes or modifications can be made where necessary. As local authorities are obliged to report every two years to the EPA on the implementation of the Regulations, the EPA recommends that a system audit be conducted prior to preparation of each Implementation Report. Therefore any changes or modifications necessary to meet the standards can be included in the updated Implementation reports.
MAIN HEADINGS FOR MEASURES AND IMPLEMENTATION REPORTS The EPA recommends the following main headings for the Measures and Implementation Reports. The Measures Report should report on Sections 1-3 and the Implementation Reports should report on Sections 1-4. Each local authority is to follow this general layout so that consistent reporting is achieved. This guidance provides details about the type of information that should be submitted in each section of the Report. SECTION 1 - CURRENT WATER QUALITY STATUS AND TARGETS SECTION 2 - IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL PRESSURES SECTION 3 - PROGRAMME FOR IMPLEMENTATION SECTION 4 PROGRESS TO DATE (IMPLEMENTATION REPORT ONLY) Template Tables are provided in Annex C which are to be used for provision of summary information on: current status of water quality with regard to all of the dangerous substances standards to be achieved by 2010 measures, targets and actions to be implemented
5
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
SECTION 1: CURRENT WATER QUALITY STATUS AND TARGETS This section should include current information on dangerous substances in waters in a local authority functional area and standards to be achieved by 2010. Information to be provided should include: The existing condition of a water body for each parameter specified in the Regulations, where the existing condition is defined as the condition most recently determined by a local authority or the EPA prior to the making of the Regulations. Where such condition has not been so determined, the condition of a water body as first determined by a local authority or the EPA after the making of the Regulations. Clear identification of the condition of water bodies in relation to the standards specified in Table 1 and 2 of the Schedule under the following headings: satisfactory waters that require protection; unsatisfactory waters that require improvement to a specified standard.
ru
Identification of any water bodies where the specified standard shall not apply for such a period (not exceeding five years), subject to the approval of the EPA, due to the water body being so affected by human activity that compliance with the relevant standard within that period is not feasible or would be disproportionately expensive (Article 9(1)). Identification of any water bodies so permanently affected by naturally occurring conditions or by past human activity that compliance with the relevant standard is not feasible or would be disproportionately expensive, subject to the approval of the EPA (Article 9(2)). If Article 9(1) extensions or Article 9(2) exemptions are proposed, the basis for such extensions/exemptions should be elaborated upon. Local authorities should also differentiate between cases where IPC activities are involved and those where they are not involved. This has implications for the decision making process associated with such extensions/exemptions, where they might apply. The decision in relation to whether an Article 9(1) extension or Article 9(2) exemption is appropriate is subject to consideration by the EPA. A Template Table is provided in Annex C for provision of the above information. An electronic version of this table will also be provided. Further maps/data on the condition of water bodies may be attached as Appendices to the report. The maps/data should also indicate where extensions are proposed under Article 9(1) and where there is a proposal for a water body to be exempted under Article 9(2).
Co ns en
Clear identification of the standards a local authority is required to achieve by December 31, 2010. Performance will ultimately be measured against the achievement of these standards.
ot he se .
6
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
SECTION 2: IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL PRESSURES This section should include an assessment of the use of each dangerous substance in the local authority area. Information is provided in Annex D on the potential uses of each dangerous substance, to provide assistance in identifying and quantifying potential pollution sources. It is important to note that Annex D is not necessarily exhaustive and that each local authority should identify likely sources of each dangerous substance within its functional area. Information to be provided should include: A preliminary identification of pressures, which may pose a threat to water quality in relation to the relevant dangerous substances, and therefore require further investigation. An assessment should be made of activities that may potentially be contributing to unsatisfactory levels of dangerous substances in rivers/lakes/tidal waters. This should include a consideration of point and nonpoint source inputs of both rural and urban origin relevant in the particular catchment and/or sub-catchment, such as inputs from: wastewater and drinking water treatment works urban stormwater overflows and runoff industrial and other point-source discharges mining activities illegal / legal landfills agricultural run-off discharges from farm yards groundwater e.g. movement of dangerous substances from soil through groundwater into rivers and lakes afforestation
A catchment-based analysis of causes of unsatisfactory levels of dangerous substances and threats to waters currently considered to be of satisfactory quality. An attempt should be made to identify the primary cause or causes of elevated levels of dangerous substances for each part of river/lake/tidal water affected so that appropriate sub-catchment measures can be identified and included in the Implementation Programme. Proposed new monitoring locations where considered necessary, to ensure that surface waters at highest risk of pollution from dangerous substances are identified and monitored.
This section should be updated in subsequent implementation reports as further information on dangerous substances arises. SECTION 3: PROGRAMME FOR IMPLEMENTATION In the Measures Report a programme for implementation of the requirements of the Regulations should be drawn up for:
Environmental Protection Agency 7
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
a) the County as a whole, and b) each river / lake / tidal water or catchment / subcatchment These Programmes should be designed to be dynamic and are to be subjected to regular review depending on the relative success of their implementation. As stated above, the EPA recommends an environmental management systems approach to the implementation of the Regulations and the preparation and implementation of these programmes. The programmes should identify or seek to identify the particular measures suitable to deal with specific problems in the County and specific rivers/lakes/tidal waters or catchments/sub-catchments within the county. Vague aspirational statements should be avoided (e.g., avoid statements such as enforcement of Water Pollution Acts instead state which aspects of the Acts are to be or are being enforced, with numbers of Section notices issued, licences to be reviewed, etc.). A list of general measures grouped under a number of headings is provided in Annex B as a general guide to measures available. This is not presented as an exhaustive list and each local authority will need to consider what specific measures are appropriate for its own situation. For specific measures, targets can be defined for catchments/subcatchments or for the County as a whole. It is recognised that a certain amount of flexibility will be required with regard to the use of various measures over the lifetime of the Regulations. However, it is important, in the early stages of implementation, to think about which specific measures are appropriate for specific problems so that workable and achievable Implementation Programmes can be put in place. Programmes should specify measures for both the preservation and improvement of water quality and how the local authority intends to implement these measures both at County level and for individual catchments. This will include the setting of targets for specific measures and a description of the actions required to meet those targets. The programme(s) should also identify what is planned to be achieved at both county and catchment level in: the immediate term (by July 31, 2004); the short term (by July 31, 2006); the medium term (by July 31, 2008); and the long term (by July 31, 2010 and beyond).
The dates suggested coincide with those specified for submission of the Implementation Reports (see Annex A). The summary Implementation Programme Tables provided in Annex C are provided as a guide for tracking the implementation of measures at catchment/subcatchment level. An electronic version of these tables will also be provided. They provide for a summary description of measures, targets, actions, timeframes and assigned responsibilities. More detailed descriptions of the various Programmes for
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
Implementation at County / River / Lake / Tidal Water level may be included in the main body of the Report. In the Implementation Reports an update should be given on the status of each measure, in order to track implementation of the measures proposed in the Measures Report. This should include a concise summary of action taken since the previous report and whether the measure has been completed or not. If the measure has not been completed a revised timescale for completion should be proposed, where appropriate. For measures that are ongoing, progress to date should be reported. As implementation of the Regulations will be an iterative process and depend largely on whether water quality is improving or being preserved and possible legislative or policy developments, it is expected that new measures will be proposed over the lifetime of the Regulations. These new measures, with timescales and responsibility assigned, should be clearly identified.
Co
ns en
ot
he
ru
se
9
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
SECTION 4 PROGRESS TO DATE (IMPLEMENTATION REPORT ONLY) It is important that, in the main body of the report, local authorities highlight successes they have had in implementation of the Regulations, with particular reference to measures that have been effective. In addition, local authorities should outline any problems they have encountered in implementation of the Regulations and suggest possible solutions. Each local authority should also outline its future plans and any new initiatives proposed for implementation of the Regulations. The measures proposed for implementation fall into five general categories (Annex B). This list of measures is not exhaustive but should serve as a useful reference. The layout of this Section in the Implementation Report should follow that presented below. 4.1 Planning Control and Enforcement Measures a) Progress During Reporting Period b) Problems Encountered c) Future Plans/New Directions 4.2 Consultative and Co-operative Measures a) Progress During Reporting Period b) Problems Encountered c) Future Plans/New Directions 4.3 Monitoring Measures a) Progress During Reporting Period b) Problems Encountered c) Future Plans/New Directions
Co ns en ot he ru se .
4.4 Public Education and Advisory Measures a) Progress During Reporting Period b) Problems Encountered c) Future Plans/New Directions 4.5 Other National and Miscellaneous Measures relevant to Dangerous Substances a) Progress During Reporting Period b) Problems Encountered c) Future Plans/New Directions 4.6 Summary and Conclusions a) Progress During Reporting Period b) Problems Encountered c) Future Plans/New Directions
10
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
Useful References Water Quality (Dangerous Substances) Regulations, 2001 (S.I. No. 12 of 2001) Stephens, 2001. A Survey of Dangerous Substances in Surface Freshwaters 19992000. EPA, Ireland An Foras Talntais, 1980. Soil Associations of Ireland and their Land Use Potential. Soil Survey Bulletin No. 36. An Foras Talntais. Bowden, 1994. A Study of Heavy Metals in the Natural Environment in proposed Mining Areas. EC Stride Environment Subprogramme Measure 1. EPA Regional Water Laboratory, Kilkenny. Bowman, J.J., 2000. River Shannon. 1999. EPA, Ireland. Lake Water Quality Monitoring 1998 and
Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, 2000. Farm Waste Management Scheme. Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, 2001. Practice.
Co ns en
Department of Agriculture, Food and Rural Development, 2000. Agri-Environmental Specifications for REPS 2000.
ot
he
ru
Bowman, J.J. and Toner, P.F., 2001. National Lake Water Quality Monitoring Programme. A Discussion Document. EPA, Ireland.
se .
Good Farming
Department of the Environment and Local Government, 1997. Sustainable Development, A Strategy for Ireland. Department of the Environment and Local Government, Environmental Protection Agency & Geological Survey of Ireland, 1999. Groundwater Protection Schemes. Department of the Environment and Local Government. Code of Good Practice for the Use of Biosolids in Agriculture. Guidelines for Farmers. Fehily, Timoney and Company. Department of the Environment and Local Government. Code of Good Practice for the Use of Biosolids in Agriculture. Guidelines for Local Authorities. Fehily, Timoney and Company. EPA, 1997. Environmental Quality Objectives and Environmental Quality Standards, The Aquatic Environment, A Discussion Document. EPA, 2000. Irelands Environment: A Millennium Report.
11
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
EPA, 2001. Parameters of Water Quality: Interpretations and Standards. EPA, 2001. The Quality of Drinking Water in Ireland. EPA, 2002. National River Water Quality Monitoring Programme. Document. EPA, Ireland. EPA, various. BATNEEC Guidance Notes. Existing Water Quality Management Plans. Groundwater Protection Schemes and Source Protection Areas for County. International Standards Organisation, 1996. ISO 14001 Environmental Management Systems - specifications with guidance for use. Local Authority Development Plans. ODonnell, C., 1980. Organic Micropollutants in Irish Waters.
ot he ru se .
A Discussion
An Foras Forbartha.
ODonnell, C. 1996. Pesticides in Drinking Waters. EPA, Ireland Teagasc, 1994. Soil Analysis & Fertiliser, Lime, Animal Manure & Trace Element Recommendations. Waste Management Plans and Strategies.
Co
ns en
Waste Management (Use of Sewage Sludge in Agriculture) Regulations, 1998 (S.I. No. 148 of 1998).
12
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
ANNEX A: REPORTING REQUIREMENTS Reporting obligations under the Dangerous Substances Regulations Local Authority Reports 31 July 2002 (Measures) 31 July 2004 (Implementation) 31 July 2006 (Implementation) 31 July 2008 (Implementation) 31 July 2010 (Implementation) 31 July 2012 (Implementation) EPA Reports 30 April 2005 (National Implementation) 30 April 2007 (National Implementation) 30 April 2009 (National Implementation) 30 April 2011 (National Implementation) 30 April 2013 (National Implementation)
Measures Report Local authorities to submit report to EPA by July 31, 2002, setting out measures to be taken to implement the Regulations. Local Authority Implementation Reports Local authorities to submit biennial progress reports to the EPA, by 31 July 2004, 2006, 2008, 2010 etc. National Implementation Reports National reports on the implementation of the Regulations to be published by the EPA within nine months of receipt of local authority reports (i.e. by 30 April 2005, 2007, 2009, 2011 etc.) with recommendations where considered necessary.
to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny ot
Co
ns en
he
ru
se
13
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:39
ANNEX B: MEASURES AVAILABLE FOR IMPLEMENTATION The primary sources for identifying measures available for implementation are: The Principal Acts (Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, 1977 as amended by the Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, 1990. Dangerous Substances Regulations, 2001 Information arising from work undertaken by the River Basin Management System Projects New measures are likely to emerge over the coming years, for instance, through new legislation or the creation of new initiatives. Each local authority will need to keep abreast of changes and developments that might impact on the implementation of the Regulations. Measures can be considered under various headings. The following are suggested: Planning, Control and Enforcement Measures Consultative and Co-operative Measures Monitoring Measures Public Education and Advisory Measures Other National and Miscellaneous Measures
The following is a list of measures that could be considered. This is not presented as an exhaustive list and each local authority will need to consider what specific measures are appropriate for its own situation.
ns en
Co
ot
he
ru
se
14
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
B.1 PLANNING CONTROL AND ENFORCEMENT MEASURES Water Quality Management Planning A key planning measure available to local authorities is the power to make a water quality management plan for any waters in its functional area or which adjoin that area. Any review of existing water quality management plans or development of new water quality management plans should take into account the requirements of the Dangerous Substances Regulations, as well as the requirements of the Phosphorus Regulations, 1998, the Water Framework Directive and other relevant pieces of water quality legislation. Other plans that should take into account these pieces of legislation include Groundwater Protection Plans, and waste and sludge management plans. Water Quality Management Plans should be included in the Development Plan for the County. Planning and Control Measures For point-source discharges within catchments: Issuing and enforcing licenses under section 4 of the Act to control point source discharges Review of existing section 4 licences in light of the requirements of the Dangerous Substances Regulations Issuing and enforcement of licenses under section 16 of the Act to control discharges to sewer that might, in turn, discharge to waters Review of existing section 16 licences in light of the requirements of the Dangerous Substances Regulations Upgrading urban wastewater discharges to reduce dangerous substances inputs from WWTPs Control of discharges from septic tanks and other small-scale sewage treatment systems either through the planning system or through licensing under the Water Pollution Act. Survey and/or upgrade surface water and foul sewer/drainage systems Remedy storm water overflows and urban runoff Farm surveys Catchment surveys for point source pollution from licensed/unlicensed discharges Upgrading of landfills Recycling / safe disposal of wastes Assess water abstractions Leakage control Controls on quarries, sheep dips, peat extraction industry Prosecution for non-compliance with licences Prosecutions for other contraventions of the Water Pollution Acts. For non point-source discharges within catchments
15
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
Regulation and control of certain agricultural activities under section 21 of the Act of 1990: i.e., the making of bye-laws Farm surveys and pesticide use surveys Review licensed landspreading Ensure Best Farm Management Practices Controls on forestry Prosecutions for contravention of the Water Pollution Acts. General Enforcement Measures Enforcement of section 3 of the Water Pollution Act (General prohibition on the entry of polluting matter to waters) Issue and enforcement of Section 10 notices (powers of courts, local authorities and regional boards in relation to the mitigation and remedying of effects of pollution) Issue and enforcement of Section 12 notices (power to require measures to be taken to prevent water pollution) Use of Section 13 powers (power to prevent and abate pollution in certain circumstances) Enforcement of Section 14 (notification of accidental discharges) Issue of Section 23 notices (power to require information on activities which may cause pollution) Enforcement of licences issued under sections 4 and 16. Enforcement actions could include: regular monitoring/sampling regular site inspections audits Prosecutions for contravention of the Water Pollution Acts. B.2 CONSULTATIVE AND COOPERATIVE MEASURES Establishment of Multi-Sectoral Catchment Management Groups Setting up consultative and co-operative structures that involve all stakeholders, such as multi-sectoral catchment management groups, is essential to the successful management of a catchment. This will be particularly important where both point and diffuse inputs are responsible for deterioration of water quality as reversal of the trend may require a range of actions across a number of sectors. The EPA recommends that multi-sectoral catchment management groups be set up to deal with water quality issues arising at a catchment level. Any management group set up should address the requirements of the Dangerous Substances Regulations, as well as the requirements of the Phosphorus Regulations, 1998, the Water Framework Directive and other relevant pieces of water quality legislation. Each local authority should identify key stakeholders both at county and catchment level. Stakeholders can roughly be identified as those who either are contributing to
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
Co
ns en
ot
he
ru
se
the problem and therefore need to be involved as part of the solution and those that are beneficiaries of improvements in water quality, as well as statutory bodies with responsibilities for protection and improvement of water quality. Stakeholders include: Central and Regional Fisheries Boards Teagasc Geological Survey of Ireland Industry associations such as IBEC, SFA, ISME and artificial fertiliser groups Agricultural representative organisations such as the IFA and the ICMSA Forestry companies and associations Specific industries/activities identified as being contributors to dangerous substance discharge Tourist boards, fishery organisations, and other sectoral interests with a beneficial interest in water quality improvement Community-based organisations Partnership organisations such as the LEADER groups
he ru se .
Other possible measures that may be implemented under this heading include the establishment of: a public consultation forum a local authority steering group / implementation committee to implement both the Dangerous Substances Regulations and the Phosphorus Regulations a working group on point / non-point sources liaison structures with other local authorities liaison with the EPA on IPC and waste facilities liaison with relevant stakeholders the appointment of a specialist advisor on various relevant topics
Co ns en to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny ot
17
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
B.3 MONITORING MEASURES The Regulations have specific requirements in terms of: i. the establishment of baseline water quality conditions, and ii. monitoring progress with regard to the achievement of necessary improvements in water quality. There is limited information presently available on dangerous substances in Irish waters. In relation to rivers, the EPA surveyed eleven of the fourteen substances listed in the Regulations at seventy-four sites in 1999-2000 (Stephens, 2001). It is proposed under the National Rivers Monitoring Programme (EPA, 2002) that the EPA will sample monthly for thirteen of the fourteen dangerous substances at fifteen river locations nationally. (Under the legislation tributyltin is to be monitored in tidal waters only, using gastropods.) The EPA will monitor a further eight sites, covering the main mining locations in the country, specifically for heavy metals. Depending on the outcome, this monitoring programme will be revised and other potential sources of dangerous substances will be examined instead. The EPA proposes to conduct an initial survey of the priority substances listed in Annex X of the Water Framework Directive at a core group of high and good quality river sites that are representative of the major ecological types defined for Irish rivers in Annex II of the Directive. An initial screening approach for priority substances is also proposed for less pristine rivers (EPA, 2002). There is some overlap between the list of priority substances in the Water Framework Directive and the substances listed in the Dangerous Substances Regulations (e.g., atrazine, dichloromethane, lead, nickel, simazine and tributyltin). In relation to lakes, there has been limited monitoring of dangerous substances to date and the EPA does not propose to monitor these substances in its current national lake water quality monitoring programme (Bowman and Toner, 2001). Very limited information is available on metals in the Shannon lakes (Bowman, 2000) and on selected acid lakes in recent years. An assessment is ongoing of potential requirements in this area under the Water Framework Directive. In relation to tidal waters, the Fisheries Research Centre have collected data on concentrations in sediments and/or biota (mainly fish and shellfish flesh) for many of the metals listed in the Dangerous Substances Regulations. In the case of tributyltin, a biological effects monitoring programme, which has been in operation for a number of years, is thought likely to fulfil the requirements of the Regulations. However, data on concentrations in water of the dangerous substances are almost entirely lacking. Other information available on dangerous substances in Irish waters include an An Foras Forbartha report on organic micropollutants in Irish waters (ODonnell, 1980); an EC Stride study on heavy metals in proposed mining areas in Kilkenny and Tipperary NR (Bowden, 1994); an EPA survey of pesticides in drinking waters in 1994-95 (ODonnell, 1996); and the annual EPA drinking water reports (e.g., EPA,
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
Co
ns en
ot
he
ru
se
2001). In addition, local authorities and the Agency may have data arising from the monitoring of licensable activities or special investigations. Many local authorities have well established monitoring programmes in place though these generally do not provide information on dangerous substances. Examination of discharge licences and an assessment of sales of dangerous substances should be among the measures used by local authorities to provide information on likely sources of dangerous substances and therefore to ascertain potential monitoring locations. Local Authorities may utilise the River Basin Management System Projects to identify and catalogue actual or potential discharges of dangerous substances within each River Basin District and then to target individual substances for monitoring and assessment. There may be a number of potential sources of information available on dangerous substances in the local authority functional area. For example local authorities may utilise results from monitoring undertaken for the Surface Water Abstraction Regulations, 1989; from monitoring of discharge licences; or from monitoring of EPA licensed IPPC and Waste facilities. Any results available should be presented in the local authority reports. It is recommended that the local authority would monitor a limited number of high risk sites intensively throughout the year (monthly/bi-monthly if possible). These sites do not have to be EPA monitoring stations. Monitoring for the herbicides, atrazine and simizine, need only be undertaken in the spring, summer and autumn periods. Where monitoring results do not indicate significant levels of these substances, different sites may be chosen. The local authority should consult with EPA monitoring staff in Dublin (Dr Ciaran ODonnell) regarding the selection of monitoring sites as the EPA have undertaken a national monitoring programme for dangerous substances. Where point sources are to be monitored it is recommended that upstream and downstream samples are taken to allow for natural background levels and to exclude the possibility of other pollution sources. Detection limits for analytical methods used, should be adequate to assess compliance with the Regulations. Where monitoring for dangerous substances is undertaken and results are presented in the Implementation Reports - an indication of the sampling frequency should be given beside any median or average values. Total hardness should always be monitored and reported when assessing heavy metal levels. It should be noted that different standards apply for certain substances in the Regulations (i.e., arsenic, chromium, copper, cyanide, fluoride, lead, nickel and zinc) depending on water hardness levels and whether samples are taken in freshwater or tidal water. For this reason different tables should be filled in for each water body type (i.e. separately for rivers, lakes and tidal waters as presented in Annex C, Table 1), and water hardness levels should be reported for samples taken for these substances in freshwaters. Monitoring, in relation to the implementation of the Regulations, should be considered in the broader context of monitoring progress towards the achievement of
19
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
the targets in the Regulations. considered include:
Specific monitoring measures that should be
Public Education Campaigns Provision of Technical Advice and Assistance Publicity campaigns such as use of TV, radio, newspapers and other media Schools education programmes Promotion of Catchment Planning through public signs, leaflets etc. Development of sectoral education programmes Appointment of environmental education officer
Co ns en
B.5 OTHER NATIONAL & MISCELLANEOUS MEASURES Section 29 (funding for research, surveys or investigations in relation to water pollution) REPS Farm Waste Management Scheme Targeted use of fines imposed by Courts and awarded to prosecuting local authority Measures by local authorities to maximise local sources of funding to be directed at Catchment Management (e.g. from local business, commercial and tourism interests etc.) Secure finance from Government Recruit staff
B.4 PUBLIC EDUCATION & ADVISORY MEASURES
ot
he
ru
se
integration of monitoring of dangerous substances by the local authorities, EPA, River Basin Management System Projects, Marine Institute etc. to avoid unnecessary duplication of effort hazard identification from existing industrial, municipal and agricultural activities development of specific catchment/sub-catchment monitoring programmes where necessary investigate causes of surface water/ groundwater pollution use of geographic information systems for storage and interrogation of data on a catchment basis review of field sampling programmes and quality control/quality assurance procedures development of site inspection/auditing programmes for activities identified as high-risk in relation to dangerous substances risk potential monitoring of point / non-point pollution sources upgrading of council facilities / equipment
undertake specific research projects.
20
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
ANNEX C - TEMPLATE TABLES Table 1: Summary of Current Status of River/Lake/Tidal Water Quality in Functional Area and Standards to be Achieved
Local Authority Name River/Lake/Tidal Water Name River/Lake/ Tidal Water Code Report Year Monitoring Station Code Station Location Name Grid Reference Dangerous Substance Baseline Condition (g/l) Water Hardness Is Baseline (mg/l CaCO3) Quality (where Satisfactory? applicable) Yes/No
Table 1 (continued)
se
Current Condition (g/l)
Water Hardness Standard to be (mg/l CaCO3) Achieved by (where 2010 applicable) (g/l)
Has Is an Article If Yes, What is Is an Article Where Quality is If there is an identifiable Standard 9(1) the proposed 9(2) Unsatisfactory What is source, please enter Been Extension compliance Exemption the Principal Source of details Achieved? Proposed? date? Proposed? Pollution?
Co n
nt o
f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny
21
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
ot
he
ru
se
The purpose of the following Tables is firstly to summarise the standards to be achieved before the statutory deadline and at shorter terms within that deadline and secondly to link the standards with the measures to be implemented, the specific targets set for those measures together with actions required to meet those targets, associated timeframes and assigned responsibilities. They are provided as a guide for tracking the implementation of measures at catchment/sub-catchment level. The table should be completed separately for measures to be implemented at a county level, and for measures to be implemented in each river, lake and tidal water or catchment/subcatchment. Examples are given as a guide. Table 2.1: County Implementation Programme
Standard to be achieved Measures Targets Actions Timeframe Responsible for Implementation Progress to Date Corrective Actions Action completed within timeframe? (Y/N) Y If not, state revised timeframe
To improve unsatisfactory water quality and to maintain satisfactory water quality in County X
Review and enforcement of all section 4 licences in light of Regulations
Reduce dangerous substances inputs from licensed premises
Wastewater treatment plants
Reduce dangerous substance inputs from WWTPs
Determine dangerous substance loads from licensed premises, assimilative capacity of receiving waters and determine whether changes are required to licences Prosecution for noncompliance with licences Establish dangerous substances loads from WWTPs
31/7/2003
NAME OF COUNTY
SEE, Environment
ot
he
ru
se
All Licences reviewed: 40 Section 4s
nt o
Co n
Ongoing
SEE, Environment
10 prosecutions taken since 2001 Monitoring ongoing but dangerous substance loads to be established Ongoing Appoint additional staff
Ongoing
se
1/6/2005
SEE, Environment
1/6/2006
Establish priority list of WWTP to be upgraded
1/12/2003
SEE, Sanitary Services
N/A
22
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
Table 2.2: Implementation Programme Summary Table For Each River / Lake / Tidal Water
Standard Measures Targets Actions Timeframe Responsible for Implementation Progress to Date Corrective Action Action Completed within timeframe? (Y/N) Y If not, state revised timeframe
NAME OF RIVER / LAKE / TIDAL WATER

To improve water quality at stations on river X Farm surveys Assess farm management to reduce dangerous substances inputs to river Review water quality data to determine where farm surveys required. 1/6/2003 SEE, Environment Water quality reviewed
Enforce Water Pollution Act
Reduce dangerous substances inputs to river
Carry out 100 farm surveys in hot spot areas of catchment. Issue and enforce section 3, 10, 12 and 13 notices
1/6/2002
SEE, Environment
ot
he
ru
se
50 farm surveys complete Notices issued: 10 Section 3 6 Section 10s 2 Section 12s 1 Section 13
N/A
Ongoing
SEE, Environment
Ongoing
Co n
se
nt o
23
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
Co n
se
nt o
24
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
ot
he
ru
se
ANNEX D: Guide to Potential Sources of Dangerous Substances listed in the Dangerous Substances Regulations, 2001.
Dangerous substance Atrazine Simazine Background Information Atrazine belongs to the triazine class of herbicides. Simazine belongs to the triazine class of herbicides. Tributlytin (TBT) is an organotin. TBT by itself is unstable and will break down in the environment unless it is combined with an element such as oxygen. One of the most common TBT compounds is bis(tributyltin) oxide, or TBTO. Potential Sources It is used for control of broadleaf and grassy weeds in corn, orchards, turf grass sod, forestry, grasslands, grass crops and roses. It is used for control of broadleaf and grassy weeds in corn, orchards, turf grass sod, forestry, grasslands, grass crops and roses. It may also be used as an algaecide in ponds. It is used as a fungicide and molluscicide. Antifouling agent for boats to discourage growth of marine organisms. Used for manufacture of other pesticides. Used to combat freshwater snails. Preservative in industrial applications e.g. as a wood and textile preservative and disinfectant. Used for prevention of slimes in industrial recirculating water systems. Stabilizer in PVC resin plastic manufacturing. Paper and pulp mills. Cooling towers. Breweries. Leather processing facilities. Used as a process chemical in the pharmaceutical sector, in the production of paints and adhesives, and as a solvent for paint removers. Used as a cleaning fluid and as a degreasing agent. Automobile exhaust. Consumer product paints. Paint thinners. Fingernail polish. Lacquers. Adhesives. Solvent in fine chemicals industry. Xylene is a constituent of gasoline and this results in a wide distribution of very large amounts. The isomer mixture is used as a solvent for alkyl resins, coatings and lacquers. o-xylene is mainly (95% globally) used for synthesis of phthalic acid anyhdride. p-xylene is consumed (66% globally) for synthesis of dimethylterephthalate and 33% globally for terephthalic acid. m-xylene is used for the synthesis of isophthalic acid and m-toluic acid. All three isomers are intermediates for vitamins, dyes, pharmaceuticals, pesticides, flavouring agents and other fine chemicals. Many industrial uses, most notably as a fuel additive and as a solvent for numerous materials, e.g., in the printing, rubber, and leather industries. Used in photographic industry Along with other solvents, xylene is also used as a cleaning agent, a paint thinner, and in varnishes. Xylene is used as a material in the chemical, plastics, and synthetic fibre industries and as an ingredient in the coating of fabrics and papers. Aromatic hydrocarbons used by rubber and insecticide industries, chemical, pharmaceutical and explosive manufacturers.
Tributyltin
Dichloromethane Toluene
Toluene is a volatile organic carbon. It is a petroleum component.
Xylenes
Xylene is a volatile organic carbon and it is a petroleum component. It is a colourless, flammable liquid with a sweet odour. There are three forms of xylene in which the methyl groups vary on the benzene ring: metaxylene, ortho-xylene, and paraxylene (m-, o-, and p-xylene). These different forms are referred to as isomers. The term total xylenes refers to all three isomers of xylene. Mixed xylene is a mixture of the three isomers and usually also contains 6-15 percent ethylbenzene. Xylene is also known as xylol or dimethylbenzene. Xylene is primarily a synthetic chemical. Chemical industries produce xylene from petroleum. Xylene also occurs naturally in petroleum
Co
ns en
Dichloromethane is a volatile organic carbon.
ot
he
ru
se
25
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
Arsenic
and coal tar and is formed during forest fires. Metal
Chromium
Metal
Copper
Metal
Lead
Metal
Nickel
Metal
Widely used in wood preservation. Glass and semi-conductor industries. Fungicide in timber processing. Natural dissolution of minerals and ores. Base metal (tin, bauxite) extraction. Smelting/refining of lead, lead-scrape, zinc, copper. Steel manufacture dusts/sludges from off-gas purification. Tanning and depilation of hides. Dusts from flues. Paint manufacture (arsenic may be used as a pigment). Biocide manufacture, formulation, marketing or use. Adhesive manufacturing (particularly for metals). Manufacture/maintenance of zerographic machines. Textile industry, oil cloths, calico printing and dyeing. Electroplating industry. Tanning and textile plants. Paint and dyeing plants. Natural dissolution of minerals and ores. Metallic products. Refractories. To form alloys with iron, nickel, or cobalt. Final composition of stainless steels. Used for high-speed metal-cutting tools. Widely used as body trim on automobiles and other vehicles. Mining waste. Electroplating waste. Algicide. Natural dissolution of minerals and ores. Photographic processes. Treatment and finishing of metals. Paint, ink manufacturing. Timber and hide preservation. Production/use of pigments, ceramics manufacture, textile dyeing and printing. Copper wire used in electronic transmission. Mining waste. Electroplating waste. Discarded batteries. Cable coverings. Ammunition. Trace components in copper and zinc concentrates, coal, oil. Stabilisers. Semi-finished products. Solders. Glass and ceramics. Others including fishing industry. Natural dissolution of ores. Electroplating waste Natural dissolution of minerals Nickel is used chiefly in making alloys. A protective and ornamental coating for metals Nickel steel is used in automobile parts such as axles, crankshafts, gears, valves, and rods; in machine parts; and in armor plate. Some of the most important nickel-containing alloys are German
Co
ns en
ot
he
ru
se
26
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
Zinc
Metal
Cyanide
Cyanide is a carbon-nitrogen chemical unit that combines with many organic and inorganic compounds.
Fluoride
Halogen
silver, Invar, Monel metal, Nichrome, and Permalloy. Also a key component of nickel-cadmium batteries. Mining waste Natural dissolution of minerals Principally used as a protective coating, or galvanizer, for iron and steel, as an ingredient of various alloys. As plates for dry electric cells and for die castings. Zinc oxide is used as a paint pigment, a filler in rubber tyres and is employed in medicine as an antiseptic ointment. Zinc chloride is used as a wood preservative and as a soldering fluid. Zinc sulfide is useful in applications involving electroluminescence, photoconductivity, and semiconductivity and has other electronic uses. It is employed as a phosphor for the screens of television tubes and in fluorescent coatings. Industrial effluents principally from electroplating processes and electric components manufacture Heat-treatment of metals and finishing operations. Cyanide pesticides used as fumigants. Coal-gas purification, steel industries where ferri/cyanide containing wastes are produced. Chemical synthesis, photography and pigment manufacture are other areas in which ionic cyanides and ferri/ferrocyanides are used. Organic cyanides may take the form of chemical intermediaries in the synthesis of antioxidants, pharmaceuticals, dyes and surface-active agents. The plastics, surface coatings and adhesive industries may all involve the use of organic cyanides. Arises from fluoridation of public water supplies and industrial discharges. Municipal sewage. Occurs naturally in quite rare instances. The chlorofluorocarbons were used as dispersing agents in aerosol sprays and as refrigerants but have been largely replaced due to the restrictions of the Montreal Protocol. Teflon, a fluorine plastic is used to make such products as motor gaskets and dashboard accessories in the automobile industry. It is also used as a coating on the inner surface of frying pans and other kitchen utensils. Perfluorocarbons and sulfur hexafluoride used in semi-conductor industry. Hydrogen fluoride is used as an etchant in glass industry and semiconductor industries. Liquid fluorinated hydrocarbons derived from petroleum are useful as highly stable lubricating oils. Fluoride wastes are by-products of phosphate fertilizer production.
Co
ns en
ot
he
ru
se
27
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
Water Quality (Dangerous Substances) Regulations, 2001 S.I. No. 12 of 2001 Dangerous Substances Implementation Report 2006
to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny Co ns en ot he ru se .
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
Table of Contents
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Current Water Quality and Targets 2.1 Main Rivers in County Carlow County Council 2.2 Water Quality Standards 2.3Current Water Quality Status
3.0 Identification of Potential Pressures 3.1 Wastewater Treatment Plant 3.2 Industrial Discharges 3.3 Agricultural Activities 3.4 Urban Storm Water Run-off and Overflows 3.5 Powerstown Landfill Facility 4.0 Programme for Implementation
Co
4.1 Monitoring Programme & Catchment Management 4.2 Wastewater Treatment Plants 4.3 Industrial Discharges 4.4 Consultative and Co-Operative Measures 4.5 Public Education and Advisory Measures
ns en
ot
he
ru
se
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
1.0
Introduction
Dangerous Substances have the potential to cause the most harm to aquatic life due to their persistence, toxicity or bioaccumulation. Many human activities, and some natural processes, release chemicals into rivers and the sea. Industrial plants and sewage
treatment works are the biggest source of the most harmful or dangerous substances, which include certain metals and pesticides. The aim of the EU Dangerous Substances Directive (76/464/EEC and Daughter Directives) is to improve water quality through the elimination and/or reduction of dangerous substances discharged to the aquatic environment.
The Water Quality (Dangerous Substances) Regulations, 2001, prescribe water quality
ot he
standards in relation to certain substances in surface waters, e.g., rivers, lakes and tidal waters. The substances include certain pesticides (atrazine, simazine, tributylin), solvents (dichlormethane, toluene, xylene), metals (arsenic, chromium, copper,lead, nickel,zinc) and certain other compounds (cyanide and fluoride). The Regulations give further effect to the EU Dangerous Substances Directive (76/464/EC) and give effect to certain provisions of the EU Water Framework Directive (200/60/EC).
Co ns en to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny
The Regulations specify quality standards for the countrys rivers and lakes that must be achieved by 31st of December 2010. Carlow County Council is the local authority assigned statutory responsibility to implement the Regulations in County Carlow and is required to submit a Measures Report to the EPA in line with Article 10(1) of the Regulations.
This measures report is based on the Guidance Manual to Local Authorities on Preparation and submission of Measures and Implementation Reports issued by the EPA. It will also be based on the experience gained from the implementation of the actions specified in the Phosphorous Measures Report and the fundamental principles of an environmental management systems approach.
ru
se
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
2.0 Current Water Quality and Targets

2.1 Main rivers in County Carlow There are two main river Catchment systems in County Carlow, the River Barrow and the River Slaney. The western portion of the county is drained by the Barrow and its tributaries while the Slaney and its tributaries drain the eastern portion. The main rivers and their tributaries are shown in Tables 2.1 and 2.2 with the relevant EPA Hydrometric Codes provided (EPA, 2001).
Table 2.1 River Aghalona Barrow Burren Lerr Mountain Pollmounty Table 2.2
Barrow Catchment Hydrometric Area 14

ru Co ns en to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny ot he
River Code 14AO2 14BO1 14B05 14LO1 14MO1 14PO3
Slaney Catchment - Hydrometric Area 12 River Code 12CO3 12CO5 12DO1 12DO2 12DO3 12SO2
River Clody Clonmore Stream Derreen Derry Douglas Slaney
The Slaney has been designated a salmonid river under the European Communities (Quality of Salmonid Waters) Regulations (S.I. No. 293 of 1988). Designated waters are required to meet the quality standards set out in the Regulations. In Carlow sampling is carried out by the EPA on a monthly basis which complies with the sampling requirements set out in the salmonid regulations.
se
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
2.2 Water Quality Standards The target substances and applicable standards to be achieved by 2010 as specified in the Regulations are presented in the tables below. Table 2.3 Substance Pesticides Atrazine Simazine Tributyltin Solvents Dichloromethane Tolulene Xylenes Standard ug/l 1.0 1.0 0.001 ** 10.0 10.0 10.0
se .
Table 2.4
Substance
Co ns en
Note** The standard for Tributyltin shall apply in relation to tidal waters only and shall be deemed to be met if the results of biological monitoring for biological effects indicate no reproductive impairment in gastropods.
ot he ru
Standard Freshwaters
(ug/l)
for
Hardness of water measured in mg/lCaCO3 <100 >100 25 30 30 10 50 100 500 10
Metals
Inorganic ions
Arsenic Chromium Copper Lead Nickel Zinc Fluoride Cyanide
25 5 5 5 8 See notes ** 500 10
Note** The value for metals are for total concentration (dissolved and colloidal/ss). In the case of zinc the standard is 8ug/l for water hardness 10mg/lCaCO3 and 50ug/l for water hardness between 10mg/l and 100mg/l CaCO3. 5
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
2.3 Current Water Quality Status All the main river channels in the county are subject to routine quality monitoring, which is carried out by the EPA, on behalf of Carlow County Council. The current monitoring programme was established to monitor general water quality and was not designed to target the substances listed in the Dangerous Substances Regulations. It must be
emphasized that poor water quality, as measured by biological and/or chemical assessment, cannot be taken to indicate the presence of Dangerous substances.
In the past the Council has conducted monitoring in the rivers, which included analyses for some of the target substances including copper, nickel, chromium and lead. The purpose of the monitoring was to assess the overall water quality in terms of suitability
he ru .
for abstraction for use as a potable water supply. The monitoring has not identified any
problem with metal levels however, the detection limits were based on the limits set in the EC (Quality of Water intended for the Abstraction of Drinking Water) Regulations and Directive 78/659/EC, which were higher than the standards set in the Dangerous Substances Regulations. The data is therefore unsuitable for use in evaluating water quality status in the context of the Regulation requirements.
ns en ot
authorities in the South East Region, to carry out sampling of river waters and analysis for the presence of Dangerous Substances in these samples in 2004. The results of this survey are contained within a Report to the Local Authorities for the South East Region on Dangerous Substances in Surface Waters dated 19th Nov. 04. The survey focused on sites where pollution from the selected substances was most likely i.e. on watercourses downstream of major towns and in areas where arable farming was predominant. The survey included three sampling sites in County Carlow: River Barrow d/s Carlow. River Slaney Rathvilly. River Burren Carlow Abstraction point.
Co
The EPA were commissioned by Carlow County Council, together with other local
se
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
The results of this sampling, which were carried out on 22nd September 2004, found that all samples complied with the specified parameters of the Dangerous Substances Regulations where tested. No substances were present in any environmentally significant concentration. Details of Dangerous substances monitoring are shown in Table 2.5. Full details of monitoring carried out are also given in Appendix A. The surface water potable water supply sources in the County are subject to routine quality monitoring as required by EC (Drinking Water) Regulations 2000. The
monitoring carried out on these sources in Carlow have not identified any significant problems with Dangerous substances in surface water supply sources.
Co
ns en
ot
he
ru
se
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
3.0 Identification of potential pressures

The main pressures due to dangerous substances on the general water quality in the county are located at or near the major population centres within the county. This is due to the concentration of households, industries, waste disposal facilities, construction sites etc located in these areas.
Dangerous substances pose a major threat to general water quality however there is limited knowledge of the occurrence of these substances in the county. Dangerous substances can enter the aquatic environment from both point and non-point (diffuse) sources. Point sources are potentially of most concern in relation to acute accidents while diffuse sources e.g. leaching and run-off can have a significant accumulative effect.
ot he ru se .
the potential to use any of the Dangerous substances identified in the regulations. The review included the following activities: 3.1 Wastewater Treatment Plants
ns en
The Councils Wastewater Treatment Plants can be identified as a pressure source in

Co
terms of general water quality. The influent to these treatment works and the associated effluent from the plants may potentially contain some of the target substances and therefore enter and contaminate the receiving aquatic environment. The current
monitoring programme at the WWTP does not include the specified Dangerous Substances. (the effluent from these treatment works are tested in accordance with the requirements of the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive.) Samples of the effluent
from the main wastewater treatment plants in the county were due to be analysed for the presence of dangerous substances in 2005 however this has not taken place as yet. A programme to conduct the required analysis is being prepared with implementation planned by the end of 2006.
Carlow County Council has conducted a review of all activities in the County, which had
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
3.2 Industrial discharges Discharges by industry either directly to waters or indirectly through the sewer network have the potential to cause pollution of watercourses and in particular to affect the levels of dangerous substances in the watercourses. In order to control pollution from such discharges, any industry whose effluent has the potential to cause pollution is licensed and monitored in accordance with the provisions of the Water Pollution Act.
Unregulated drainage from industries to sewer collection systems can effect treatment processes in downstream plants resulting in reduced operational efficiency or in the worst case scenario, failure of the plant treatment processes resulting in discharge of untreated industrial and domestic sewage.
se .
some of which include the specified Dangerous Substances. The EPA is responsible for licensing, auditing and compliance monitoring of IPC licensed industries. The IPC licensed industries are required to provide monitoring data to the EPA.
a potential source of information on incidents where spills or incidents may have resulted in the discharge of Dangerous Substances to surface waters.
3.3 Agricultural Activity Agriculture is the main land use and industry within both catchments especially the Barrow. Agricultural point and diffuse loads are therefore another major threat to general water quality in the region. Agricultural practices are very intensive in the northern region of the county leading to increased pollution levels especially in the Barrow catchment. Whilst phosphorous and nitrate levels are of particular concern in the county, agricultural run-off may also result in other pollutants entering water bodies including pesticides and BOD and bacterial loadings. The main threat in relation to dangerous
Co
ns en
The Council also investigates incidents of water pollution. The investigation records are
Licences specify the monitoring and reporting requirements for the licensed facility,
ot
he
IPC Licensed facilities in the county are controlled and regulated by the EPA. The
ru
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
substances is the usage of herbicides and pesticides in the region. Accidental releases of oils and other chemicals can also occur and need to be investigated. The application of pig slurries to land poses another threat to both catchments as copper is a very important feed additive in the pig industry. A requirement for Nutrient Management Planning is included in all intensive agriculture planning permissions.
3.4 Urban stormwater overflows and runoff Untreated urban runoff from the major population centres such as Carlow town can have a significant affect on the water quality in the catchments. This runoff enters the water courses through gullies etc following periods of heavy rain and can potentially contain high levels of metals, hydrocarbons, organic pollutants etc. There is currently no register
ru ot he se
of outfalls or overflows from urban areas in the county and no monitoring data for the quality of effluent from such systems.
to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny .
3.5 Powerstown Landfill Facility
The Waste License for Powerstown Landfill facility requires that monitoring be carried out throughout the lifecycle of the landfill, from operational phase through to the aftercare phase. Carlow County Council undertake monitoring with the EPA carrying out annual audits. The Waste License issued by the EPA permits the Council to discharge treated landfill leachate to the Barrow subject to quality and flow restrictions. However this route is not utilized. Leachate is collected in a lagoon on-site and transported for treatment in the Mortarstown Treatment Plant. There is therefore no impact from landfill discharges on the Barrow.
Co ns en
10
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
4.0 Programme of measures of implementation

Refer to table 4.1 for implementation programme summaries. In the programme, the timescale column is defined by the EPA in their report Guidance Manual to Local Authorities on Preparation and Submission of Measures and Implementation report. Immediate term by July 2004 Short term by July 2006 Medium term by July 2008 Long term by July 2010
4.1 Monitoring programme & Catchment Management

ru
Water samples for measuring the concentrations of Dangerous Substances within rivers
in Carlow were taken at three sites during 2004 with all sites being sampled on one day only. All results for these parameters were within the limits specified within the regulations. The limited data available indicates that the presence of the specified substances is not a cause for concern. It should be noted that whilst the samples taken were tested for the parameters specified in the Dangerous Substances Regulations, the samples were analysed for the presence of a total of 84 parameters no substance was
Co ns en ot
found to be present in any environmentally significant concentration for any of the samples. The samples were not tested for Atrazine, simazine, tributyltin and cyanide.
The river catchments of Co. Carlow are part of the South Eastern River Basin District (SERBD) area. The SERBD project has been set up to satisfy the requirements of the Water Framework Directive and the need to have a catchment based national strategy to the implementation to the Water Framework Directive. The objective is to prepare a programme of measures designed to maintain and /or achieve at least good water quality for all waters, which includes assistance in complying with the Water Quality (Dangerous Substances) Regulations 2001.
he
se
11
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
The Characterization Report for the SERBD project has been completed. The purpose of this report was to collect and analyse all existing datasets to provide a baseline report of the Water quality within the SERBD project area. This will facilitate the development of recommendations for monitoring programmes and the design of measures which will be required to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Water Framework Directive. Such monitoring must cover both surface and groundwater and must be operational by 22nd December 2006. The lack of data in relation to dangerous substances will be addressed by additional data collection and monitoring for the first river basin management plan.
In addition to the work of the SERBD project, in 2003 a National Dangerous Substances Expert Group was established, by the DoEHLG, to assist with developing
he ru .
lists of dangerous substances relevant to water quality in an Irish context. Having

reviewed available datasets the Expert Group has put forward a list of pollutants that are potentially relevant in Ireland. These substances will have particular relevance to the implementation of the Dangerous Substances and Water framework Directives.
ot
A National Substances Screening Monitoring Programme was started in 2005. The programme will run until October 2006 and includes monitoring over 200 dangerous
Co ns en
substances identified. The programme will serve to feed into the setting of national E.Q.S. for waters.
Carlow County Council, on behalf of the combined river basin districts, utilized 2 main facilities to carry out the analysis for priority action substances (41 no.), candidate relevant pollutants (161 no.) and candidate general components (24 no.) The first phase of this programme investigated evidence of substances at specific locations in the vicinity of likely potential sources of pollutants. This provided a general overview of the
presence or absence of substances. In the second phase, further target sites were be selected to isolate the causes of individual substances identified by the initial investigations.
se
12
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
As much of the potential usage of chemicals in concentrated in major urban centres, sampling in the vicinity of the major population centres was undertaken during the first phase. This included the sampling of the River Barrow at two locations - upstream of Carlow Town and upstream of St Mullins. Results from the sampling will not be available until November 2006.
4.2 Wastewater Treatment Works Whilst the effluent from Wastewater treatment works has been identified as a potential source of dangerous substances to river water systems, there is no data available to confirm if these substances are present. In order to investigate this, it is proposed that samples of the effluent from the major wastewater treatment works in the County be
ru se
analysed, on a once off basis, for the presence of these substances.

A number of the plants in Carlow County require upgrading to cater for new development in urban and village centres in the county and also to comply with the requirements of the relevant EU directives .
o Mortarstown upgraded to provide nutrient removal

Co ns en
o Tinnahinch now connected to the new WWTP at Graiguenamanagh. o Raheendoran WWTP installed in 3005
Improvement works to be carried out in 2006 include the following plants : o Leighlinbridge o Muinebheag o Ballon o Myshall Improvements are also planned for Palatine, Rathvilly, Hacketsown and documents for the appointment of Consultants have been prepared for the WWTP at Tullow, Fenagh and Rathoe.
13
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
4.3 Industrial Discharges Carlow County Council will continue on an ongoing basis to license industrial discharges to waters and sewers in accordance with the provisions of the Water Pollution Act. Where any of the Dangerous Substances identified in the Regulations are present in the effluent, the requirements of the Regulations will be considered in setting the discharge limits. A review of the application process for licenses will be carried out with specific reference to the Dangerous substances regulations.
Since January 2004, Carlow County Council has issued 65 new/revised Section 4 licenses (discharge to waters) and 14 new/revised Section 16 licenses (discharge to sewers) under the Water Pollution Act. 4.4 Consultative and Cooperative Measures
to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny se .
There are many different stakeholders who have an impact on the quality of waters. Setting up consultative and co-operative structures that involve all stakeholders is essential to the successful management of the implementation programme for the Water Framework Directive and other EU regulations including the Dangerous Substances Regulations. The SERBD project has provided a suitable forum for bringing these
Co ns en
stakeholders together these stakeholders include Teagasc, Irish farmers Association, Coillte, IBEC, Teagasc, Duchas, neighbouring local authorities , Barrow Catchment Group. 4.5 Public Education and Advisory Measures An important element of the programme is raising public awareness of the importance of prevention of emissions to the aquatic environment. This involves the development of an education programme targeted at the sectors both directly and indirectly involved in the usage and emission of target substances. Carlow Co Council has appointed an
environmental awareness officer whose role includes the development and delivery of this programme.
ot
he
ru
14
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
The SERBD project has created a project website which is aimed at providing information to the general public on water quality issues in the region.
Carlow Co Co participates in the Rural Environmental Protection Scheme (REPS) lectures organized by Teagasc and deliver lectures/talks on an ongoing basis to the farming community on topics in relation to Water Quality issues and measures which they can take to protect water quality. The REPS scheme makes particular reference to the use by farmers of pesticides and fertilizers near rivers/streams etc such substances are included in the lists of substances specified in the Dangerous Substances Regulations.
Co
ns en
ot
he
ru
se
15
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
Co ns en
Appendix A
to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny ot he ru se .
16
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, 1977 (Water Quality Standards for Phosphorus) Regulations, 1998 Implementation Report 2006
Co
ns en
ot
he
ru
se
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
Introduction
The Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, 1977 (Water Quality Standards for Phosphorus) Regulations 1998 provide for specified improvements in water quality conditions in rivers and lakes based on molybdate-reactive phosphate levels (MRP) or the biological Q rating of the river water. Each local authority is required to submit an implementation report to the Environmental Protection Agency in line with Article 4(3) of the Regulations. This report details the progress in implementing the Regulations in County Carlow to date (2006).
Co
ns en
ot
he
ru
se
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
Table of Contents
1.0 2.0 3.0 Water Quality in County Carlow___________________________________________4 Implementation of Phosphorus Measures __________________________________10 Implementation Programme Progress _____________________________________27
3.1 Planning Control and Enforcement Measures _______________________________27 3.2 Water Quality Management Plans_________________________________________27 3.3 Groundwater Protection Plans ____________________________________________27 3.4 Point Sources __________________________________________________________27 3.4.1 Section 4 & 16 Licences _______________________________________________27 3.4.2 Urban Wastewater Discharges Treatment Plants ____________________________27 3.4.3 Septic Tanks ________________________________________________________27 3.4.4 Agricultural Point-Sources _____________________________________________28
3.5 Diffuse Sources_________________________________________________________28 3.5.1. Agriculture_________________________________________________________28 3.6 Monitoring Measures ___________________________________________________29 3.7 Public Education and Advisory Measures___________________________________30 3.8 Financial & Other Measures _____________________________________________31
ns en
Co
ot
he
ru
se
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
Co ns en
SECTION 1
WATER QUALITY
ot he ru se .
IN
COUNTY CARLOW
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
1.0
Water Quality in County Carlow
In order to assess compliance with the requirements of the Phosphorus Regulations and for the purposes of monitoring improvements or deteriorations in the river water quality, the regulations permit local authorities to use either the biological quality (Q) rating or the median concentration for molybdate-reactive phosphate (MRP).
For the MRP values to be used, the regulations specify a minimum number of samples required when calculating the median MRP. (a minimum of 10 samples must be taken at intervals of four weeks or longer in any twelve consecutive month period - where there are insufficient samples taken in a 12 month period, the period may be extended to a
ru se
period up to 24 months during which at least 15 samples were taken).

This minimum number of samples has not been taken in Carlow in 2004/2005 for the majority of stations and so the Biological or Q rating for the rivers have been used as the primary basis for measuring improvement or deterioration in the water quality standard.
Carlow County Council commissions the Regional Water laboratory in Kilkenny to carry
Co ns en
out the sampling and testing of river water quality in County Carlow. The laboratory prepares a yearly report on the physico/chemical and microbiological testing which is carried out during the year. For the purposes of this report, the River Water Quality in County Carlow, 2005 report is used.
The Q values for each of the monitoring stations are assessed on a three yearly basis, with the country being divided into a number of hydrometric areas. Hydrometric areas 12 (River Slaney) and area 14 (River Barrow) include County Carlow. Biological surveys of each area are carried out every 3 years. For the purposes of this report, the biological data used is from the survey of Hydrometric area 14 carried out in 2003 and the survey of Hydrometric area 12 carried out in 2004.
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
Biological surveys are usually undertaken in the summer-autumn period (JuneSeptember) when flows are likely to be relatively low and water temperatures highest. Surveys during this period are therefore likely to coincide with the worst conditions to be expected in rivers affected by waste inputs.
The Q value for a river is based on a biological assessment of the water quality. The biological classification of water quality is carried out by examining the different types of macroinvertebrates (crustaceans, insects, worms, mollusks, leeches etc) that live in a river. Some species are sensitive and some are tolerant to pollution and a system for classifying water quality depending on the different numbers of the various macroinvertebrate species has been developed. Depending on the diversity of species found and their numbers, the river is classified on a scale of Q1 to Q5 with 5 the cleanest
he ru to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny .
water and 1 the most polluted.
Biotic Quality Index (Q Value) Q5, Q4-5, Q4 Q3-4 Q3, Q2-3 Q2, Q1-2, Q1
Biological Quality Status
Unpolluted Slightly Polluted
Moderately Polluted
Co
ns en
Seriously Polluted
ot
se
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
Table 1.1 A synopsis of River Water Quality in Carlow in 2005 River Aghalona (Tributary of the Burren/Barrow) Barrow Change from 2004 Overall Quality No significant change Nitrates are high but appear to have stabilised in observed. recent years. The Aghalona has also been subject to intermittent agricultural discharges. Improvements have been Overall water quality in the Barrow is fair with observed over the past four a background of slight/moderate pollution from years downstream of the diffuse agricultural sources and sewage Carlow Sugar Factory and discharges from the various towns. downstream of the Carlow Municipal Sewage Treatment Plant. . Burren While nitrates are still The Burren flows through a high tillage area in elevated, levels appear to N. Carlow Nitrates are high , but recent data have improved and indicate that levels have stabilised. There is stabilised since 1999. evidence of enrichment at the middle and lower sections, with increased signs of eutrophication in recent years. River Clody No significant change Generally satisfactory observed. River Derreen No significant change The Derreen is shows elevated nitrates but observed. otherwise quality is satisfactory. River Derry No significant change Quality is generally satisfactory. however observed. quality can be affected by run-off during rain. River Douglas No significant change Elevated nitrates in the lower reaches. observed. Otherwise satisfactory. Lerr There are indications of a Nitrates are high due to intensive tillage in levelling off in nitrate South Kildare recent data indicates that nitrate levels since 1998. levels are levelling off. Biological data indicates borderline conditions. Overall quality is mediocre. Mountain No significant change Generally satisfactory. observed. Poulmounty No significant change Mainly satisfactory but slight loss of quality observed. downstream of fish farm at times. Clonmore Stream No significant change Generally satisfactory. (Tributary of the observed. Derreen/Slaney) Slaney No significant change Overall the Slaney is reasonably satisfactory observed.
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
Table 1.2 gives the overall trend in River Water Quality in County Carlow since the baseline year 1998. These results are graphed in Fig. 1.1. It is clear from this graph that the overall trend in river water quality is that it is improving on an ongoing basis.
Table 1.2 Overall trend in Water Quality in County Carlow

Percentage samples in each category Year Unpolluted Moderately Polluted 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 61.6% 80.6% 76.4% 86.7% 81.5% 90.2% 89.9% 91.2% 38.4% 19.4% 19.4% 10.0% 18.5% 9.8% 10.2% 8.8% Seriously Polluted 0.0% 0.0% 4.2% 3.3% 0.0% 0.0% 0% 0%
Figure 1.1 Overall trend in Water Quality in County Carlow

Overall Trend of River Water Quality in County Carlow 100.0% 90.0% 80.0% 70.0% 60.0% 50.0% 40.0% 30.0% 20.0% 10.0% 0.0% 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005
Co
ns en
ot
he
ru
se
Unpolluted Moderately Polluted Seriously Polluted
Table 1.3 gives the details of the current river water quality standards in County Carlow compared with the quality standards to be achieved by 2007. The Q values for the monitored stations are summarized in Figure 1.2.
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:40
Fig. 1.2
Co. Carlow Q-value summary

Co Carlow River Q-values and Targets
60% 50% % of stations 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Q5 Q4-5 Q4 Q3-4 Q-value Q3 Q2-3 Q<=2 2004-2005 Target 2007
Co
ns en
ot
he
ru
se
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:41
Co ns en
SECTION 2
IMPLEMENTATION
ot he ru se .
OF
PHOSPHORUS MEASURES
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:41
2.0
Implementation of Phosphorus Measures
The Phosphorus Measures Report, submitted by Carlow County Council to the EPA in September 1999, outlined the measures, which Carlow County Council intended taking to ensure compliance with the Phosphorus Regulations. These measures are reviewed on an ongoing basis. The measures currently being implemented are listed in Table 2.1 Implementation Programme Summary Table for County Carlow and Table 2.2 Implementation Programme Summary Table for Rivers in County Carlow.
Co
ns en
ot
he
ru
se
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:41
Co ns en
TO
ot he ru se .
SECTION 3
PROGRESS
DATE
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:41
3.0
Implementation Programme
3.1 Planning Control and Enforcement Measures Where it is deemed to be necessary the Environment Section examines planning applications and appropriate conditions are placed on the planning permission. These conditions are aimed at eliminating environmental pollution.
As part of planning control, a farm survey is carried out on all agricultural developments that apply for planning permission. In addition, all intensive agricultural enterprises are subject to Nutrient Management Plan requirements as part of the planning process.
ru ot he se .
3.2 Water Quality Management Plans
Carlow County Council is the lead Local Authority for the South Eastern River Basin District (SERBD) project Monitoring and Management System. The overall objectives of the project are to establish an integrated monitoring and management system for all waters within the river basin district, to develop a programme of management measures and to produce a River Basin Management Strategy to achieve Good river water quality
Co ns en
in all waters.
3.3 Groundwater Protection Plans Groundwater characterisation and monitoring is included as part of the SERBD Management System. A ground water protection plan has previously been prepared by Carlow County Council for the boreholes in Bagenalstown. Draft groundwater protection plans have been prepared for the five other groundwater sources of drinking water in County Carlow. These plans will be finalised at the end of September 2006 (Bagenalstown, Leighlinbridge, Old Leighlin, Ballinkillen, Tynock and Bilboa).
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:41
3.4 Point Sources 3.4.1 Section 4 & 16 Licences Continued reviewing of existing Section 4 & 16 discharges licenses has taken place since the last Implementation Report and license conditions have been changed where necessary to take consideration of the Phosphorus Regulations.
Since January 2004, Carlow County Council has issued 65 new/revised Section 4 licenses (including the trade and domestic effluents) and 14 new/revised Section 16 licenses under the Water Pollution Act. An inspection of all food outlets in Carlow, Bagenalstown and Tullow was conducted this summer. Where necessary premises are applying for licences to discharge into the public sewer (a minimum of 30 premises have been identified to
ot he ru se .
date, with a target to have these facilities licensed by the end of 2006).
3.4.2 Urban Wastewater Discharges Treatment Plants Progress has been made by Carlow County Council in relation to the improvement of discharges from Wastewater Treatment works, with particular reference to Phosphorus.
ns en
with a view to installing phosphorus removal facilities. Initial priority was directed towards the River Barrow. The Scoping report for Identification of Water Quality Improvements to the River Barrow with particular reference to the Discharge of Wastewater from Existing Wastewater Treatment Plants identified required
improvements in the Barrow Catchment as follows: -
Co
Existing treatment plants in both the Barrow and Slaney Catchments have been examined
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:41
Table 3.0 - Sewerage Needs: 2000 2006 Waste Water Existing p.e. Description Timeframe Completed
Treatment Plant Mortarstown Leighlinbridge 36,000 450 Tertiary 2000/2001 Yes No
Secondary To End 2006 be pumped to Bagenalstown
Muinebeag
4,000
Tertiary
End 2006
No
In addition, Carlow County Council is currently working on the upgrading of the following WWTPs, which affect both the Barrow and Slaney River Catchments.
se ns en to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny .
Existing plants are to be upgraded to provide additional capacity and improved treatment, including Phosphorus removal. These plants have been designed to achieve the following standard of effluent :
BOD SS Ammonia Phosphorus
10 mg/l 10 mg/l 5 mg/l 1 mg/l
Ballon and Myshall upgrades shall be completed by the end of September 2006. Palatine is currently awaiting funding.
Raheendoran The existing communal septic tank was replaced with a WWTP, including phosphorus removal in the summer of 2005. This effluent discharges directly to the River Barrow.
3.4.3 Septic Tanks Carlow County Council continues to supervise groundwater and sub-soil percolation tests in relation to septic tank treatment systems, in accordance with the requirements of SR6 /
Co
ot
he
ru
Ballon, Myshall & Palatine
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:41
EPA guidelines for Treatment Systems for Single Houses. Discharges to groundwater have been further controlled by the insertion of a maintenance clause for all small-scale treatment systems in planning permissions. Details of final sludge removal are also required to be submitted.
3.4.4 Agricultural Point-Sources Where a pollution incident occurs legal proceedings will be brought against a person who allows polluting matter to enter a watercourse. In addition to this Notices are served under Section 12 and/or Section 23 of the Local Government (Water Pollution) Acts, 1977-1990 requesting information and/or specifying measures to be taken to prevent pollution of watercourses where required.
ot he ru se .
3.5 Diffuse Sources 3.5.1. Agriculture
The need for Byelaws to be enacted under Section 21 of the Local Government (Water Pollution) (Amendment) Act 1990 will be considered through the SERBD project. It is
Co ns en
thought that any proposed Byelaws would address such topics as soil P testing, phosphate application limits, Code of Good Agriculture Practice etc. The introduction of such a Byelaw will not take place until the SERBD Management Plan has been completed.
It is proposed to carry out a review of the catchments in which it is considered that agriculture is the primary source of pollution, and that additional surveys of farms may be carried out in these areas.
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:41
3.6 Monitoring Measures 3.6.1 Regional Water Laboratory The Regional Water Laboratory (EPA Kilkenny) is commissioned by Carlow County Council to carry out physico/chemical and biological sampling and analysis of the rivers in County Carlow. A yearly report is prepared by the laboratory giving details of all sampling and analysis carried out and also includes an assessment of the results.
3.6.2 South Eastern River Basin District (SERBD) Project The establishment of appropriate monitoring systems for both surface and groundwater is one of the key tasks of the South Eastern River Basin District Project, which was set up for the purpose of implementing the Water Framework Directive. A characterization report was produced by the SERBDM in 2005. The completeion of
ot he ru se .
this intital characterization and analysis provides the baseline necessary to begin the next phase of the river basin management process.
The general objective of the Water Framework Directive (WFD) is to prevent deterioration of water status and to secure at least good status in relation to all waters by 2015.
Co
The WFD requires management of water bodies on the basis of river catchment management, rather than each local authority looking after the section of a river in their administrative area only. The establishment of the SERBD project has provided the necessary structure for Carlow County Council to liaise with the other local authorities who have responsibilities in the Barrow and Slaney River Catchments in relation to River Water Quality.
3.6.3
LabInfo
Carlow County Council has commenced using the LabInfo computer package. The package in use for drinking water and wastewater treatment discharges only. It is intended to extend the database to include the sampling and testing of river water if compatibility with the EPA database can be achieved. This will allow all information
ns en
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:41
to be easily assessed with regard to the implementation of the Phosphorus Regulations.
3.7 Public Education and Advisory Measures Carlow County Council participate in the Rural Environmental Protection Scheme (REPS) lectures organised by Teagasc and deliver lectures/talks on an ongoing basis to the Farming community on topics in relation to Water Quality issues and measures which they can take to protect water quality.
Public Participation has been highlighted as being a key requirement of the implementation of the Water Framework Directive with all stakeholders to be represented. The SERBD project includes amongst its interest groups Teagasc, Irish
ru se
Farmers Association (IFA), Coillte, Fishery Boards and Community Groups. Their
to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny ot
involvement in the project is a very important and effective way of keeping these organisations informed of the issue of Water Quality Management. The SERBD project has had information stands at agricultural events such as the ploughing championships, which have helped to make individual farmers more aware of water quality issues.
accessed from the Carlow County Council website. It is intended that further information in relation to Water Quality issues will be added to the Carlow County Council website including a link to the Implementation report and the EPA website.
Carlow County Council, through the SERBD project has developed a website has which provides environmental information on the Barrow and Slaney catchments. Interactive maps are provided allowing for the interrogation of all relevant data relating to water quality.
Co
The SERBD project also has information available on a website, which can be
ns en
he
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:41
3.8 Financial & Other Measures Funding has been secured for the following projects & infrastructural works : Catchment Based Monitoring and Management System (SERBD project). Leighlinbridge Sewerage Scheme to pump wastewater to Bagenalstown WWTP. Ballon and Myshall WWTP upgrade each of these WWTP to include Phosphorus removal. Fenagh WWTP- contractor has been appointed Rathoe WWTP currently undergoing site selection Tullow WWTP consultant has been appointed to produce a preliminary report for upgrade
Funding/approval is also being sought for the upgrading of the following WWTP
ot Co ns en to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny he
Rathvilly, Hacketstown, Palatine and Bagenalstown WWTP upgrade to provide Tertiary Treatment
ru
se
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:41
Phosphorous Standard for Wastewater Treatment Works

1.0 Introduction
Carlow County Council has to set a phosphorous discharge standard for the wastewater treatment works(WWTWs) in its region. To do so it must comply with current environmental legislation namely the Urban Wastewater Treatment Directive and the Phosphorous Regulations.
2.0
Legislation
The urban waste water treatment directive (UWWTD) is concerned with the collection, treatment and disposal of urban waste waters and the treatment and discharge of industrial waste waters.
The principal elements of the Directive are summarised as requiring: Collection systems (sewerage) in urban agglomerations designed and constructed in accordance
he ru
with Best Available Technology Not Entailing Excessive Cost (BATNEEC) having regard to:
o Volume and characteristics of urban waste water. o Prevention of leaks.
o Limitation of pollution of receiving waters due to stormwater overflows. Collection systems to be in place by 31 December 1998, 2000 and 2005 for discharges to sensitive waters, populations of more than 15,000 and populations between 2,000 and 15,000 respectively.
Co ns en
Waste water to be subjected to Secondary Treatment or equivalent prior to discharge. Treatment to be in place by 31 December 2000 and 2005 depending on size and location. A higher level of treatment where discharge is to sensitive waters. The disposal of waste water be the subject of regulation. The discharge of industrial waste water into urban collection systems and treatment plants be the subject of regulation. The elimination of the disposal of sludge to surface waters by 31 December 1998. Sludge arising from waste water be reused whenever appropriate. Discharges from treatment plants be monitored and reported. A concession in relation to the classification of waters as less-sensitive and allowing treatment of a lower order than Secondary Treatment is included in the Directive.
The UWWT Directive was transposed into Irish Law by the Environmental Protection Agency Act, 1992 (Urban Waste Water Treatment) Regulations 1994 (SI 419 of 1994).
Carlow County Council
ot
se
Wastewater Treatment
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:41
The UWWTD sets P discharge consent standards of 2mg/l of total phosphorous for WWTW between 10,000 and 100,000 pe and 1mg/l total P for WWTW greater than 100,000 pe where the WWTW is discharging into sensitive waters. An equivalent percentage reduction in inlet P concentrations is also permissible. A list of sensitive receiving waters is included in the Regulations. All these waters are inland. No waters around Ireland are classified as less-sensitive.
The implications of the UWWTD for P reduction in WWTW are as follows: There is no P standard required by the UWWTD for WWTW under 10,000 pe. For WWTW greater than 10,000 pe and less than 100,000 pe a 2mg/l total P standard is required if the receiving water is designated sensitive For WWTW greater than 100,000 pe a 1mg/l total P standard is required if the receiving water is designated sensitive Employ the principle of BATNEEC in treatment of wastewater.
The other legislation concerning control of P discharges from wastewater treatment works is the Phosphorous Regulations of 1998 (Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, 1977 (Water Quality
ot he ru se .
Standards for Phosphorous) Regulations, 1998). These regulations require that a Local Authority review
the EPAs water quality data of inland river and lake waters and prepare a baseline report by 1998 of inland surface waters within their boundaries. The regulations require that the existing water quality or biological quality rating, as set out in this baseline report, be maintained if it is currently satisfactory or where the baseline biological rating is less than satisfactory that the rating is improved over time to a satisfactory condition and then is maintained. The Third Schedule of the Regulations defines various ratings and the improvements required. The Third Schedule uses both Biological Quality Ratings Q Ratings and
Co ns en
Molybdate Reactive Phosphate(MRP) concentrations. MRP concentrations are matched against Q Ratings. The LA is then required to plan, report and implement(under the BATNEEC principle) any measures required to maintain and/or improve the baseline water quality as required by the regulations.
The MRP concentrations detailed in the Third Schedule are very low and range from 0.015 mgMRP/l to 0.07 mgMRP/l in the surface water. These are median concentrations and by the sampling regime required to measure the median concentration they are based on an annual variation in surface water conditions. The relationship between total P and MRP is not easily defined and a useful guide when assessing discharges from WWTW is that the MRP is taken as half of the total P concentration.
The implications of the Phosphorous Regulations of 1998 for P reduction in WWTW are as follows: Very low annual median concentrations of MRP are set depending on the baseline water quality of the surface water as set by the EPA data available up to 1998. There is no method proposed for relating median MRP concentrations in the surface waters to WWTW final effluent discharges.
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:41
Employ the principle of BATNEEC in maintaining/improving the baseline Biological Rating of the surface water.
3.0
Defining P Reduction Concentrations.
The UWWTD does not apply to WWTW under 10,000 pe with regard to P consent standards and for works greater than 10,000 pe it only applies if the receiving water has been designated sensitive. Therefore the principle environmental legislation that controls the discharges of phosphorous to surface water is the Phosphorous Regulations of 1998 (Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, 1977 (Water Quality Standards for Phosphorous) Regulations, 1998).
To evaluate the requirements of the P Regulations with regard to effluent discharges from WWTW a spreadsheet has been developed that calculates the MRP concentration in a stream/river for various sizes of WWTW and for various total P discharges. Three tables from this spreadsheet demonstrate the impact of P reduction concentrations for WWTW from 500 pe up to 2000 pe for three different discharge levels of total P 10mgP/l, 2mgP/l and 1 mgP/l. The MRP value has been taken as half the total P concentration for
ot he se .
calculating the MRP concentration in the receiving water. For discussion purposes a stream with a low
95%ile flow(10l/s) has been used to examine the MRP concentrations, this is a small stream but one that dose not quite dry up in the summer usually. The median flows are based on estimates for similar sized streams using data from the EPA.
Table 1 shows a total P discharge of 10 mg/l which is for a WWTW without any P reduction process in place. The light shading show the MRP concentrations at the 95% ile flow and at the estimated median
Co ns en
flows. The P Regulations Third Schedule has the following MRP levels defined;
Existing Q Rating 5 4-5 4 3-4 3 2-3 <=2
Minimum Target Q Rating 5 4-5 4 4 3-4 3 3
ru
MRP Median Concentration (mg/l) 0.015 0.020 0.030 0.030 0.050 0.070 0.070
Table 1 shows that WWTW discharges without P reduction can increase the level of MRP above the 0.070 mgMRP/l very quickly at median flows ie unless the river has a fairly high flow or the WWTW is small (<500 pe). The 0.070 MRP concentration is associated with seriously polluted waters as seen from the above data. For WWTW to require no P reduction the median flows would have to be very high as shown
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:41
by the heavier shaded boxes on the table 350l/s for a 500pe works, 600l/s for a 800 pe works and 700l/s for a 1000pe works and this would be without background P levels in the river being taken into account. Therefore P reduction is required at WWTW.
In deciding what level of P reductions is required the levels set in the UWWTD are used as a guide. These are 2 mg/l and 1 mg/l. Table 2 shows the impact of a 2mg/l total P discharge in the final effluent and clearly shows that the river water concentrations of MRP for a Q5 water quality are more readily achieved for small WWTW(500 pe). However for larger works of 1500pe and over the MRP level from the WWTW alone is above 0.030 mg/l which is equivalent to a slightly polluted water and when background levels of MRP are taken into account could be equivalent to a moderately polluted water with MRP values in excess of 0.05 mg/l. Also when the 95%ile flows are considered the MRP levels are an order of magnitude greater than those required at the median level in the river throughout the year by the regulations.
Table 3 shows the impact of a 1mg/l total P discharge in the final effluent from a range of WWTWs and the table demonstrates that the MRP levels(0.015 0.03 mg/l) associated with Q4, Q4-5 and Q5 is achievable
ru se
for WWTW of 2,000pe and under discharging into a fairly small stream as represented by the lighter shaded
to f c Fo op r i yr ns ig pe ht ct ow ion ne pu r r rp eq os ui es re o d nl fo y. ra ny ot he
area. The MRP levels at the 95%ile flows are also significantly reduced and while still high compared to the median values required they will only occur in the river/stream for a short period and statistically a high value that occurs in the lower 50 % of results does not affect the median value. P unlike BOD and ammonia is not immediately toxic and therefore relatively high levels for a short period will not cause a pollution incident. The relevance of an annual median value of MRP appears to be that it reflects or relates to the biological diversity and hence health of the river/stream over an annual cycle. As can be see from
ns en
Table 3 for the smaller works the Q5 MRP value is being well exceeded in the receiving water, but it must
Co
be remembered that there will be background P levels which are unaccounted for in the table. It is very difficult to evaluate the background level of MRP as an existing small WWTW without P reduction will be contributing a significant amount to the MRP level in any given waterway as is demonstrated by Table 1.
Reviewing Table 1 clearly shows that there is requirement for P reduction at WWTWs. Table 2 shows that a 2mg/l total P in the final effluent from a WWTW is insufficient to meet the requirements of the 1998 P Regulations on all but the smallest of WWTWs. Table 3 indicates that a 1mg/l level of total P in the final effluent will meet the requirements of the P Regulations unless there is a relatively large works (2,000 pe) discharging into a small stream with very low median flows.
Another consideration with regard to setting a P reduction standard is the process technology available to reduce the P to the required level. The traditional P reduction process is the use of an acid such as ferric chloride which changes the solubility of the P and makes it more readily settleable. Then more recently particularly on larger works there is biological P reduction which uses alternating anaerobic, anoxic and aerobic conditions to adsorb the soluble P. The third principle method is the use of membrane technology
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:41
which physically removes the soluble P. To achieve a lower than 1 mg/l total P is not feasible using biological P reduction on its own. The chemical addition method can achieve lower concentrations but not without other process difficulties as the addition of the acid reduces the pH which will prevent nitrification if there is insufficient alkalinity. Also the acid addition significantly increases the sludge production from a works. Membrane technology can achieve lower P concentrations down to quite low values of less than 0.1 mg/l, however it is very expensive to install and operate. Under the principle of BATNEEC the cost of membrane technology is unacceptable on both capital and operating grounds for P reduction alone as it can more than double the cost of the treatment works. If there are other factors driving final effluent
requirements such as very low BOD or Faecal Coliform standards then the use of membrane technology could be considered.
4.0 Selecting the P Concentration for Final Effluent Discharges A 1 mg/l total P final effluent standard is therefore selected and set for all WWTWs in the Carlow County Council region as this will meet the requirements of the regulations and maintain the principle of BATNEEC. There are two exceptions to this that can apply:
ot he
Where a WWTW is less than 200 pe and is demonstrated as discharging into a stream with suitable
95%ile and median flows, as shown in Table 4, for this exception to apply supporting data must be fully and clearly presented.
Where a WWTW is discharging into a river with larger median flows as shown in Table 5, in this case P reduction will still be required however the standard can be increased to a total P of 5 mg/l provided that the river can sustain this and that that the river flow data is available to demonstrate this.
Co ns en
The implications to Carlow County Council in setting a P reduction standard are as follows WWTW effluents will meet the 1998 P Regulations The UWWTD will be met in that the standard is greater than set by the UWWTD for P reduction into sensitive waters unless one of the above exceptions are considered and then the UWWTD must be taken into account. There will be an increase in the amount of sludge produced from each works and this should be accounted for in the final design of the sludge handling stream and sludge treatment centre. For small works sludge treatment using sludge reed beds should be considered as these are more cost effective than transporting and treating sludge from these small works, particularly given the additional volumes expected. There will be an additional cost of treatment both in capital and operating costs at each WWTW.
ru
se
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:41
WWTW DWF Effluent Discharges Ortho P concentrations in Receiving River Waters

Table 1 Total P =10mg/l
River Flow l/s 5 10 15 20 30 40 50 60 75 95 105 115 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 600 700 800 500 WTTW PE = Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l Sample 4.32 5.79 1.157 95%ile 8.64 2.89 0.579 Flow 12.96 1.93 0.386 17.28 1.45 0.289 25.92 0.96 0.193 34.56 0.72 0.145 43.20 0.58 0.116 51.84 0.48 0.096 64.80 0.39 0.077 Expected 82.08 0.30 0.061 50%ile 90.72 0.28 0.055 Flow 99.36 0.25 0.050 129.60 0.19 0.039 172.80 0.14 0.029 216.00 0.12 0.023 259.20 0.10 0.019 302.40 0.08 0.017 345.60 0.07 0.014 388.80 0.06 0.013 432.00 0.06 0.012 518.40 0.05 0.010 604.80 0.04 0.008 691.20 0.04 0.007 WTTW PE = 800 Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 2.70 9.26 1.852 5.40 4.63 0.926 8.10 3.09 0.617 10.80 2.31 0.463 16.20 1.54 0.309 21.60 1.16 0.231 27.00 0.93 0.185 32.40 0.77 0.154 40.50 0.62 0.123 51.30 0.49 0.097 56.70 0.44 0.088 62.10 0.40 0.081 81.00 0.31 0.062 108.00 0.23 0.046 135.00 0.19 0.037 162.00 0.15 0.031 189.00 0.13 0.026 216.00 0.12 0.023 243.00 0.10 0.021 270.00 0.09 0.019 324.00 0.08 0.015 378.00 0.07 0.013 432.00 0.06 0.012 WTTW PE = 1000 Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 2.16 11.57 2.315 4.32 5.79 1.157 6.48 3.86 0.772 8.64 2.89 0.579 12.96 1.93 0.386 17.28 1.45 0.289 21.60 1.16 0.231 25.92 0.96 0.193 32.40 0.77 0.154 41.04 0.61 0.122 45.36 0.55 0.110 49.68 0.50 0.101 64.80 0.39 0.077 86.40 0.29 0.058 108.00 0.23 0.046 129.60 0.19 0.039 151.20 0.17 0.033 172.80 0.14 0.029 194.40 0.13 0.026 216.00 0.12 0.023 259.20 0.10 0.019 302.40 0.08 0.017 345.60 0.07 0.014 WTTW PE = 1500 Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 1.44 17.36 3.472 2.88 8.68 1.736 4.32 5.79 1.157 5.76 4.34 0.868 8.64 2.89 0.579 11.52 2.17 0.434 14.40 1.74 0.347 17.28 1.45 0.289 21.60 1.16 0.231 27.36 0.91 0.183 30.24 0.83 0.165 33.12 0.75 0.151 43.20 0.58 0.116 57.60 0.43 0.087 72.00 0.35 0.069 86.40 0.29 0.058 100.80 0.25 0.050 115.20 0.22 0.043 129.60 0.19 0.039 144.00 0.17 0.035 172.80 0.14 0.029 201.60 0.12 0.025 230.40 0.11 0.022 WTTW PE = 2000 Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 1.08 23.15 4.630 2.16 11.57 2.315 3.24 7.72 1.543 4.32 5.79 1.157 6.48 3.86 0.772 8.64 2.89 0.579 10.80 2.31 0.463 12.96 1.93 0.386 16.20 1.54 0.309 20.52 1.22 0.244 22.68 1.10 0.220 24.84 1.01 0.201 32.40 0.77 0.154 43.20 0.58 0.116 54.00 0.46 0.093 64.80 0.39 0.077 75.60 0.33 0.066 86.40 0.29 0.058 97.20 0.26 0.051 108.00 0.23 0.046 129.60 0.19 0.039 151.20 0.17 0.033 172.80 0.14 0.029
Per capita discharge BOD P MRP
200 25 10 5
l/c/d mg/l mg/l mg/l
Co n
se
nt o
ot
he
ru
se
Carlow Co Co
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:41

River Flow l/s 500 WTTW PE = Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 5 Sample 4.32 5.79 0.231 10 95%ile 8.64 2.89 0.116 15 Flow 12.96 1.93 0.077 20 17.28 1.45 0.058 30 25.92 0.96 0.039 40 34.56 0.72 0.029 50 43.20 0.58 0.023 60 51.84 0.48 0.019 75 64.80 0.39 0.015 95 Expectd 82.08 0.30 0.012 105 50%ile 90.72 0.28 0.011 115 Flow 99.36 0.25 0.010 150 129.60 0.19 0.008 200 172.80 0.14 0.006 250 216.00 0.12 0.005 300 259.20 0.10 0.004 350 302.40 0.08 0.003 400 345.60 0.07 0.003 450 388.80 0.06 0.003 500 432.00 0.06 0.002 600 518.40 0.05 0.002 700 604.80 0.04 0.002 800 691.20 0.04 0.001 WTTW PE = 800 Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 2.70 9.26 0.370 5.40 4.63 0.185 8.10 3.09 0.123 10.80 2.31 0.093 16.20 1.54 0.062 21.60 1.16 0.046 27.00 0.93 0.037 32.40 0.77 0.031 40.50 0.62 0.025 51.30 0.49 0.019 56.70 0.44 0.018 62.10 0.40 0.016 81.00 0.31 0.012 108.00 0.23 0.009 135.00 0.19 0.007 162.00 0.15 0.006 189.00 0.13 0.005 216.00 0.12 0.005 243.00 0.10 0.004 270.00 0.09 0.004 324.00 0.08 0.003 378.00 0.07 0.003 432.00 0.06 0.002 WTTW PE = 1000 Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 2.16 11.57 0.463 4.32 5.79 0.231 6.48 3.86 0.154 8.64 2.89 0.116 12.96 1.93 0.077 17.28 1.45 0.058 21.60 1.16 0.046 25.92 0.96 0.039 32.40 0.77 0.031 41.04 0.61 0.024 45.36 0.55 0.022 49.68 0.50 0.020 64.80 0.39 0.015 86.40 0.29 0.012 108.00 0.23 0.009 129.60 0.19 0.008 151.20 0.17 0.007 172.80 0.14 0.006 194.40 0.13 0.005 216.00 0.12 0.005 259.20 0.10 0.004 302.40 0.08 0.003 345.60 0.07 0.003 WTTW PE = 1500 Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 1.44 17.36 0.694 2.88 8.68 0.347 4.32 5.79 0.231 5.76 4.34 0.174 8.64 2.89 0.116 11.52 2.17 0.087 14.40 1.74 0.069 17.28 1.45 0.058 21.60 1.16 0.046 27.36 0.91 0.037 30.24 0.83 0.033 33.12 0.75 0.030 43.20 0.58 0.023 57.60 0.43 0.017 72.00 0.35 0.014 86.40 0.29 0.012 100.80 0.25 0.010 115.20 0.22 0.009 129.60 0.19 0.008 144.00 0.17 0.007 172.80 0.14 0.006 201.60 0.12 0.005 230.40 0.11 0.004 WTTW PE = 2000 Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 1.08 23.15 0.926 2.16 11.57 0.463 3.24 7.72 0.309 4.32 5.79 0.231 6.48 3.86 0.154 8.64 2.89 0.116 10.80 2.31 0.093 12.96 1.93 0.077 16.20 1.54 0.062 20.52 1.22 0.049 22.68 1.10 0.044 24.84 1.01 0.040 32.40 0.77 0.031 43.20 0.58 0.023 54.00 0.46 0.019 64.80 0.39 0.015 75.60 0.33 0.013 86.40 0.29 0.012 97.20 0.26 0.010 108.00 0.23 0.009 129.60 0.19 0.008 151.20 0.17 0.007 172.80 0.14 0.006
200 25 2 1
Co n
se
nt o
ot
he
ru
se
Carlow Co Co
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:41

River Flow l/s 500 WTTW PE = Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 5 Sample 4.32 5.79 0.116 10 95%ile 8.64 2.89 0.058 15 Flow 12.96 1.93 0.039 20 17.28 1.45 0.029 30 25.92 0.96 0.019 40 34.56 0.72 0.014 50 43.20 0.58 0.012 60 51.84 0.48 0.010 75 64.80 0.39 0.008 95 Expectd 82.08 0.30 0.006 105 50%ile 90.72 0.28 0.006 115 Flow 99.36 0.25 0.005 150 129.60 0.19 0.004 200 172.80 0.14 0.003 250 216.00 0.12 0.002 300 259.20 0.10 0.002 350 302.40 0.08 0.002 400 345.60 0.07 0.001 450 388.80 0.06 0.001 500 432.00 0.06 0.001 600 518.40 0.05 0.001 700 604.80 0.04 0.001 800 691.20 0.04 0.001 WTTW PE = 800 Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 2.70 9.26 0.185 5.40 4.63 0.093 8.10 3.09 0.062 10.80 2.31 0.046 16.20 1.54 0.031 21.60 1.16 0.023 27.00 0.93 0.019 32.40 0.77 0.015 40.50 0.62 0.012 51.30 0.49 0.010 56.70 0.44 0.009 62.10 0.40 0.008 81.00 0.31 0.006 108.00 0.23 0.005 135.00 0.19 0.004 162.00 0.15 0.003 189.00 0.13 0.003 216.00 0.12 0.002 243.00 0.10 0.002 270.00 0.09 0.002 324.00 0.08 0.002 378.00 0.07 0.001 432.00 0.06 0.001 WTTW PE = 1000 Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 2.16 11.57 0.231 4.32 5.79 0.116 6.48 3.86 0.077 8.64 2.89 0.058 12.96 1.93 0.039 17.28 1.45 0.029 21.60 1.16 0.023 25.92 0.96 0.019 32.40 0.77 0.015 41.04 0.61 0.012 45.36 0.55 0.011 49.68 0.50 0.010 64.80 0.39 0.008 86.40 0.29 0.006 108.00 0.23 0.005 129.60 0.19 0.004 151.20 0.17 0.003 172.80 0.14 0.003 194.40 0.13 0.003 216.00 0.12 0.002 259.20 0.10 0.002 302.40 0.08 0.002 345.60 0.07 0.001 WTTW PE = 1500 Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 1.44 17.36 0.347 2.88 8.68 0.174 4.32 5.79 0.116 5.76 4.34 0.087 8.64 2.89 0.058 11.52 2.17 0.043 14.40 1.74 0.035 17.28 1.45 0.029 21.60 1.16 0.023 27.36 0.91 0.018 30.24 0.83 0.017 33.12 0.75 0.015 43.20 0.58 0.012 57.60 0.43 0.009 72.00 0.35 0.007 86.40 0.29 0.006 100.80 0.25 0.005 115.20 0.22 0.004 129.60 0.19 0.004 144.00 0.17 0.003 172.80 0.14 0.003 201.60 0.12 0.002 230.40 0.11 0.002 WTTW PE = 2000 Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 1.08 23.15 0.463 2.16 11.57 0.231 3.24 7.72 0.154 4.32 5.79 0.116 6.48 3.86 0.077 8.64 2.89 0.058 10.80 2.31 0.046 12.96 1.93 0.039 16.20 1.54 0.031 20.52 1.22 0.024 22.68 1.10 0.022 24.84 1.01 0.020 32.40 0.77 0.015 43.20 0.58 0.012 54.00 0.46 0.009 64.80 0.39 0.008 75.60 0.33 0.007 86.40 0.29 0.006 97.20 0.26 0.005 108.00 0.23 0.005 129.60 0.19 0.004 151.20 0.17 0.003 172.80 0.14 0.003
200 25 1 0.5
Co n
se
nt o
ot
he
ru
se
Carlow Co Co
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:41

Table 4 Total P =10mg/l - smaller works
River Flow l/s 5 10 15 20 30 40 50 60 75 95 105 115 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 600 700 800 50 WTTW PE = Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l Sample 43.20 0.58 0.116 95%ile 86.40 0.29 0.058 Flow 129.60 0.19 0.039 172.80 0.14 0.029 259.20 0.10 0.019 345.60 0.07 0.014 432.00 0.06 0.012 518.40 0.05 0.010 648.00 0.04 0.008 Expected 820.80 0.03 0.006 50%ile 907.20 0.03 0.006 Flow 993.60 0.03 0.005 1296.00 0.02 0.004 1728.00 0.01 0.003 2160.00 0.01 0.002 2592.00 0.01 0.002 3024.00 0.01 0.002 3456.00 0.01 0.001 3888.00 0.01 0.001 4320.00 0.01 0.001 5184.00 0.00 0.001 6048.00 0.00 0.001 6912.00 0.00 0.001 WTTW PE = 75 Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 28.80 0.87 0.174 57.60 0.43 0.087 86.40 0.29 0.058 115.20 0.22 0.043 172.80 0.14 0.029 230.40 0.11 0.022 288.00 0.09 0.017 345.60 0.07 0.014 432.00 0.06 0.012 547.20 0.05 0.009 604.80 0.04 0.008 662.40 0.04 0.008 864.00 0.03 0.006 1152.00 0.02 0.004 1440.00 0.02 0.003 1728.00 0.01 0.003 2016.00 0.01 0.002 2304.00 0.01 0.002 2592.00 0.01 0.002 2880.00 0.01 0.002 3456.00 0.01 0.001 4032.00 0.01 0.001 4608.00 0.01 0.001 WTTW PE = 100 Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 21.60 1.16 0.231 43.20 0.58 0.116 64.80 0.39 0.077 86.40 0.29 0.058 129.60 0.19 0.039 172.80 0.14 0.029 216.00 0.12 0.023 259.20 0.10 0.019 324.00 0.08 0.015 410.40 0.06 0.012 453.60 0.06 0.011 496.80 0.05 0.010 648.00 0.04 0.008 864.00 0.03 0.006 1080.00 0.02 0.005 1296.00 0.02 0.004 1512.00 0.02 0.003 1728.00 0.01 0.003 1944.00 0.01 0.003 2160.00 0.01 0.002 2592.00 0.01 0.002 3024.00 0.01 0.002 3456.00 0.01 0.001 WTTW PE = 150 Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 14.40 1.74 0.347 28.80 0.87 0.174 43.20 0.58 0.116 57.60 0.43 0.087 86.40 0.29 0.058 115.20 0.22 0.043 144.00 0.17 0.035 172.80 0.14 0.029 216.00 0.12 0.023 273.60 0.09 0.018 302.40 0.08 0.017 331.20 0.08 0.015 432.00 0.06 0.012 576.00 0.04 0.009 720.00 0.03 0.007 864.00 0.03 0.006 1008.00 0.02 0.005 1152.00 0.02 0.004 1296.00 0.02 0.004 1440.00 0.02 0.003 1728.00 0.01 0.003 2016.00 0.01 0.002 2304.00 0.01 0.002 WTTW PE = 200 Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 10.80 2.31 0.463 21.60 1.16 0.231 32.40 0.77 0.154 43.20 0.58 0.116 64.80 0.39 0.077 86.40 0.29 0.058 108.00 0.23 0.046 129.60 0.19 0.039 162.00 0.15 0.031 205.20 0.12 0.024 226.80 0.11 0.022 248.40 0.10 0.020 324.00 0.08 0.015 432.00 0.06 0.012 540.00 0.05 0.009 648.00 0.04 0.008 756.00 0.03 0.007 864.00 0.03 0.006 972.00 0.03 0.005 1080.00 0.02 0.005 1296.00 0.02 0.004 1512.00 0.02 0.003 1728.00 0.01 0.003
200 25 10 5
Co n
se
nt o
ot
he
ru
se
Carlow Co Co
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:41

Table 5 Total P =5mg/l - Larger Works
River Flow l/s 40 50 60 75 100 125 150 175 200 250 300 350 400 450 500 600 700 800 900 1000 1500 2000 2500 2000 WTTW PE = Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 8.64 2.89 0.289 10.80 2.31 0.231 12.96 1.93 0.193 16.20 1.54 0.154 21.60 1.16 0.116 Sample 27.00 0.93 0.093 95%ile 32.40 0.77 0.077 Flow 37.80 0.66 0.066 43.20 0.58 0.058 54.00 0.46 0.046 64.80 0.39 0.039 75.60 0.33 0.033 86.40 0.29 0.029 97.20 0.26 0.026 108.00 0.23 0.023 129.60 0.19 0.019 151.20 0.17 0.017 172.80 0.14 0.014 194.40 0.13 0.013 Expected 216.00 0.12 0.012 50%ile 324.00 0.08 0.008 Flow 432.00 0.06 0.006 540.00 0.05 0.005 WTTW PE = 2500 Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 6.91 3.62 0.362 8.64 2.89 0.289 10.37 2.41 0.241 12.96 1.93 0.193 17.28 1.45 0.145 21.60 1.16 0.116 25.92 0.96 0.096 30.24 0.83 0.083 34.56 0.72 0.072 43.20 0.58 0.058 51.84 0.48 0.048 60.48 0.41 0.041 69.12 0.36 0.036 77.76 0.32 0.032 86.40 0.29 0.029 103.68 0.24 0.024 120.96 0.21 0.021 138.24 0.18 0.018 155.52 0.16 0.016 172.80 0.14 0.014 259.20 0.10 0.010 345.60 0.07 0.007 432.00 0.06 0.006 WTTW PE = 3000 Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 5.76 4.34 0.434 7.20 3.47 0.347 8.64 2.89 0.289 10.80 2.31 0.231 14.40 1.74 0.174 18.00 1.39 0.139 21.60 1.16 0.116 25.20 0.99 0.099 28.80 0.87 0.087 36.00 0.69 0.069 43.20 0.58 0.058 50.40 0.50 0.050 57.60 0.43 0.043 64.80 0.39 0.039 72.00 0.35 0.035 86.40 0.29 0.029 100.80 0.25 0.025 115.20 0.22 0.022 129.60 0.19 0.019 144.00 0.17 0.017 216.00 0.12 0.012 288.00 0.09 0.009 360.00 0.07 0.007 WTTW PE = 4000 Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 4.32 5.79 0.579 5.40 4.63 0.463 6.48 3.86 0.386 8.10 3.09 0.309 10.80 2.31 0.231 13.50 1.85 0.185 16.20 1.54 0.154 18.90 1.32 0.132 21.60 1.16 0.116 27.00 0.93 0.093 32.40 0.77 0.077 37.80 0.66 0.066 43.20 0.58 0.058 48.60 0.51 0.051 54.00 0.46 0.046 64.80 0.39 0.039 75.60 0.33 0.033 86.40 0.29 0.029 97.20 0.26 0.026 108.00 0.23 0.023 162.00 0.15 0.015 216.00 0.12 0.012 270.00 0.09 0.009 WTTW PE = 5000 Dilution BOD MRP mg/l mg/l 3.46 7.23 0.723 4.32 5.79 0.579 5.18 4.82 0.482 6.48 3.86 0.386 8.64 2.89 0.289 10.80 2.31 0.231 12.96 1.93 0.193 15.12 1.65 0.165 17.28 1.45 0.145 21.60 1.16 0.116 25.92 0.96 0.096 30.24 0.83 0.083 34.56 0.72 0.072 38.88 0.64 0.064 43.20 0.58 0.058 51.84 0.48 0.048 60.48 0.41 0.041 69.12 0.36 0.036 77.76 0.32 0.032 86.40 0.29 0.029 129.60 0.19 0.019 172.80 0.14 0.014 216.00 0.12 0.012
200 25 5 2.5
Co n
se
nt o
ot
he
ru
se
Carlow Co Co
EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:41

Operation Philosophy Wastewater Treatement Plant

Загружено:

Сведения о документе

Оригинальное название

Авторское право

Доступные форматы

Поделиться этим документом

Поделиться или встроить документ

Параметры публикации

Этот документ был вам полезен?

Это неприемлемый материал?

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

Operation Philosophy Wastewater Treatement Plant

Загружено:

Авторское право:

Доступные форматы

CONTROL PHILOSOPHY

TO BE READ IN CONJUNCTION WITH P+ID PLAN (Rev. 02)

CARLOW COUNTY COUNCIL

FENNAGH WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT

EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:36

Inlet Works ..................................................................................................................... 8

Tertiary Treatment Filter............................................................................................... 23

10. Ferric Dosing................................................................................................................ 28

Fennagh WWTP Ref No. 1728

EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:36

The process control description is based on the following P+ID drawing:

Fennagh WWTP Ref No. 1728

EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:36

Waste Water Treatment Plant

Fennagh WWTP Ref No. 1728

EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37

Fennagh WWTP Ref No. 1728

EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37

II. ABBREVIATIONS LIST

Fennagh WWTP Ref No. 1728

RAS = Return Activated Sludge

EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37

III. TAGS AND CODES IN P+ID PLANS

Tags for equipment instruments are specified as follows:

01Unit No. (e.g. inlet works, pumping station)

Existing Replaced New

Letter codes for identification function of plant / equipment instruments as follows:

Level Moisture or humidity --

Time or time programme

-Indicating ---Recording --Switching Transmitting -Emergency of safety acting

Pressure (analysis, concentration, conductivity, etc.) Quality Speed Temperature On/Off --

Additional specifications (used as first letter; OC = Open / Close

Fennagh WWTP Ref No. 1728

EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37

Urgent (Over flow, pump fail to start, etc)

Alarm raised locally and at the county councils head office.

Fennagh WWTP Ref No. 1728

EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37

1. INLET WORKS 1.1. Process Description

An enable signal is triggered from panel (PL-01) and (01-SC01) is activated.

EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37

(Levels to be set during commissioning)

Fennagh WWTP Ref No. 1728

EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37

01-SC03 01-SC04 01-SV01 01-SV02

Grit trap Grit classifier Solenoid valve Solenoid valve

3-way actuated valve

Fennagh WWTP Ref No. 1728

EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37

2. FORWARD FEED PUMPING STATION 2.1. Process Description

located in the wet well.

(Levels to be set during commissioning)

Fennagh WWTP Ref No. 1728

EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37

Comment Duty/ Standby VSD Controls at PL-01

Fennagh WWTP Ref No. 1728

EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37

3. STORM TANK 3.1. Process Description

(Levels to be set during commissioning)

Fennagh WWTP Ref No. 1728

to the nearby stream.

EPA Export 26-02-2010:18:59:37

Fennagh WWTP Ref No. 1728