|
|
|||
|
||||
Meeting of the Hawke's Bay Drinking Water Governance Joint Committee
Date: Friday 4 December 2020
Time: 10.00am
Venue: |
Council Chamber Hawke's Bay Regional Council 159 Dalton Street NAPIER |
Agenda
Item Title Page
1. Welcome/Notices/Apologies
2. Conflict of Interest Declarations
3. Confirmation of Minutes of the Hawke's Bay Drinking Water Governance Joint Committee held on 3 August 2020
4. Call for Minor Items not on the Agenda
Decision Items
5. Six Principles of Safe Drinking Water 3
6. Information and Data Sharing Project 5
7. TANK submissions on Drinking Water Provisions 11
Information or Performance Monitoring
8. Working Group Work Plan Update 15
9. Verbal Regional Three Waters Update
10. Discussion of Minor Items Not on the Agenda 19
|
|
|||
|
||||
Hawke's Bay Drinking Water Governance Joint Committee
Friday 04 December 2020
Subject: Six Principles of Safe Drinking Water
Reason for Report
1. To introduce to the Committee the six principles of safe drinking water
Executive Summary
2. A power point presentation will be made of the six principles of safe drinking water. A copy of the presentation will be made available after the meeting.
Background
3. The Report of the Havelock North Drinking Water Inquiry Stage 2 noted that addressing the basic problems of water safety in New Zealand requires recognition of six fundamental principles.
4. A number of principles permeate the Drinking Water Standards for NZ and Drinking Water guidelines, however prior to the Inquiry they were not drawn together in any meaningful way.
5. The Inquiry identified six fundamental principles for drinking water safety in New Zealand to guide decisions on drinking water.
Next Steps
6. The six principles form the framework to the work carried out by the Committee in addressing the safety of human drinking water.
Decision Making Process
7. Staff have assessed the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only, the decision-making provisions do not apply.
That the Hawke’s Bay Drinking Water Governance Joint Committee receives and notes the “Six Principles of Safe Drinking Water” presentation. |
Authored and approved by:
Liz Lambert Group Manager Regulation |
|
|
|
|||
|
||||
Hawke's Bay Drinking Water Governance Joint Committee
Friday 04 December 2020
Subject: Information and Data Sharing Project
Reason for Report
1. The purpose of this report is to update the Committee on the information and data sharing work stream and to seek the Committee’s support for the next steps.
Officers’ Recommendation(s)
2. That the Hawke’s Bay Drinking Water Governance Joint Committee agrees to write a letter to the Department of Internal Affairs in support of consideration being given to a pilot project for the development of an information and data system to meet the needs of all agencies involved drinking water safety within the Hawke’s Bay region.
Background
3. In August 2016, there was a major outbreak of campylobacteriosis in Havelock North due to contaminated drinking water. In September 2016, the Government established a Commission of Inquiry to investigate and report on the outbreak. The Inquiry proceeded in two stages.
4. The first stage focussed on identifying what happened, the cause of the outbreak, and an assessment of the conduct of those responsible for providing safe drinking water to Havelock North.
5. In Stage 2 the Inquiry focussed on the improvement of the safety of drinking water in New Zealand, lessons to be learned from the Havelock North outbreak and changes which could be made to achieve those goals.
6. As part of Stage 1, the Inquiry Panel made several interim recommendations concerning actions required to assure drinking water safety for Havelock North, including the establishment of the Water Safety Joint Working Group. Among these recommendations were:
6.1. A(c) The Water Safety A(c) The Water Safety Joint Working Group members notify each other, and keep each other informed, of any information that could affect drinking-water safety risks and the members should record, and as appropriate, make available to other members, information and data and records which are relevant to the safety of drinking water.
6.2. A(d) The Water Safety JWG investigate aquifer - matters of potential relevance to drinking-water safety.
7. The Inquiry saw merit in Joint Working Groups having (at least) the following functions and purposes:
7.1. Liaison and relationship and confidence building, a general vehicle for interchange between agencies;
7.2. Information sharing, preferably in due course by way of databases and other more formalised systems;
7.3. Making recommendations in relation to drinking water;
7.4. Negotiating or mediating outcomes on issues involving drinking water;
7.5. Monitoring test results, and aquifer investigations, and other indicators of drinking water safety;
7.6. Reviewing compliance levels and taking steps to achieve full compliance; and
7.7. Overseeing and/or conducting research or investigations.
8. This Committee has raised the issues of data sharing and information sharing to a high priority in its work plan for the Working Group. The JWG held workshop on this project earlier in November.
Discussion
9. Every member agency has a plethora of data in respect of its water management responsibilities. Over the course of the past three years since the JWG was formed there has been a significant improvement in the sharing of information between agencies. The opportunity to meet as part of the Working Group has facilitated a greater level of understanding on one another’s needs and a willingness to share not just data but knowledge, processes, etc.
10. It has been important for us collectively to identify the purposes for which data and information sharing can be used as the first step in defining the problem, identifying opportunities and then looking for solutions. Our assessment is that the key reasons for sharing data and information are for:
10.1. Understanding risks
10.2. Managing emergencies
10.3. Determining regulatory compliance
10.4. Planning for:
10.4.1. Water Safety
10.4.2. Water Allocation
11. Expectations in terms of sharing and receiving information relating to drinking water safety risks are common to JWG members. The following are considered important:
11.1. Information is fit for purpose, robust and reflects industry best practice
11.2. Timeliness of information
11.3. Relevant and in context
11.4. Reflects a “no surprises” approach
11.5. Appropriate decision-making action can be taken where information is provided
11.6. That information shared won’t be “used against” the sharer
11.7. Privacy of individuals is maintained where relevant.
12. Since the JWG initiated discussions on information sharing developments have occurred around the Three Waters Reform Programme and the requirements for territorial authorities to provide an extensive range of information on their Three Waters services to central government.
13. You will be aware that the Crown has signed Memoranda of Understanding with all eligible local authorities in Hawke’s Bay and provided stimulus funding to support economic recovery and transform the delivery of three waters services. The MoU included a commitment to share information to support the Three Waters Reform Programme.
14. The information being requested by the Department of Internal Affairs (DIA) will enable analysis to better understand the:
14.1. Current state of the three waters related asset base
14.2. Conditions of the assets
14.3. The operating environment
14.4. Commercial and financial arrangements
14.5. Forecast investment plans
14.6. Potential impacts and advantages of reform on the local government sector
15. The information requested covers a wide range of issues:
15.1. Commercial and borrowing arrangements, insurances, consents, Infrastructure Strategy, valuation reports
15.2. Properties, populations and volumes
15.3. Water availability, wastewater flooding, customer service and other service indicators
15.4. Drinking water quality outputs, compliance parameters, consents and wastewater standards
15.5. Operating costs and cost drivers
15.6. Financial information such as cashflow, balance sheet and profit and loss
15.7. Capital investment
15.8. Asset values
16. The information request from DIA was made in October 2020 and is required to be completed and submitted by 1 February 2021. There is a significant amount of work to be carried out by the local councils to meet this deadline. In addition they are preparing Long Term Plans and 30-year Infrastructure Strategies.
17. It is the initial assessment of the Joint Working Group that while in the immediate future the territorial authorities will have to give all their resources to meeting the DIA information request, in the medium term there is a much greater opportunity to align with neighbouring councils and central government agencies to develop a prototype data and information system that could be replicated elsewhere.
18. The advantages of this are:
18.1. There are far more extensive information demands to be made on councils in the future, through upcoming reforms. Both Taumata Arowai and the Three Waters Reform programme will necessitate the gathering of additional data and the presentation of that data in a public-friendly manner. We have an opportunity to work smarter.
18.2. Such a system could be designed to incorporate the array of information already being shared by JWG agencies e.g notification of outbreaks of illness; water supply issues and problems; real time science updates; HBRC Consent database; and Compliance information as examples.
18.3. There is potential funding already available through the Department of Internal Affairs and its funding to HB councils (c. $700k).
18.4. Taumata Arowai has suggested informally that consideration needs to be given in any joint activities in considering councils beyond the current Hawke’s Bay region.
19. The JWG has concluded that such an approach has the potential to maximise our limited resources for the best possible outcome. The support of the Drinking Water Joint Governance Committee is sought to approach DIA to commence discussions on this.
Options Assessment
20. The issue of data sharing and information sharing across agencies responsible for drinking water safety was identified by the Board of Inquiry into the Havelock North contamination event as a matter for addressing. The Joint Committee has subsequently now raised this to a high priority in the work programme for the Committee and its Working Group.
21. The ongoing reforms of drinking water (and stormwater and wastewater) taking place at central government have added to the demands and expectations on drinking water agencies. This has presented as a potential opportunity to avoid unnecessary duplication and costs in the data and information space.
22. There are three options put forward for consideration:
22.1. Option 1 is to do nothing and retain current date and information sharing systems. This option reflects business as usual and does not meet the intent from the Board nor will it assist in minimising drinking water safety risk.
22.2. Option 2 is to develop a project based on existing member agencies of the Committee and on existing date and information sharing platforms. This option will require ongoing input from agencies using stretched human resources and will miss the opportunity to incorporate data and information form central government agencies.
22.3. Option 3 is to approach DIA with a proposal for the development of a data and information sharing system that meets the needs of all agencies. We would seek their guidance on how the system could be set up and how any inherent problems could be addressed. There is potential for central government funding to be used in this option especially if it were to be presented as a pilot project.
Significance and Engagement Policy Assessment
23. Whilst the matters discussed in this report are of interest to the community they do not directly impact or affect the community. There are no levels of service implications associated with deciding to adopt this report. Accordingly, this report is of low significance.
Financial and Resource Implications
24. There are no financial and funding implications directly associated with adopting the report and recommendation. Further consequential decisions may have financial impacts and will be brought back to the Committee for approval.
Next Steps
25. If the Committee recommends Option 3 a letter of support for the option form the Committee seeking investment by the DIA into a pilot project would be written, Members of the Joint Working Group will prepare a proposal for a discussion with the DIA to accompany the letter.
Decision Making Process
26. Council and its committees are required to make every decision in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements in relation to this item and have concluded:
26.1. The decision does not significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset, nor is it inconsistent with an existing policy or plan.
26.2. The use of the special consultative procedure is not prescribed by legislation.
26.3. The decision is not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted Significance and Engagement Policy.
26.4. There are no persons directly affected by this decision but are those persons interested in the management of drinking water safety in the region may be interested in the eventual outcome of the project.
26.5. Given the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided, and also the persons likely to be affected by, or have an interest in the decisions made, Council can exercise its discretion and make a decision without consulting directly with the community or others having an interest in the decision.
That the Hawke’s Bay Drinking Water Governance Joint Committee: 1. Receives and considers the “Information and Data Sharing Project” staff report. 2. Agrees that the decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in HBRC’s adopted Significance and Engagement Policy, and that the Joint Committee can exercise its discretion and make decisions on this issue without conferring directly with the community or persons likely to have an interest in the decision. 3. Agrees to write a letter to the Department of Internal Affairs in support of consideration being given to a pilot project for the development of an information and data system to meet the needs of all agencies involved drinking water safety within the Hawke’s Bay region.
|
Authored and approved by:
Liz Lambert Group Manager Regulation |
|
Attachment/s
|
|
|||
|
||||
Hawke's Bay Drinking Water Governance Joint Committee
Friday 04 December 2020
Subject: TANK submissions on Drinking Water Provisions
Reason for Report
1. The purpose of this report is to update the Committee on the submissions received to Plan Change 9 to the Hawke’s Bay Regional Resource Management Plan (“TANK”).
2. TANK covers the Tutaekuri, Ahuriri, Ngarururo and Karamu catchments of the Heretaunga Plains and includes the urban areas of Napier and Hastings. The plan change deals with the management of water quality and water quantity in those catchments.
Officers’ Recommendation(s)
3. The recommendation is to receive the report for information only.
Executive Summary
4. The Drinking Water Governance Committee, through the Joint Working Group, was recognised as a TANK working group tasked with developing draft policies and rules for the protection of drinking water sources for inclusion in the TANK plan change.
5. The TANK Plan was publicly notified on 2 May 2020 and 240 submissions were received. These submissions have been summarised and are now open for further submissions in support or opposition, which close on Wednesday 9 December 2020.
6. This paper provides a broad summary of the submissions received on drinking water source protection.
Background
7. The Joint Working Group (JWG) presented the following recommendations to the TANK group meeting on 27 July 2018.
7.1. Include a new objective to provide an explicit statement in the Regional Plan that recognises and provides for drinking water source protection zones (SPZs).
7.2. Include a new policy to support the above objective and provide guidance as to how the objective is to be implemented.
7.3. Several changes to rules:
7.3.1. For activities that already require a resource consent, add matters of control/ discretion that enable the risk to drinking water sources to be considered, where those activities are located in mapped Source Protection Zones (SPZs)
7.3.2. Introduce consenting requirements for activities located over SPZs
7.3.3. A default 2km radius or provisional protection zone (PPZ) applied for registered drinking water supplies in the absence of more specific information
7.3.4. Amendments to some existing Permitted Activity rules to meet National Environmental Standard for Sources of Human Drinking Water requirements
7.3.5. Production Land use consents in a SPZ area to be a permitted activity as proposed by TANK, but Farm Environment Plans will need to include consultation with the water supply authority and identify measures to manage risks to drinking water sources
8. Further work was undertaken and clarity sought on the models to be used for the mapping of the SPZs. Minor details included: the practical implications of the SPZs on land use implications both current and future in those zones and the status of the development of Napier City Council’s SPZs.
9. The result of this further work was a conclusion that the ‘modelling approach adopted by HBRC for delineating the SPZ’s for the four Hastings bore-fields is considered appropriate and represents an advance on the initial work by Tonkin and Taylor in that it accommodates more of the complexity of groundwater flow system, and in particular the groundwater flow directions and gradients’.
10. Ultimately it was recommended to the Regional Planning Committee that the Heretaunga Plains numerical model be used to determine SPZs in the longer term within the TANK Plan while the AEM approach for Napier be used in the short term until further modelling can be carried out.
11. The groundwater modellers indicated that the Napier SPZs modelled using an AEM model may not be significantly different using the Heretaunga Plains numerical model as the bores in that location are within a more homogeneous part of the aquifer. The item also noted that whilst the Heretaunga Plains numerical model represents the best available knowledge it may change as more data is gathered as part of improving the model. This related specifically to the SkyTEM Airborne Aquifer Survey work programmed for completion in 2021.
12. Ahead of public notification the provisions were also amended to insert definitions into the glossary for ‘Registered drinking water supply’, ‘Source Protection Zones’, ‘Source Protection Extent’ and ‘Hawkes Bay Regional Council Heretaunga Plains Groundwater Model’.
Discussion
13. Hawke’s Bay Regional Council received 240 submissions on Plan Change 9 – TANK. Of these, 42 submissions submitted on one or more of the source protection provisions, a total of 83 points. These can be found on pp 39-43 of the summary of submitters by provision:https://www.hbrc.govt.nz/assets/Document-Library/TANK/Summary-of-submissions-by-provision.pdf
14. The submissions can be broadly categorised as follows:
14.1. Seeking changes to boundaries of SPZs
14.2. General support but concern around over-precautionary approach to protection of source drinking water and suggested amendments to make this less regulatory.
14.3. Acknowledge that provisions may need to be amended to be consistent with the Water Service Bill.
15. Overall, however, there are no submissions seeking the removal of the drinking water source provisions. The Joint Committee has status as a submitter and can (and should) appear before the TANK hearings panel with the aim of assisting the Panel to finalise these provisions.
16. The Joint Committee will not be disadvantaged by not lodging a further submission. The period for further submissions closes on Wednesday 9 December 2020. Member agencies may well be preparing their own further submissions.
17. The hearings are scheduled for May and June 2021 (2 weeks of each month) and the Officers Reports are likely to be circulated by the end of March 2021. This will give an opportunity for the Joint Working Group to undertake further work ahead of the hearings on the zone boundaries and any other matters. By the time of the hearings we will also have a better idea of the content of the Water Services legislation.
Decision Making Process
18. Council and its committees are required to make every decision in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 (the Act). Staff have assessed the requirements in relation to this item and have concluded:
18.1. The decision does not significantly alter the service provision or affect a strategic asset, nor is it inconsistent with an existing policy or plan.
18.2. The use of the special consultative procedure is not prescribed by legislation.
18.3. The decision is not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted Significance and Engagement Policy.
18.4. The persons affected by this decision are those who access drinking water in the TANK catchments.
18.5. Given the nature and significance of the issue to be considered and decided, and also the persons likely to be affected by, or have an interest in the decisions made, Council can exercise its discretion and make a decision without consulting directly with the community or others having an interest in the decision.
That Hawke’s Bay Drinking Water Governance Joint Committee: 1. Agrees that the decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted Significance and Engagement Policy, and that Council can exercise its discretion and make decisions on this issue without conferring directly with the community or persons likely to have an interest in the decision. 2. Receives and considers the “TANK submissions on Drinking Water Provisions“ staff report. |
Authored and approved by:
Liz Lambert Group Manager Regulation |
|
Attachment/s
|
|
|||
|
||||
Hawke's Bay Drinking Water Governance Joint Committee
Friday 04 December 2020
Subject: Working Group Work Plan Update
Reason for Report
1. To provide an update on the Joint Working Group’s (JWG) work plan.
Background
2. The Joint Committee monitors the progress of the JWG progress on its work through a Work Plan. The JWG has been systematically working this plan over the last three years. Most of the original actions arising from the Inquiry Panel’s directions have been completed, and what remains is being continually monitored and updated.
3. In 2018 the Committee directed the JWG to prioritise its actions. The work plan is now updated and priorities amended, if required, at every JWG meeting.
Discussion
4. The Joint Working Group has now been operating for three years. The focus of the first term was, firstly, the immediate steps to be taken to resolve Havelock North Drinking water issues and, secondly, completion of the work required to input into the TANK plan change
5. With the completion of these the priority actions for the JWG are now:
5.1. Greater focus on sharing of information/knowledge/skills across agencies to enhance consistency of approach and to fill knowledge gaps. This will include federated approach to data sharing and gaps analysis about what information is missing
5.2. The development of a Joint Emergency Response Plan to enhance preparation for potential scenarios where drinking water access is lost or interrupted.
6. The workstream identified by the Board of Inquiry that specifically related to the Havelock North water supply has been “closed out” as this has been completed.
7. A copy of the updated Work Plan is attached for the Committee’s consideration and approval.
Decision Making Process
8. Staff have assessed the requirements of the Local Government Act 2002 in relation to this item and have concluded that, as this report is for information only, the decision-making provisions do not apply.
That the Hawke’s Bay Drinking Water Governance Joint Committee: 1. Receives and considers the “Work Plan Update” staff report. 2. Agrees that the decisions to be made are not significant under the criteria contained in Council’s adopted Significance and Engagement Policy, and that Council can exercise its discretion and make decisions on this issue without conferring directly with the community or persons likely to have an interest in the decision. 3. Approves the changes to the work plan for implementation by the Joint Drinking Water Group.
|
Authored and approved by:
Liz Lambert Group Manager Regulation |
|
⇩1 |
Work Plan with priorities December 2020 |
|
|
Hawke's Bay Drinking Water Governance Joint Committee
Friday 04 December 2020
Subject: Discussion of Minor Items Not on the Agenda
Reason for Report
1. This document has been prepared to assist Joint Committee members to note any Minor Items of Business Not on the Agenda to be discussed as agreed in Agenda Item 5.
Topic |
Raised by |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|