I From: Eimer Godsil Environmental Licensing Program meFrom: Eimer Godsil Environmental Licensing...

This Report has been cleared for submission to the Director by Senior Inspector M r Patrick Byrne 1 Signed h3 Date grh September 2026

OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAIN ABIL ITY

I I To Director

From Eimer Godsil Environmental Licensing Program me

I Date gTH SEPTEMBER 2016

Application for an I E licence from Mr Stephen Hall Lattacapple Cootehill County Cavan Licence Register No P1034-01 RE

Application Details

Licence application received 18 November 2015

Class of activity under First Schedule of EPA Act 1992 as amended

Class 61 (a) The rearing of poultry in installations where the capacity exceeds 40000 places

66(a) Intensive rearing of poultry with more than 40000 places for poultry

~~

Category of Activity under I E Directive (201075EU)

Title of BREF document (main) BREF Document on Best Available Techniques for Intensive Rearing of Poultry and Pigs (July 2003)

Notices under Regulation 10( 2)( b)( ii) issued

14 January 2016

Information under Regulation 10(2)( b)(ii) received

24 June 2016

EIS received 18 November 2015

24 June 2016 Application compliant with Regulation 9

Submissions received 1 HSE 23 December 2015 2 Mr Peter Sweetman 13 March

2016

10 December 2015 Site notice inspected

1

Site visit I 26 July 2016 (ELP) 1 1 Installation and Applicant

Mr Stephen Hall operates a poultry (broiler) rearing farm on land owned by Herbert Hall a t Lattacapple Cootehill Co Cavan

The installation currently accommodates approximately 90000 broilers in 2 poultry houses Poultry farming has been carried out on this site since 2004 Planning permission Ref 01715 was granted by Cavan County Council on 17 April 2002 for one poultry house this house was constructed in 2004 House 2 was completed in 2015 under planning permission Ref 14286 granted on 18 November 2014 Retention for alterations to planning 14286 was granted on 17 February 2016 under planning Ref 15470

The present enterprise provides full-time employment for the applicant The main activities a t this installation occur during normal working hours between 600 am and 800 pm Stock inspections are carried out every day including weekends and bank holidays and additional essential activities may be undertaken outside of core working hours The installation currently operates in accordance with the requirements of the Department of Agriculture Food and the Marine and the Bord Bia Poultry Products Quality Assurance Scheme (PPQAS)

2 Process description

The process involves the rearing of stock specifically bred for lean poultry meat production from day olds delivered from the hatchery until they are removed from the site to the processing installation (approximately 5 - 6 weeks) At the end of each rearing cycle the houses are destocked and the birds are sold for processing Following a period of 2 weeks to allow for removal of the poultry litter (organic fertiliser) and complete drying after the cleaning process the houses are restocked

The type of broiler house used for this activity is a simple closed building of block and timberwood construction on an impervious concrete base The houses are thermally insulated with a forced computer controlled ventilation system and artificial lighting Automatic feeding and ventilation systems operate on a 24 hour basis The solid flooring of each broiler house is bedded with wood shavings over its entire area immediately prior to housing each new batch bought from the hatchery

The principal inputs to the operation are feed water veterinary medicines and energy (electricity and gas for heating) The main by-product of poultry rearing is poultry litter (organic fertiliser) These are discussed in further detail below

I

3 Planning Permission EIS and E IA Requirements 31 EIA Screening

I n accordance with Section 83(2A) of the EPA Act 1992 as amended the Agency must ensure that before a licence or revised licence is granted that the application is made subject to an environmental impact assessment (EIA) where the activity meets the criteria outlined in Section 83(2A)(b) and 83(2A)(c) I n accordance with the EIA Screening Determination the Agency has determined that the activity is likely to have a significant

I Any fer t i l iser other than that manufactured by indust r ia l process and inc ludes l i ves tock manure dungsteacl manure f a rmyard manure slurry so i led water si lage eff luent non - fa rm organic substances such as sewage s I uclge i n cl us t r i a I by - prod uc ts a ntl res i dues from fi s h fa r i m

2

effect on the environment and accordingly is carrying out an assessment for the purposes of EIA An EIS was submitted with the licence application

32 Plannins status

A number of planning applications have been made by the applicant for the site of the activity since 2001 Details of these planning applications and permissions have been provided in the application form and are detailed below

Planning Ref Brief Description Date of final grant

01715 onstruct 2 poultry houses with associated works 17042002

onstruct 1 poultry house and underground 22052009 (expired) I 0953 ashwater storage

onstruct 1 poultry house with ancillary structures

o retain and complete alterations to development

14286

15470 pproved under planning Ref 14286

Cavan County Council granted planning permission (Ref 01715) for the construction of 2 poultry houses on 17 April 2002 - only one of these houses was constructed in 2004 Planning was granted (Ref 0953) for a second poultry house on 22 May 2009 this planning expired without construction Planning was granted (Ref 14286) on 18 November 2014 for the construction of 1 poultry house this house has been constructed Further planning was granted on 17 February 2016 for retention of alterations to the development granted under Ref 14286 Thus there are currently 2 poultry houses on site

Cavan County Council required an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in support of three planning applications The applicant has submitted the two most recent EISs required by Cavan County Council These EISs relate to planning permissions Ref 14286 and Ref 15470 Having reviewed the (planners) reports for previous planning permissions it is considered that the two EISs submitted with the licence application adequately identify describe and assess the direct and indirect effects of the entire activity and that the EIS relating to planning permission Ref 0953 is not required for the Agencys assessment

Having specific regard to EIA this report is intended to identify describe and assess for the Agency the direct and indirect effects of the activity on the environment as respects the matters that come within the functions of the Agency including any interaction between those effects and the related development forming part of the wider project and to propose conclusions to the Agency in relation to such effects

The EISs submitted the licence application the submissions and observations received from third parties the assessments carried out by the planning authority consultations with the planning authority the relevant planning decisions and any additional information submitted by the applicant have been examined and assessed and are considered below for that purpose

I

I

33 Content of EIS and licence aDulication

I have considered and examined the content of the licence application the EISs and other relevant material submitted with it

3

It was considered that the EIS and licence application did not adequately address the following areas and this information was requested under Regulation 10 of the EPA (Industrial Emissions) (Licensing) Regulations 2013

1 Planning Permission EIS and EIA requirements

2 Planning status of the installation

3 Details on organic fertiliser production and storage capacity at the installation

4 Arrangements for the collection and removal of organic fertiliser from the installation and its end destination

5 Details regarding storm water drainage from the installation

6 Details on the volume of washwater produced and storage capacity and

7 Resource use at the installation

i

On receipt of further information all of the documentation received was examined and I consider that the information as submitted contains a satisfactory description of the project the alternatives studied by the applicant the aspects of the environment likely to be significantly affected by the activity the likely effects of the activity on the environment the forecasting methods used the prevention and mitigation measures envisaged the difficulties and deficiencies encountered and a non-technical summary

I consider that the EIS when considered in conjunction with the additional material submitted with the application also complies with the requirements of the EPA (Industrial Emissions)(Licensing) Regulations 2013

relation to the impacts assessed by them in the planners reports and the decisions dated 18 November 2014 (ref 14286) 17 February 2016 (Ref 15470)

I consider the issues that interact with the matters that were considered by the above authorities and which relate to the activity in Section 170 of this report

Having considered the application and EIS the submissions by members of the public the submissions of state and public authorities and the matters resulting from the planning

authority decisions I consider that the likely significant effects of the activity on the environment are as set out in Section 170 below

I 8

I have considered and examined the documents furnished by Cavan County Council in

34 Consultation with Competent Authorities

Consultation was carried out between Cavan County Council and the Agency as follows

Consultation I Date I Notice under Section 87( lE)(a) (request for observations) issued

Response to Section 87(1E)(a) Notice received

30 November 2015 to Cavan County Council

25 July 2016 from Cavan County Council

I n their response Cavan County Council did not provide any additional observations to the Agency on the licence application and EIS

4

i - 4 Submissions

2 submissions were received in relation to the licence application These submissions were taken into consideration during the preparation of the RD

lJ Claire ODwyer Principal Environmental Health Officer Environmental Health Service HSE DublinNorth East Cavan and Monaghan The Arcade Main Street Cavan Co Cavan Received 23122015

2J Mr Peter Sweetman Rossport South Ballina County Mayo Received 13032016

The submission points are summarised below followed by the Inspectors response however the original submission should be referred to for full details

Submission 1 Ms Claire ODwyer Environmental Health Service HSE DublinNorth East Cavan and Monaahan

The Agency received a submission on the 23 December 2015 from Claire ODwyer Principal Environmental Health Officer Health Services Executive which enclosed a report from Mr Brian Coady The report is based on a site visit discussions with the applicant and available documents and provides a summary report of their findings The report makes twelve observations in relation to the licence application The issues raised include site location poultry litter waste water storm water water supply surface water groundwater nutrient management plan odour emissions pest control waste storage and noise The HSE also confirmed in their submission that they have not received any complaints relating to odour from the installation to date I t refers only to those areas within the remit of the HSE

Response The issues raised in the submission are noted and addressed in the relevant Sections of the inspectors report

Submission 2 Mr Peter Sweetman Peter Sweetman amp Associates Rossport South Ballina County Mayo

The Agency received a submission on the 13 March 2016 from Mr Peter Sweetman Peter Sweetman amp Associates Rossport South Ballina County Mayo The issues raised in the submission are as follows

Mr Sweetman contends that To adequately screen for effects on a Natura Site it is mandatoty that a map of the spread lands be included in the application

He refers to and attaches a letter from the Development Applications Unit (DAU) of the Department of Arts Heritage and the Gaeltacht (DAHG) to the Planning Director of Services of Limerick City and County Council (dated 12th October 2015) in relation to a planning application for a pig farm in Abbeyfeale Co Limerick (planning ref 15573) I n the letter the DAU states that for Appropriate Assessment Screening under the Birds and Natural Habitats Regulations 2011 a map of the spread lands is required to ensure that there is no significant negative effect on any Natura 2000 site from the proposal The DAU also states that the spread lands should be subject to AA screening with particular reference to potential effects on water quality

Response Appropriate Assessment screening for the activity has been carried out as detailed in Section 12 below The issue of Appropriate Assessment and the spreading of organic fertiliser is discussed therein Organic fertiliser generated by the activity will be sent off-site for use as fertiliser (mushroom compost production or fertiliser to be applied to land) in accordance with the European Union (Good Agricultural Practice for the Protection of Waters)

5

I

Regulations 2014 (Nitrates Regulations) and the European Animal By-product Regulations (EC Regulation No 10692009 and Commission Regulation 1422011) (Animal By-product Regulations) The I E licence relates to the installation of the activity for which the licence application is made and does not extend to the lands on which organic fertiliser may be used as fertiliser The use of organic fertiliser as fertiliser will be carried out in accordance with the Nitrates Regulations and Animal By-product Regulations and will be monitored and controlled by the DAFM and Local Authorities As outlined in Section 12 below I consider that the use of poultry litter and wash water as fertiliser in accordance with the Nitrates Regulations will not cause environmental pollution and I am satisfied beyond reasonable scientific doubt that the use of wash water and poultry litter as fertiliser from the activity will not have a significant effect on any European Sites

The DAU letter attached to the submission pertains to a planning application for a development of a piggery (Boherash Pig Breeders) in County Limerick and not to the site which is the subject of this licence review application The matters raised by the DAU in relation to the piggery development in county Limerick are dealt with in the decision of the planning authority to grant planning permission for that piggery development

I t is noted that the Department of Arts Heritage and the Gaeltacht (DAHG) are a specified body which is notified of all licence applications and licence review applications received by the Agency The DAHG was notified of this licence application and no submission has been received

- 5 Section 86A(3) of the EPA Act 1992 as amended requires that the Agency shall apply BAT conclusions as a reference for attaching one or more conditions to a licence or a revised licence (Article 14(3) of the IED) Therefore BAT for the installation was assessed against the BAT Conclusions contained in the following documents

Consideration of Best Available Techniques (BAT) and BAT Conclusions

BREF Document for the Intensive rearing of Poultry and Pigs (July 2003) [Main Applicable BREF activity] BREF Document on Energy Eficiency (February 2009) BREF Document for Emissions from Storage (July 2006)

The applicant submitted an assessment of the installation activity against the relevant BAT Conclusion requirements contained in the above BREF Documents The applicant has demonstrated that the installation will comply with all applicable BAT Conclusion requirements specified in the Poultry and Pig BREF and those contained in the additional BREF Documents

I consider that the applicable BAT Conclusion requirements are addressed through (i) the technologies and techniques as described in the application and (ii) the standard conditions specified in the RD

- 6 Emissions

61 Emissions to AirOdour

The applicant states that potential emissions to air from the activity should be limited to odour emissions associated with the general operation of the activity such as emissions of warm air from the ventilation system as well as the loading of organic fertiliser and its

B R E F currently untler review

6

removal Increased emissions may at times be associated with loading of poultry andor loading of organic fertiliser The potential impact from loading organic fertiliser is deemed to be a minor issue due to the fact that it is removed only once in every 6-8 weeks and only takes 4-5 hours to completely remove the organic fertiliser from the houses No organic fertiliser (poultry litter) is stored on-site following removal from the houses It is loaded directly onto lorries and dispatched off-site

Odour will be minimised by implementing appropriate management practices on the installation such as adequate use of bedding material maintaining stock density a t design level the use of automated feeding and ventilation systems maintaining a high standard of litter management on-site minimisation of carcasses by good flock management using feed with optimum crude protein levels to minimise nitrogen excretion and ammonia emissions from ventilation proper on-site storage with regular removal of wastes and appropriate maintenance of water and feed systems

The nearest third party residential dwelling to the unit is approximately 230m south-west of the unit The land in the immediate vicinity of the installation is farmland The applicant states that no complaints regarding odour from the installation have been received The HSE confirmed in their submission (detailed in section 4 above) that they have not received any odour complaints in relation to the installation to date and the EPA has not received any complaints relating to odour for the existing activity

Condition 5 of the RD requires that amenities the environment and any legitimate uses of the environment beyond the installation boundary shall not be impaired or interfered with by emissions including odour arising from the activity The applicant will also be required to prepare and implement an odour management programme with the agreement of the Agency and this programme shall be reviewed and submitted annually as part of the Annual Environmental Report (AER) for this activity

Ammonia emissions from intensive agricultural activities may have an impact on sensitive receptors (eg lichens bryophytes etc) however ammonia emissions have been modelled using a screen model (SCAIL Agriculture httpwwwscailcehaciik) and the predicted concentration of ammonia at European sites will not cause an impact on the designated sites (see Section 121 below)

Dust may arise as fugitive emissions from the ventilation systems on-site Good housekeeping practices will minimise the occurrence of dust The RD requires that dust (and odour) do not cause a nuisance beyond the site boundary

The applicant uses gas burners to heat the houses and they also have a back-up generator should the electricity supply be interrupted Approximately 40-45 litres of gas per thousand birds will be used per annum These emissions are considered minor and therefore ELVs have not been applied The RD requires a Resource Use and Energy Programme to be established and an energy audit to be carried out and repeated at intervals as required by the Agency

62 Emissions to Sewer

There are no emissions to sewer from this installation

63 Emissions to Waters

There is no process effluent discharge from the site

7

64 Surface Water

Surface water arises on-site from storm water collected from yards and the roofs of buildings All clean storm water is diverted away from soiled areas of the site Stormwater from House 1 (older of the two houses) is collected in channels running along the sides of the house and is discharged through SW1 and SW2 which discharge at the southwest and southeast boundaries respectively of the site Stormwater from House 2 (newer of the two houses) partly percolates to ground and is also piped via gravity to SW3 on the eastern boundary of the site There is an extensive concrete apron in front of both houses and stormwater from here discharges through SW3 All three discharge points discharge via a field drain to the Bunnoe River 200m north of the site The Bunnoe River then flows southward for 65km before reaching the Annalee River

At the point closest to the installation the Bunnoe River currently has a WFD status of Moderate and the Annalee River a WFD status of Good There are no identified drinking water abstraction points on the Bunnoe River There is a drinking water abstraction point on the Annalee River (Annalee River 02OOPUB1005) approximately 14km downstream of the installation at Ballyhaise Co Cavan

The storm water discharged should be uncontaminated and therefore should have no impact on receiving surface waters or on the drinking water abstraction point at Ballyhaise The only period during which there is potential for contamination of surface waters is during removal of organic fertiliser from the poultry houses ie once every 8 week rearing cycle and when the houses are washed out All soiled surface water is diverted to the 2 washwater tanks one for each house

Storm water from the yard at the front of the houses flows into collection drains which direct the clean surface water to SW3 The drains are adjacent to the washwater tank for House 2 thus during cleaning of house 2 the applicant has advised that a procedure is in place to bung the drains Thereby ensuring that all wash water is diverted to the wash water tank at the front of House 2 and that only clean storm water discharges to the surface water drainage system

Condition 6106 requires that measures are taken to ensure that washwater will be diverted to the washwater storage tanks prior to the commencement of poultry litter removal and during washing of the houses until such time as washing is complete and that a written procedure and records are maintained The risk of surface water soil or groundwater contamination as a result of accidental emissions during poultry removal and washing activities is considered to be minimal for the following reasons

Poultry litter removal and washing only occurs for one day every six to eight weeks (at the end of each batch) Drainage channel only needs to be diverted to the wash water tanks once every 6-8 weeks The applicant states that only 145m3 of wash water is generated by the activity per annum and The wash water results from water being used to wash the surfaces of the houses and therefore coming in contact with poultry litter The nutrient content of wash water is relatively low compared to livestock slurry

Therefore it is considered that the requirement of Condition 6106 is sufficient for the protection of surface water and groundwater during poultry litter removal and washing activities

I 1

8

The discharge to the surface water discharge points must be visually inspected weekly and monitored for BOD and COD as required by the Agency in accordance with Schedule C23 Monitoring of Storm Water Emissions The RD requires the licensee to provide and maintain a storm waterrainwater collection and drainage system for all poultry houses on-site to provide and maintain an inspection chamber within three months of grant of licence and to assess the need to install silt trapsswales on the drainage system The RD also requires the storage of all liquid fuels chemicals etc in bunded areas to avoid spillage The RD specifies that there can be no unauthorised discharge of polluting matter to water

The RD includes a requirement to ensure that a documented Accident Prevention Procedure is in place that addresses the hazards on-site particularly in relation to the prevention of accidents with a possible impact on the environment This procedure should also address the operation of the diversion chamber to ensure wash water is not discharged to the surface water system The RD requires that should any accident occur the procedure will be updated to prevent any reoccurrence of that accident or incident

These measures will aid in achieving good water quality in the Bunnoe River and maintaining rsquoGoodrsquo water quality in the Annalee River

65 Emissions to around or aroundwater

The applicant states in the application that there has been no historical contamination of groundwater at the site There are no emissions to groundgroundwater from this activity

There is no on-site septic tankpercolation for this activity

The applicant identifies the Bunnoe Group Water Scheme (GWS) as being the only source of water for this activity There is no on-site groundwater well within the licensed boundary I t is noted that the installation is situated in the Cavan groundwater body a poorly productive bedrock and its WFD status is lsquoGoodrsquo

The RD includes requirements for bunding and storage of materials as well as requirements for accidentincident prevention which will minimise the potential for spillages that could impact on groundwater

66 Baseline Report (Industrial Emissions Directive (201075EC))

A baseline report in accordance with Section 86B of the EPA Act 1992 as amended was not

determine if a baseline report was required The applicant states that the activity does involve the use of small amounts of hazardous substances including fuels disinfectants and fluorescent tubes However they state that limited quantities will be stored on-site a t any one time and materials will be stored in designated storage areas protected from breakage and regularly removed from site with minimal if any risk of soilgroundwater contamination The applicant concludes that screening was sufficient and that no Baseline Report is necessary

Taking into account the small quantities of substances used the location of these substances on the site in view of the soil and groundwater characteristics and the measures to be taken to prevent accidents and incidents the possibility of soil and groundwater contamination at the site of the installation is considered to be IOW Having regard to the possibility of soil and groundwater contamination and to the European Commission Guidance concerning baseline reports under Article 22(2) of Directive 201075EU I am satisfied that a baseline report is not required The RD does not require that relevant hazardous substances are monitored in soil due to the reasons set out above

I provided with the licence application The applicant carried out screening of the activity to

9

67 Orqanic Fertiliser

The installation will necessarily generate organic fertiliser (poultry litter and washwater) The applicant states that the poultry litter for the expanded activity approximately 16875 tonnes per annum and the wash water approximately 145m3annum will be sent off-site for use as fertiliser in accordance with the European Union (Good Agricultural Practice for the Protection of Waters) Regulations 2014 (Nitrates Regulations) and the European Animal By-product Regulations (EC Regulation No 10692009 and Commission Regulation 1422011) (Animal By-product Regulations)

671 Poultrv Litter (Orqanic Fertiliser)

The organic fertiliser generated by the birds during the course of a batch remains in the houses under the birds until the birds are removed to the factory (every 6-8 weeks) The organic fertiliser is then cleaned and brushed out and loaded into lorries for export off-site

The application includes a letter from McCartney Contractors Ltd confirming they take poultry litter from the installation to mushroom compost production facilities or to recipient farmers for use as organic fertiliser McCartney Contractors Ltd are a registered contractor with the Department of Agriculture Food and the Marine for the transport of animal by- products (poultry litter) DAFM Reference No AMC

The Animal By-product Regulations impose legal requirements on the applicant the lsquocommercial haulierrsquo (registered by DAFM) that is used to transport the organic fertiliser and the user of the organic fertiliser These requirements include use of a lsquocommercial documentrsquo to record the consignor (applicantpoultry farmer) the consignee (customer farmer mushroom compost facility operator receiving the organic fertiliser) the carrier (haulier) means of transport the quantity and the date of dispatch The consignor is required to receive a completed copy of the rsquocommercial documentrsquo from the consignee confirming the final destination Documents in relation to legal obligations and good practice guidelines for use and disposal of poultry litter are available on the DAFM website at httpwwwaqricultureqovieaqri-foodindustryanimalbyproductspoultrvlitter- leqaloblisationsandauidelines and an example of the commercial document is available at httpwwwaaricultureqoviemediamierationaqri-foodindustrvanimal by- productsanimalby-~roducts-tradernoticesTN012015CommercialDocumentsRev2250315~df

The applicant (poultry farmer) is required under the Nitrates Regulations to submit to DAFM by the 31St December annually details in relation to the quantity of organic fertiliser (poultry litter and washwater) exported (Record 3 form) These details can be taken from the commercial documents returned to the consignor (poultry farmer) from the consignee (recipient farmer composter) DAFM can use the record of export of organic fertiliser to identify the recipient of the organic fertiliser including farmers who are recipients of organic fertiliser and the quantity received The record shall also be maintained at the installation for inspection by the Agency Local Authority or DAFM

The poultry litter collected by McCartney Contractors Ltd will be used as a feedstock for the production of mushroom compost McCartney Contractors Ltd supply poultry litter to two authorised mushroom compost producing facilities Custom Compost and Carbury Compost The use of poultry litter from the licensees installation by these composting facilities will not cause environmental pollution and I am satisfied that this method of handling the organic fertiliser (poultry litter) from the activity will not have a significant effect on the environment

10

I n the event that the contractor delivers the organic fertiliser to farmers for use as an organic fertiliser on land the transport of the poultry litter is subject to the Animal By- Product Regulations and records are required under the Nitrates Regulations and the application to land is subject to the Nitrates Regulations The Nitrates Regulations specifies when organic fertiliser can be applied to land the application rates etc and are enforced by the DAFM and Local Authorities I am satisfied that the use of poultry litter as fertiliser in accordance with the Nitrates Regulations will not have a significant effect on the environment The RD provides that poultry litter may be sent off-site for use as fertiliser by farmers in accordance with the Nitrates Regulations

The Nitrates Regulations requires that at least 26 weeks storage capacity for organic fertiliser is provided The applicant does not provide on-site storage for organic fertiliser (poultry litter) generated by this activity outside of the poultry houses The organic fertiliser storage capacity currently provided on-site within the poultry houses is approximately 8 weeks (duration that a batch of birds is on-site) As the organic fertiliser is removed off-site by a registered contractor the applicant is exempt from the requirement to provide a minimum 26 weeks on-site storage for organic fertiliser as would otherwise be required under Article 10( 1) of the Nitrates Regulations subject to the licensee having a contract for access to a treatment facility for livestock manure (organic fertiliser) or for the transfer of organic fertiliser to a person registered under and in accordance with the European Communities (Transmissable Spongiform Encephalopathies and Animal By-products) Regulations 2008 (SI 252 of 2008) to undertake the transport of organic fertiliser Such exemption is provided in accordance with Article 14(1) of the Nitrates Regulations Condition 36 of the RD requires that such a contract is in place as required under Article 14(1) of the Nitrates Regulations and that a copy of this contact is maintained on-site McCartney Contractors limited have provided a letter stating that they remove poultry litter from the applicant farm

672 Washwater

Washwater is generated by the activity every 6-8 weeks after the poultry litter has been removed from the poultry houses Prior to washing the houses the floors are brushed to reduce the quantity of poultry litter remaining in the houses The houses are then washed down with water and disinfectant applied As described in Section 64 above the washwater is directed to washwater storage tanks where it is contained until sent off-site for use as fertiliser The washwater consists of water contaminated with poultry litter and small quantities of disinfectant The washwater is considered suitable for use on land as fertiliser and such use is provided for by the Nitrates Regulation and Animal By-product Regulations

The applicant has identified that the washwater will be used on identified farmland in the vicinity of the activity on the applicants landholding which adjoins the site The quantity of washwater generated by the expanded activity has been calculated to be 145m3annum The RD requires the movement of the washwater to the land be recorded and the submission of a record of the export (Record 3) to DAFM in accordance with the Nitrates Regulations as outlined above for poultry litter The transport and use of washwater as fertiliser in accordance with the Nitrates Regulations and Animal By-product Regulations will not cause environmental pollution The RD requires that records are kept of all organic fertiliser movements off-site and that such records shall be available on-site and sent to the DAFM annually as required in accordance with the Nitrates Regulations

Wash water from the activity is collected in 2 wash water collection tanks with an estimated capacity of 1272m3 The washwater storage capacity may be supplemented by storage available in the applicants bovine slatted tanks adjacent to the site During cleaning of the

11

- 8 Noise

Given the nature of the operations on-site and the activity noise is not expected to be an issue at or beyond the site boundary as per most poultry farms in the country The nearest third party noise sensitive receptor is 230m southwest of the installation and no noise complaints have been received by the installation to date Therefore standard noise conditions and emission limit values have been included in the RD

yard area surface water is diverted to the tank for House 2 and is diverted back to the surface water system on completion of cleaning The washwater storage tanks and supplementary slatted tank off-site provide well in excess of the 26 week storage capacity requirement in the Nitrates Regulations The RD requires that a freeboard of at least 200 mm from the top of each covered organic fertiliser storage tank and 300 mm from the top of uncovered organic fertiliser storage tanks is maintained as a minimum at all times The required freeboard shall be clearly indicated in the tank I t also requires that the integrity of all underground effluent storage tanks are assessed within twelve months of date of grant of this licence and a t least once every five years thereafter Each of these measures significantly reduces the likelihood of spillages from the washwater storage tanks themselves

- 7 Waste

The activity does not produce significant quantities of waste There are no waste disposal or recovery activities undertaken on-site Waste arising on-site includes fluorescent tubes fallen stock (poultry tissue waste) veterinarychemical waste containers and general waste The applicant states that there will be minimum waste streams on-site combined with maintaining a high health status on the farm I t is policy to minimise waste accumulation and to recycle as much as possible and that they will operate the installation in an efficient manner to minimise energy usage and minimise overall waste generation I n order to do this they use specialist feeding devices to minimise feed waste and regularly maintain feeding water supply litter removal and ventilation systems in order to maximise efficiency and help conserve resources The applicant also states that they minimise and recycle waste where possible

Carcasses are stored temporarily on-site in covered bins are removed off-site approximately fortnightly and transported to an appropriately licensed installation where the material will be rendered in accordance with the Animal By-product Regulations (Regulation (EC) No 10692009) The RD requires that animal carcasses are removed from site a t least fortnightly

The RD requires that waste sent off-site is transported and recovereddisposed in accordance with National and European Legislation and requires maintenance of records on matters relating to the waste management operations and practices at this site

- 9 Use of Resources

Energy

Electricity is used to power all processes on-site Approximately 35000kWh of electricity is required for the activity The electricity supply is backed-up by the on-site diesel generator This has a self-contained fuel storage tank thus there is no additional diesel storage on-site

12

Heating for the poultry houses is primarily provided by gas All buildings are insulated to reduce the requirement for gas for heating The average volume of gas used will be approximately 40-45 litres per 1000 birds

The RD requires a Resource Use and Energy Programme to be established and an energy audit to be carried out and repeated at intervals as required by the Agency The BREF on Energy Efficiency should be referred to in the context of the Resource Use and Energy Programme

Water

The applicant estimates that 7m3 of water per 1000 birds is used for this activity per annum The only source of water for the activity is provided by the Bunnoe Group Water Scheme There is no well on-site The poultry house will be physically cleaned of organic fertiliser and brushedblown down in order to minimise washing and water consumption The installation is located on the Cavan groundwater body a poorly productive bedrock which has a WFD status of Good

The RD requires the licensee to install and maintain a water meter on all water supplies serving the installation and to maintain records of water usage on-site

I Feed

There are four stages of rations fed throughout the lifecycle of the birds Starter Grower Finisher and Withdrawal which are formulated to match the birds requirements for protein energy minerals and vitamins a t the various ages and to minimise excretion and to maximise rate of development and meat quality Feed is supplied by specialised suppliers and stored in feed storage binssilos located adjacent to the poultry houses Total annual feed consumption for this activity is approximately 38-4 tonnes per 1000 birds

Medication and Disinfectant

Medication and disinfectant will be stored inside in designated areas on the site

Condition 7 of the RD includes conditions dealing with water energy and raw material use reduction and efficiency on-site

- 10 Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Climate Change Impact

With regard to reducing the climate impact of the installation under IED the RD requires energy efficiency and resource use efficiency to be addressed as part of the Resource Use and Energy Programme

- 11 Prevention of Accidents and Cessation of Activity

111 Measures to prevent accidents and limit their consequences

The application details a range of measures that will help to prevent accidents at the installation and limit their environmental consequences These include

- - -

Separation of soiled water and clean storm water I n excess of 26 weeks washwater storage capacity provided (on-site off-site) and Emergency response and corrective action procedures will be put in place

Condition 9 of the RD requires procedures to be put in place to prevent accidents with a possible impact on the environment and to respond to emergencies so as to minimise the impact on the environment I t also requires the accident prevention procedure to be

13

i

i( Ii

updated in light of experience I n addition the RD specifies the minimum organic fertiliser storage capacity to be maintained assessment of organic fertiliser storage tanks control and management of organic fertiliser on-site storm water monitoring etc

112 Measures to be taken upon cessation

The application details a range of measures to be employed upon cessation of the activity

- Operations on-site would cease - Saleable stock will be sold to the usual outlet - Wastes will be removed as per normal procedure - Feed amp medicines returned to suppliers - The buildings once empty of stock would be washed clean and all wash water

organic fertiliser removed as per normal procedure - Organic fertiliser removed from houses amp transported off-site as per normal

procedure - Houses washed disinfected and left idle and - I f Class A disease incident occurs any non-saleable stock would be humanely put

down and consigned either for rendering or for incineration The actions undertaken would be under the supervision of veterinary division of Department of Agriculture Food and the Marine

As outlined in Section 66 above a baseline report was not required due to the low risk of soil or groundwater contamination by relevant hazardous substances

Condition 10 of the RD specifies decommissioning and residuals management requirements

Condition 12 of the RD requires that an annual statement is provided in the AER as to the measures taken or adopted at the site in relation to the prevention of environmental damage for remedial actions following closuredecommissioning or accidentsincidents as may be associated with the carrying on of the activity The applicant must have regard to the Environmental Protection Agencys Guidance on Assessing and Costing Environmental Liabilities (2014) and as appropriate Guidance on Financial Provision for Environmental Liabilities (2015) when doing so

- 12 Compliance with EU Directives

121 Birds Directive [2009147ECl amp Habitats Directive [9243EECI

The installation is not located within a European Site There are a number of European sites in the vicinity of the installation Any European Sites more than 15km distance from the installation fall well outside of the potential zone of influence of the activity so it was not necessary to consider them further The table below lists the European Sites assessed their associated qualifying interests and conservation objectives

European Site

(Site code)

Upper Lough Erne SPA (UK9020071)

Lough Oughter

Distance 1 Direction from installation

6lkm northwest of the installation

72km west

Qualifying Interests

( denotes a priority habitat)

Species Whooper Swan

~ ~~

Habitats

Conservation o bjedives

As per Upper Lough Erne SPA (UK9020071) Conservation Objectives Version 3 Department of Environment Northern Ireland (dated 0 1042015) As per NPWS (2015)

I

I 14

and Associated ~

Loughs SAC (000007)

Kilroosky Lough Cluster SAC (001786)

Magheraveely Marl Loughs SAC (UKOO 1662 1)

Lough Oughter Complex SPA (004049)

Jpper Lough Erne SAC UK0016614)

mtly known as Depz

of the installation

109 km north of the installation

112km north amp west of the installation

139krn jouthwest of he nstallation

155km iorthwest of he nstallation

Natural eutrophic lakes with Magnopotamion or Hydrocharition - type vegetation Bog woodland Species Otter (Lutra lutra)

Habitats Hard oligo-mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp Calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianae Alkaline fens Species White-clawed Crayfish (Austropotamobius pallipes) Habitats Hard oligo-mesotrophic waters with benthic vegetation of Chara spp Calcareous fens with Cladium mariscus and species of the Caricion davallianae Alkaline fens Species White-clawed Crayfish (Austropotamobius pallipes) Species Grear Crested Grebe (Podiceps cristatus) Uhopper Swan (Cygnus Cygnus) Uigeon (Anas penelope)

qa bitats 4lluvial forests with Alnus glutinosa and raxinus excelsior (Alno-Padion Alnion ncanae Salicion alvae) )Id sessile oak woods with Ilex and 3lechnum rlatural eutrophic lakes with qagnopotamion or Hydrocharition type regetation jpecies Mer (Lutra lutra)

lent of Agriculture Environment and Rural Affairs

Conservation objectives for Lough Oughter and Associated Loughs SAC (000007) Generic version 40 Department of Arts Heritage and the Gaeltacht (dated 13022015) As per NPWS (2015) Conservation objectives for Kilroosky Lough Cluster SAC (001786) Generic version 40 Department of Arts Heritage and the Gaeltacht (dated 130220 1 5)

As per Magheraveely Marl Loughs SAC (UK0016621) Conservation Objectives Version 2 Department of Environment Northern Ireland (dated 0 10420 15)

As per NPWS (2015) Conservation objectives for Lough Oughter Complex SPA (004049) Generic fersion 40 Department of 4rts Heritage and the Saeltacht (dated 13022015) 4s per Upper Lough Erne 5AC (UK0016614) Zonservation Objectives dersion 2 Department of nvironment Northern [reland (dated 11042015)

I n consideration of the documents submitted with the licence application and all submissions and observations made on the licence application and having considered the processes and emissions associated with the activity (as now outlined throughout this Inspectors Report) a screening for Appropriate Assessment was undertaken to assess in view of best scientific knowledge and the conservation objectives of the site if the activity individually or in combination with other plans or projects is likely to have a significant effect on any European Site I n this context particular attention was paid to the European Sites listed in the table above The activity is not directly connected with or necessary to the management of any European Site and the Agency considered for the reasons set out below that it can be excluded on the basis of objective information that the activity individually or in combination with other plans or projects will have a significant effect on any European site and accordingly determined that an Appropriate Assessment of the activity was not required

15

I

This determination was based on the following reasons

- The installation is not located within a European site

- The only surface water pathway connecting the installation to a European site arises when the clean storm water from the site is discharged through SW1 SW2 and SW3 All three discharge points discharge via a field drain to the Bunnoe River 200m north of the site The Bunnoe River then flows southward for 65km before reaching the Annalee River after a distance of 16km the Annalee River enters Lough Oughter and Associated Loughs SAC

As discussed in Section 64 and 65 above the risk of surface water or groundwater contamination as a result of accidental emissions during washing activities or from spillage from the wash water tanks is minimal The provision of bunding and the protection of surface water and ground water as outlined in Section 6 above are considered sufficient to ensure that accidental emissions from the activity will not impact on the qualifying interests of the European sites identified above Given the distance between the activity and European Sites the quantity of washwater and the low level of contaminants in the washwater it is considered that even if an accidental emission of wash water were to occur the washwater and its constituents will be completely assimilated in the water body before it reaches the European Sites

The litter generated a t the installation has high dry matter content and remains within the concrete-floored covered broiler houses until all broilers are removed a t the end of the batch Therefore there is no pathway between the litter and surface watergroundwater while the houses are stocked When the houses are destocked the litter is removed from the sheds and loaded onto lorries for transport off-site for composting or use as fertiliser on land and the houses are brushed and washed down Considering the controls in place in relation to the management of organic fertiliser on-site as outlined in Section 67 above I am satisfied beyond reasonable scientific doubt that this method of handling the organic fertiliser (poultry litter) from the activity within the installation boundary will not have a significant effect on any European site

-

- As noted in Section 671 and 672 above wash water is used as a fertiliser on lands that are not within the installation boundary in accordance with the Nitrates Regulations Poultry litter is transported by a contractor to composting facilities or may be used as an organic fertiliser on land in accordance with the Nitrates Regulations

- The licence if granted relates to the site of the activity for which the licence application is made ie the rearing of poultry within the installation boundary and does not extend to the lands on which organic fertiliser may be used as fertiliser The regulatory controls in place in relation to the transport and use of organic fertiliser as fertiliser on land beyond the installation boundary is outlined in Section 671 and 672 above The Nitrates Regulations make it possible for DAFM to know and take account of the additional input of nitrogen and phosphorous from the activity with a view to ensuring there is no downstream environmental pollution I t is considered that the regulatory systems in place will ensure that cumulative impacts as a result of the use of organic fertiliser on land from this activity will not have a significant effect on any European sites (see Section 17(a)(iii) below for further details on cumulative impact)

16

I

I

i I

i

I

13

I n addition the Agency notes that the activities which can take place within European sites are restricted by legislation All persons must obtain the written consent from the relevant Minister before performing particular operations on or affecting particular habitats where they occur on lands waters within the Special Area of Conservation Hence further regulatory controls exist for the spreading of fertilisers within European sites Therefore I consider that the use of poultry litter and wash water as fertiliser in accordance with the Nitrates Regulations will not cause environmental pollution and I am satisfied beyond reasonable scientific doubt that use of wash water and poultry litter as fertiliser from the activity will not have a significant effect on any European sites As outlined in Section 671 I am also satisfied that the use of the applicants poultry litter for mushroom composting will not cause environmental pollution and I am satisfied beyond reasonable scientific doubt that this method of handling the organic fertiliser (poultry litter) from the activity will not have a significant effect on any European site

Based on the use of SCAIL Agriculture3 ammonia emissions from this activity are not predicted to have a significant impact on sensitive receptors within the European Sites Based on the model output nitrogen deposition as a result of this activity will not have a significant effect on sensitive receptors within European sites

Noise levels from poultry installations are very low and as the nearest European Site is 6lkm northwest of the installation (Upper Lough Erne NI SPA) it is considered that noise will not impact on the qualifying interests within that European Site The RD specifies standard noise conditions and emission limit values for noise

The installation is located in a rural area where the predominant farming activities involve the rearing of livestock There are only 2 other licensed intensive poultry rearing installations within a 5km radius of the installation Given the small scale of emissions associated with these activities it is considered that the activity in combination with other plans or projects will not have a significant effect on any protected sites For the foregoing reasons it was concluded there will be no significant effects on the qualifying interests of any European sites arising from air emissions water emissions noise emissions or accidental emissions from the activity

Capacity of Installation

Planning permission 14286 restricts the number of broiler places to between 86000 and 90000 The EIS prepared in support of planning permission 0953 refers to a capacity of approximately 86000 broilers while the EIS supplementary report (prepared for planning application 14286) refers to a capacity of 86000 broilers with a maximum of 90000 birds I t is noted that the licence application was made for a capacity of 90000 birds Therefore Schedule A of the RD limits the number of birds housed on-site to 90000 broilers

14 Cross Office Liaison

Extensive communication has taken place between the Environmental Licensing Programme (ELP) and the Office of Environmental Enforcement (OEE) in relation to licensing of the poultry sector Advice and guidance issued by the OEE co-ordinated Intensive Agricultural Sectoral Working Group was followed in the assessment of this application

SCAl L Agriculture is a web based screening tool available at httpllwYwscailceliacull

17

15 Site Visit

A site visit was undertaken on 26 July 2016 by Eimer Godsil (ELP) The following aspects were noted during a tour of the site storm water and soiled water collection gas storage surface water discharge points and concrete apron at the front of the houses

Based on this visit and the information provided by the applicant and the Planning Authority I am satisfied that a further site visit is not required

16

The Fit amp Proper Person test requires three elements of examination

Technical Ability

The applicant Mr Stephen Hall is the owneroperator of this installation Mr Hall is an experienced operator of this poultry farm which has been in operation for in excess of 10 years It is considered that the applicant has demonstrated the technical knowledge required

Leaal Standinq

Neither the applicant nor any relevant person has relevant convictions under the Environmental Protection Agency Act 1992 as amended the Waste Management Act 1996 as amended the Local Government (Water Pollution) Acts 1997 and 1990 the Air Pollution Act 1987 and the Air Pollution Act 1987 (Environmental Specifications for Petrol and Diesel Fuels)(Amendment) Regulations 2004 Stephen Hall has no history of incidents or legal infringements with regard to the effect of the existing poultry farm on the local environment

Financial Standinq

The applicant has supplied a declaration confirming that he has the financial ability to meet any liabilities associated with the activity Due to the nature of the activity poultry rearing it is not likely to lead to significant environmental liabilities

I t is my view that the applicant can be deemed a Fit amp Proper Person for the purpose of this application

Fit amp Proper Person Assessment

17

The following section identifies describes and assesses the likely significant direct and indirect effects of the activity on the environment as respects the matters that come within the functions of the Agency for each of the following factors human beings flora fauna soil water air climate the landscape material assets and cultural heritage

The main mitigation measures proposed to address the range of predicted significant impacts arising from the activity have also been outlined The cumulative impacts with other developments in the vicinity of the activity have also been considered as regards the impacts of emissions from the activity This section must be read in conjunction with the analysis carried out in all sections of this report

Environmental Impact Assessment Directive (85337EEC)

18

17(a) Human Beings

Likely significant effect

Odour nuisance

Noise impact beyond the site boundary

Nuisance from landspreading

Description of effect Assessment addressed in

section Odour arising from site operations 17(a)(i) organic fertiliser management and waste management may result in neighbouring residents experiencing odour nuisance on occasion Noise from the operation of the 17(a)(ii) installation may result in neighbouring residents experiencing noise nuisance on occasion Landspreading is not conducted andor 17(a)(iii) permitted on-site Where organic fertiliser is transported off-site for landspreading as fertiliser it could lead to nuisance being experienced by affected residents

Assessment of Effects on Human Beings

17(a)(i) Odour Nuisance

Odour arising from the installation could have the potential to cause nuisance for those living in the vicinity of the installation The nearest third party dwelling house to the installation is 230m to the southwest However as discussed in section 61 above odour is not expected to be a significant environmental issue at or beyond the site boundary Therefore direct impacts as a result of odour from the activity are considered to be neither likely nor significant

The installation is situated in an agricultural area where odours from agricultural activities outside the installation may occur on occasion but any odours experienced will most likely be of short duration I t is noted that there are no other intensive activities (pig or poultry rearing) within 3km of the installation that would generate a continuous significant odour There are 2 licensed intensive agriculture installations within 5km of the site Therefore it is considered that there will be no significant cumulative odour impact from the activity and other odour generating activities in the area I t is also considered that no secondary or indirect effects are likely as a result of odour from the activity

Mitigation Measures

The following mitigation measures will reduce the likelihood of a negative impact on human beings from odour nuisance

- Activities on-site to be managed so as to occur at times when the effects (including odours) withinoutside of the site will be minimal

- Organic fertiliser bird movements will be minimised and timed where possible to reduce odour effects on people

- Proper management of temperature and humidity controls within the houses - Appropriate maintenance of water feed and ventilation systems - Maintaining stock density at design level - Activity operates on dry organic fertiliser basis - Use of low protein diets Using feed with optimum crude protein content to minimise

nitrogen excretion This will keep ammonia emissions from ventilation systems and from organic fertiliser transportation to a minimum

19

- Provision of adequate organic fertiliser storage capacity - Houses are adequately cleaned disinfected amp rested between restocking - Houses to be cleaned out as quickly as possible with organic fertiliser removed off-site

in suitably designated and covered trucks - Minimisation of carcasses by good flock management and regular removal of carcasses

from the houses - Carcasses are stored on-site in covered containers and transported to a rendering

facility in covered leak proof containers at least fortnightly - Litter content of washwater is minimised by the houses being physically cleaned prior

to washing and - Proper storage of wastes on-site with regular removal of wastes

These odour management measures and their effectiveness will be addressed and monitored in an odour management plan which is required by condition in the RD The RD requires that this programme shall be reviewed and submitted annually as part of the Annual Environmental Report (AER) for this activity

Condition 5 of the RD requires that amenities the environment and any legitimate uses of the environment beyond the installation boundary shall not be impaired or interfered with by emissions including odour arising from the activity

Conclusion

I am satisfied that based on the above assessment the nature of the activity and the mitigation measures in place that the likelihood of a significant odour nuisance effect occurring is negligible The odour management plan will facilitate ongoing monitoring of the effectiveness of odour mitigation measures

Accordingly if the activity is carried out in accordance with the RD and the conditions attached the operation of the activity will not cause environmental pollution The conditions of the RD and the mitigation measures proposed will significantly reduce the likelihood of accidental emissions occurring and limit the environmental consequences of an accidental emission should one occur

17(aNii) Noise imDact beyond the site boundarv

Noise may be generated from the operation of equipment and during loading and unloading operations (feed organic fertiliser and birds) Noise from the activity could have the potential to cause nuisance for nearby sensitive receptors However as discussed in Section 8 above noise is not expected to be an issue a t or beyond the site boundary as per the experience from other established poultry farms in the country The installation is located in a rural setting with the nearest third party dwelling house to the installation located 230m to the southwest No noise complaints have been received by the applicant or the HSE Therefore direct impacts as a result of noise from the activity are considered to be neither likely nor significant

There are no other installations or activities in the vicinity that are likely to generate noise to an extent that could lead to likely or significant cumulative effects beyond the site boundary

Mitigation Measures

The following mitigation measures will reduce the likelihood of a negative impact on human beings from noise nuisance

Activities on-site to be managed so as to occur at times when the effects (including noise) withinoutside of the site will be minimal

-

20 I

i I

i

- - - - -

Maintaining stock density at design level Use of automated feeding and watering systems Appropriate maintenance of water feed and ventilation systems High insulation levels of the buildings Organic fertiliser bird movements will be timed where possible to reduce noise effects on people and Houses to be cleaned out as quickly as possible -

Condition 5 of the RD requires that amenities the environment and any legitimate uses of the environment beyond the installation boundary shall not be impaired or interfered with by emissions including noise arising from the activity The RD requires the applicant to carry out a noise survey and noise monitoring as required by the Agency Standard noise conditions and emission limit values have been included in the RD

Conclusion

I am satisfied that there will not be significant effects on the environment from noise from the installation

Accordingly if the activity is carried out in accordance with the RD and the conditions

of the RD and the mitigation measures proposed will significantly reduce the likelihood of accidental emissions occurring and limit the environmental consequences of an accidental emission should one occur

6 attached the operation of the activity will not cause environmental pollution The conditions

17(a)(iii) Nuisance from landsmeading

Landspreading is not conducted andor permitted within the installation boundary so nuisance from landspreading or direct impacts on soil water and groundwater quality and habitats in the immediate vicinity of the installation and consequential indirect effects on people water soil flora and fauna and their habitats will not occur

As outlined in Section 671 and 672 above soiled water from washing activities is used as a fertiliser on the applicants farmland

Poultry litter may be sent for use as an organic fertiliser on land or for use in the mushroom compost production industry

I t is important to note that the I E licence relates to the site of the activity for which the licence application is made and does not extend to the lands on which organic fertiliser may be used as fertiliser The organic fertiliser (wash water and poultry litter) will pass beyond the control of the licence conditions when it leaves the installation The transportation and use of organic fertiliser beyond the installation boundary is subject to the documentation and control described in Section 671 and 672 While impacts could occur on or near the spreadlands (nuisance pollution of watergroundwatersoil impacts on flora and fauna) these would be indirect effects of the activity only and are subject to the control of the Nitrates Regulations system As discussed and reasoned in Section 67 above I consider that the transport and use of organic fertiliser as fertiliser in accordance with the Nitrates Regulations and Animal By-Product Regulations will not cause environmental pollution

From a cumulative impacts perspective the installation is located in a rural area where the predominant farming activities involve the rearing of livestock and pig amp poultry therefore all farms in the area will produce a quantity of organic fertiliser which they are individually obliged to manage and use as fertiliser in accordance with theNitrates Regulations

21

The Nitrates Regulations specify a maximum organic nitrogen loading per ha on all farmers of -170kgha a farmer may seek a derogation to apply up to 250kgha however if the farmer applies for a derogation he cannot import organic fertiliser I n addition the Nitrates Regulations specifies when organic fertiliser can be applied to land the application rates etc and these regulations are enforced by the DAFM and Local Authorities Failure by a farmer to comply with the Nitrates Regulations may result in DAFM imposing a penalty (deduction from the farmers single farm payment) I n addition to the requirements of the Nitrates Regulations landowners who have lands which have been designated European Sites must comply with any additional requirements of the designation (see Section 12 above)

The quantity of nitrogen and phosphorus generated by the expanded activity is 21600kg and 810Okg respectively based on the figures available in the Nitrates Regulations (Annual nutrient excretion rates for livestock) The organic fertiliser generated by the activity represents a negligible quantity relative to the quantity of organic fertiliser arising from the livestock sectors in the Republic of Ireland (cattle sheep pigs poultry) The national production of organic fertiliser from livestock based on 2013 livestock numbers was approximately 462000 tonnes of N and 30000 tonnes of P Relative to the national quantity of organic fertiliser the activity will generate an insignificant amount of phosphorous and nitrogen which will have no impact on the States ability to achieve its objectives under the

Aside from potential pollution and nuisance which are negative in nature the application of organic fertiliser to land as fertiliser is a positive effect of the development There has been a steady reduction in the sale (tonnes) of fertiliser nitrogen (N) and phosphorus (P) over the last 25 years Nitrogen fertiliser $ales in 1990 were 380000 tonnes and increased to 443000 tonnes in 1998 followed by a general decline to 330000 tonnes in 2015 Phosphorus fertiliser sales fell from almost 65000 tonnes in 1990 to 20000 tonnes in 2010 Fertiliser P sales have increased from 2010 by almost 80 to 36551 tonnes in 2015 This was in response to the significant decline in soil test P levels to below sub optimal agronomic levels that evolved between 2007 and 2015 This data shows a reduction in the N and P pressure Where the land and crop grown thereon has capacity to use the fertiliser its agricultural utility is increased and the use of locally sourced organic fertiliser has a positive environmental effect in reducing the demand for and transport of manufactured (inorganic) fertilisers

Section 67) that the use of the applicants poultry litter will not cause environmental pollution and I am satisfied that the method of handling the organic fertiliser (poultry litter) from the activity will not have a significant effect on the environment

Nitrates Regulations and Directive

1 With regard to sending organic fertiliser for composting it is considered (as outlined in

Mitigation Measures

Any landspreading occurring outside of the installation boundary must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Nitrates Regulations and will be monitored and controlled by the Department of Agriculture Food and the Marine and Local Authorities

The RD requires that records of organic fertiliser that is sent off-site for use on land are maintained in accordance with the requirements of the Nitrates Regulations

Records must also be maintained of organic fertiliser that is sent for composting

Conclusion

There is no landspreading of organic fertiliser within the installation boundary and I am satisfied that there will be no significant effects on the environment from landspreading which is subject to the controls of the Nitrates Regulations

22

I

Accordingly if the activity is carried on in accordance with the RD and the conditions attached the operation of the activity will not cause environmental pollution The conditions of the RD and the mitigation measures proposed will significantly reduce the likelihood of accidental emissions occurring and limit the environmental consequences of an accidental emission should one occur

Assessment of Positive Effects on Human Beings

Positive effects on human beings from the activity will include provision of food supply and employment associated with the installation These are outside the Agencys remit and are dealt with by the planning authority

17(b) Flora amp fauna


Water pollution damaging aquatic habitats or directly impacting aquatic faunaflora

Attraction of pestsrodents

Air pollution damaging habitats or directly impacting flora fauna

Description of effect

Potential for contamination of surface water systems from the sites activities and from landspreading of organic fertiliser which could damage aquatic habitats andor individual aquatic species Dead birds can result in high populations of scavengers and has the potential for increasing the spread of bacteria and disease

Scavenging vermin may be attracted to uncovered waste Ammonia emissions from the installation could have the potential to impact on flora and fauna

Effect assessed in

section 17( a)( i ii) 17(d)(i)

Assessment of Effects on Flora and Fauna

17(b)(i) Attraction of Destrodents

The storage of uncovered wastes and dead birds at the installation could attract pestsrodents to the installation Where infestation by pests occurs this has negative secondary effects for humans in terms of amenity and potentially spread of disease Predation and spread of disease could also be an issue for flora and fauna beyond the installation boundary

However the RD requires that bird carcasses are stored in covered leak-proof containers and removed at least fortnightly to an approved installation All other wastes must be appropriately segregated stored labelled and removed from site which will significantly reduce the likelihood of pests being attracted to the installation This will prevent the occurrence of possible primary secondary direct and indirect negative effects

There are no other large scale developments or activities close to the installation where pests could arise at levels that might lead to cumulative effects

Mitigation Measures

The following mitigation measures will further reduce the likelihood of a negative impact from pests and vermin

23

-

- -

- - -

Appropriate storage and regular removal of wastes (including carcasses) which could attract pests Regular removal of wastes and carcasses which could attract pests Good housekeeping around the site including vermin control to avoid an impact on the amenities outside the site boundary Maintenance of feed systems to minimise spills which could attract pests Weed control around the site to remove any potential cover for vermin and Vermin pest control system in place with vermin control carried out in accordance with Bord Bia and Department of Agriculture requirements

The RD requires the implementation of a pest control programme and includes conditions for waste management on the site

Conclusion

Based on the above assessment and the mitigation measures in place I am satisfied that there will not be significant effects on the environment from pests or vermin


17(c) Soil Likely significant effect Description of effect

Contamination from accidental Accidental spillages or washwater tank spillages Reduction in soil quality of Contamination of soil from spreading spreadlands organic fertiliser soiled water

failure could impact on soil quality

Effect assessed in

section

Assessment of Effects on Soil

See assessments documented in section 17(a)(iii) and 17(d)(i)

Conclusion

I am satisfied that there will not be significant effects on soil from the operation of the activity


17(d) Water

Likely significant effect Description of effect Effect assessed in

sectian

Diffuse pollution of surface Potential run-off to local water courses watergroundwater from if organic fertiliser is over applied landspreading soiled water

24

17(a)(iii) 1

Pollution of surface water groundwater from accidental spillages or storage of organic fertiliser a t the installation

Assessment of Effects on Water

17(d)(i) Pollution of surface water sroundwater from accidental sdlases or storage of orsanic fertiliser at the installation

Accidental spillages of various hazardous and non-hazardous substances could occur on-site which could cause pollution to surface water groundwater and soil This could affect those using the groundwater body as a source of drinking water I t could also have the potential to indirectly affect surface water quality downstream as well as aquatic habitats within that surface water As outlined in Section 65 above the possibility of soil and groundwater contamination from hazardous substances at the site of the installation is considered to be low

Other materials stored on-site are mainly solid materials (eg organic fertiliser feedstuffs and wastes) and the risk of that material entering soil water or groundwater is very low and would be limited to times when the houses are being washed out As the likelihood of spillages is low damage to aquatic habitats or species as a result of spillages is unlikely

As outlined in Section 64 above washwater arising from the washing and disinfection of the poultry houses is diverted to the two underground storage tanks Should wash water accidentally discharge to surface water or ground this could potentially affect the quality of surface water soil and groundwater directly which could affect those using the surface water groundwater body as a source of drinking water I t could also have the potential to indirectly affect surface water quality downstream as well as aquatic habitats within that surface water As outlined in Section 65 above the risk to soil groundwater and surface water from accidental spillages of wash water during washing or poultry litter removal is minimal and it is considered that any effect that might occur would be limited insignificant and of short duration

As further outlined in Section 67 the wash water storage tanks and supplementary slatted tank provide well in excess of the 26 week storage requirements of the European Union (Good Agricultural Practice for the Protection of Waters) Regulations 2014 (SI No 31 of 2014) There are requirements in the RD regarding maintaining a freeboard and the periodic assessment of all underground effluent storage tanks which will significantly reduce the likelihood of spillages from the wash water storage tanks themselves

As outlined in Section 67 organic fertiliser (other than washwater) arising from the installation is not stored a t the installation outside of the poultry houses I t is removed at the end of each cycle by a licenced contractor for use for compost production andor landspreading There are no other installations or activities in the vicinity where there could be a significant risk of release of wash water or other substances to ground that could lead to likely or significant cumulative effects on groundwater soil surface water or habitats when considered in tandem with the activities a t this installation

Mitigation Measures

Potential contamination could occur if washing activities on-site are not managed appropriately and if wash water collection tanks are not adequately managed and maintained

Unexpected spillages of chemicals disinfectants etc could impact on surface water and groundwater

25

I

The following mitigation measures will further reduce the likelihood of an impact on water and soil quality from organic fertiliser (including wash water) and from accidental spillages arising on-site

- - -

- -

- -

The licensable activity takes place on an impermeable concrete base The poultry litter is dry All houses are thoroughly brushed out and all organic fertiliser is removed from site before washing commences reducing the nutrient content of the resulting washwater No organic fertiliser storage on-site (other than washwater) The provision of in excess of 26 weeks organic fertiliser wash water storage capacity (on and off-site) The provision of storm and soiled water collection facilities and All washwater is diverted to wash water storage tanks

The RD requires that a freeboard of at least 200mm from the top of each covered organic fertiliser storage tank and 300mm from the top of uncovered organic fertiliser storage tanks is maintained as a minimum at all times I t also requires that all underground effluent storage tanks are assessed within twelve months of date of grant of this licence and a t least once every five years thereafter

The RD requires that the washwater storage tank shall be fitted with high level indicators within twelve months of the date of grant of this licence It also requires that all underground effluent storage tanks are assessed within twelve months of date of grant of this licence and a t leastonce every five years thereafter

Condition 6106 requires that the drainage channels are diverted to the underground storage tank prior to the commencement of any washing activities and that a written procedure and records are maintained

The RD also requires that the storm water discharge points are visually inspected weekly and monitored for BOD and COD as required by the Agency in accordance with Schedule C23 Monitoring of Storm Water Emissions

The RD includes conditions in relation to materials handling The RD requires appropriate storage of materials and wastes that loading and unloading of materials shall be carried out in designated areas protected against spillage and leachate run-off and that bunding be provided for all tank and drum storage areas

The RD also requires that accident and emergency response procedures are put in place and that there is an adequate supply of containment booms andor suitable absorbent material to contain and absorb any spillage at the installation

These measures will help to control any impacts which could occur should any mitigation measures fail

Conclusion

Based on the above assessments and the mitigation measures proposed I am satisfied that there will not be significant effects on the environment from the storage and management of organic fertiliser (including washwater) or from accidental spillage of materials to water groundwater or soil a t the installation

Accordingly if the activity is carried on in accordance with the RD and the conditions attached the operation of the activity will not cause environmental pollution The conditions

26


17(e) Air


Odour impact beyond the site boundary

Dust deposition beyond the site boundary

Ammonia emissions impacting habitats and species

~ __ ___ Description of effect

Odour arising from site operations organic fertiliser management and waste management may result in a deterioration of air quality in the vicinity of the installation Dust may arise from the expelling of warm air from the ventilation systems filling of meal storage bins or the loading of organic fertiliser into lorries which may deposit beyond the site boundary Habitats and species (including flora and fauna) have the potential to be impacted by ammonia emissions from the activity

--Effect assessed in

Assessment of Effects on Air

See assessments documented in section 17(a)(i)

17(eXi) Dust dePosition beyond the site boundary

Dust arising from the activity could have the potential to deposit beyond the site boundary causing nuisance for those living nearby and potentially affecting habitats if located close to the site boundary There are no third party dwellings within 230m of the site The applicant has advised that all buildings and equipment are serviced and maintained regularly and that site operational checks are in place to reduce emissions of dust from the site While minimal dust impact may occur locally within the site boundary during organic fertiliser loading operations (which only occur every 6-8 weeks) dust is not expected to be a significant issue beyond the site boundary in keeping with experience for poultry rearing activities in Ireland and the British Isles

The other similar activities in the vicinity will also have minimal dust impact outside their site boundaries therefore it is unlikely that there will be a cumulative effect from dust deposition in the local area beyond the site boundary

Mitigation Measures The RD requires that dust associated with the activity does not result in an impairment of or an interference with amenities or the environment at the installation or beyond the installation boundary or any other legitimate uses of the environment beyond the installation boundary

Conclusion Based on the above assessment I am satisfied that there will not be significant effects on the environment from dust emissions from the activity

27

i


Release of climate altering substances

I

Description of effect Effect assessed in

section Climate altering substances may be 17(f)(i) released in small quantities from animal housing storage of organic fertiliser from traffic and as a result of heating the poultry houses


17(e)(ii) Ammonia emissions imPactinq habitats and mecies

Ammonia emissions from this activity could have the potential to impaci sensitive receptors (eg lichens bryophytes etc) in the vicinity of the installation

As outlined in Section 121 such qualifying interests in European sites will not be affected by ammonia emissions from the installation The presence of sensitive receptors outside of the designated sites has not been identified I n addition the infrastructure on-site is considered BAT for ammonia reduction

The area surrounding the installation is rural with rural dwellings and typical farming activities involve the rearing of livestock Farming activities in the vicinity of the installation do not occur at an intensive level

Therefore significant effects from ammonia emissions on air quality or on lichens and bryophytes or indirectly on those species which depend on them is unlikely

I n addition I consider that the risk of significant cumulative impacts from ammonia emissions on air quality or on lichens and bryophytes or indirectly on those species which depend on them is low

Mitigation Measures

The odour reduction measures outlined in Section 17(a)(i) will help to mitigate against ammonia emissions occurring

Co ncl us ion

Considering the assessment above it is concluded that there will be no significant effect on the environment from ammonia emissions from the licensable activity

Accordingly if the activity is carried on in accordance with the RD and the conditions attached the operation of the activity will not cause environmental pollution The conditions of the RD and the mitigation measures proposed will significantly reduce the likelihood of accidental emissions occurring and even if an accidental emission should occur it will not have a significant effect on the environment and the conditions are such as to ensure it will not be repeated

Assessment of Effects on Climate

17(f)(i) Release of climate alterinq substances

28

Climate change is a significant global issue which affects weather and environmental conditions which consequently affects human resources and amenities as well as biodiversity and habitats Climate change is caused by warming of the climate system by enhanced levels of atmospheric greenhouse gases due to human activities including intensive agriculture I n Ireland the greenhouse gases most commonly associated with agriculture are carbon dioxide methane and nitrous oxide

Poultry litter is a dry solid material and remains in the poultry house until the end of the batch The litter is completely removed from the site at the end of each batch (every 6-8 weeks) With appropriate management and bedding during a batch methane emissions from the poultry litter during a batch will be minimal

Heating for the poultry houses at this installation is provided by combustion of LPG with a diesel oil generator used as a back-up electricity supply Both sources are considered minor emissions Electricity is used to power the equipment on-site The applicant states that they will operate the installation in order to maximise resource efficiency

The impact of traffic movements associated with the development is dealt with in the decision of the planning authority to grant planning permission for the poultry houses and are not controlled by the Agency The planning authority has considered the impacts to be acceptable

Given the small quantity of climate altering substances that could be released from the activity in a national context I consider that the cumulative impact of any emissions from the installation on climatic considerations should be insignificant

Mitigation Measures

The RD requires energy efficiency and resource use efficiency to be addressed as part of the Resource Use and Energy Programme

Conclusion

I am satisfied that there will not be significant effects on climate from the operation of the activity


17(g) Landscape Material Assets amp Cultural Heritage


Disturbance of archaeology from the operation of the activity

Disturbance of architecture from the operation of the activity Landscape and visual impact from the operation of the activity

Cultural impacts from the


There is no evidence of any archaeological features within the installation boundary The operation of the activity is unlikely to impact on archaeological features There are no buildings of architectural significance located on the site The installation is located in a rural area No additional impacts on the landscape are expected from the operation of the activity The operation of the activity is unlikely

Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i

operation of the activity

Use of natural resources and generation of wastes

to negatively impact on the agricultural culture of the area Water oil gas wood chips and electricity will be used in the operation of the activity Small quantities of waste will be produced including waste veterinary products fluorescent tubes carcasses and other General waste

17( g)( iii)

Assessment of Effects on landscape material assets and cultural heritage

17(aMi) Disturbance of archaeology and architecture from the oeeration of the activitv

Any loss of archaeological or architectural heritage could impact negatively on human beings These matters are dealt with in the decision of the planning authority to grant planning permission for the poultry houses and are not controlled by the Agency The planning authority has considered the impacts to be acceptable

The nearest archaeology features are two ringforts one 250m west and another 600m southeast of the site However it is very difficult to envisage any pathway by which emissions from the operation of the activity could impact any feature which might be present

Mitigation Measures

No mitigation measures have been proposed

Conclusion

I am satisfied that there will not be significant effects on archaeology or architecture from the operation of the activity

Accordingly if the activity is carried out in accordance with the RD and the conditions attached the operation of the activity will not cause environmental pollution

17(q)(ii) Landscape visual and cultural imDact

Any disturbance of the landscape or the cultural heritage of an area has the potential to impact on human beings and their enjoyment of the surrounding area These matters are dealt with in the decision of the planning authority to grant planning permission for the poultry unit and are not controlled by the Agency The planning authority has considered the impacts to be acceptable

The installation is located in an agricultural area that is not highly populated Emissions from the operation of the activity will not impact on the agricultural landscape and culture of the area The original poultry house has been in situ in excess of 10 years

Mitigation Measures


Conclusion

I am satisfied that there will not be significant effects on the landscape visual or cultural heritage of the area from the operation of the activity


30

17(aMiii) Use of natural resources and eeneration of wastes

As outlined in Section 9 of this report the RD includes conditions dealing with water energy and raw material use reduction and efficiency on-site The use of natural resources by the activity will not be significant

As discussed in Section 7 the activity does not produce significant quantities of waste and waste generation is minimised by employing best technologies combined with good management practices on-site and maintaining a high health status on the installation

The installation is located in a rural area with most of the developments in the vicinity of the installation being dwelling houses and farm yards all of which would use minimal amounts of resources and produce minimal amounts of waste There are no other intensive agricultural activities in the area Therefore significant cumulative effects on the environment from the use of resources or production of waste by this installation and other developments are not likely

Mitigation Measures

The RD requires that waste is appropriately segregated and stored while on-site and that all waste sent off-site is transported and recovereddisposed in accordance with National and European Legislation and that waste records are maintained

Conclusion

I am satisfied that there will not be significant effects on the environment from the use of natural resources or the generation of waste from the operation of the activity


17(h) Interaction of ef fects I have considered the interaction between the factors referred to in Tables (a) to (9) above and the interaction of the likely effects identified

The interaction between factors as a result of the operation of the installation are summarised below

31

The most significant interactions as addressed in the earlier parts of this report are as follows Human Beinqs and Flora and fauna Pestsrodents that may arise on-site have the potential to impact on human beings and other flora and fauna with regard to the spread of disease and in the case of humans nuisance As demonstrated in Section 17(b)(i) above such impacts are considered not to be likely or significant

Water soil and flora and fauna Accidental discharges of wash water or other substances to ground may directly and indirectly impact on soil ground water quality surface water quality downstream aquatic habitats and aquatic flora and fauna Indirect effects on soil ground water quality surface water quality habitats and flora and fauna may arise from landspreading organic fertiliser which arises from the activity As demonstrated in sections 17(a)(iii) and 17(d)(i) above such impacts are considered not to be likely or significant

Climate human beinqs and flora and fauna Climate change is a global issue that affects food production ecosystems biodiversity resources and amenities As outlined in Section 17(f)(i) above the activity is not considered to be a significant contributor of climate altering substances and it is considered that significant effects on climate (and consequently effects on human beings and flora and fauna) as a result of the operation of the activity are not likely

Human beinqs and material assets landscaue and cultural heritaqe The exploitation of material assets or any disturbance of the landscape or the cultural heritage of an area could have the potential to impact on human beings and their quality of life As discussed in Section 17(g) above the installation will not use excessive resources during the operation of the activity I t is also noted that any impacts on landscape and cultural heritage have already been assessed and are considered acceptable by the planning authority

Based on the assessment in parts 17(a) to (9) above and the mitigation measures proposed (including the relevant conditions in the RD) I do not consider that the interactions identified are likely to cause or exacerbate any potentially significant environmental effects of the activity

Reasoned Conclusion on Environmental Impact Assessment

Having regard to the impacts (and interactions) identified described and assessed above I consider that the mitigation measures proposed will enable the activity to operate without causing environmental pollution I also consider that the potential impacts on the environment identified above even if they occur are unlikely to damage the environment and the risk of them occurring is not unacceptable

18 Recommended Determination (RD)

I n preparing this report and the RD I have consulted with Agency technical and sectoral advisors as appropriate The RD specifies the necessary measures to provide that the installation shall be operated in accordance with the requirements of Section 83(5) of the EPA Act 1992 as amended and has regard to the AA screening and EIA screening The RD gives effect to the requirements of the Environmental Protection Agency Acts 1992 as amended and has regard to submissions made

32

i

I I

i

19 Charges

The annual enforcement charge recommended in the RD is euro2552 which is considered appropriate to cover the costs associated with the enforcement of the RD

20 Recommendation

I recommend that a Proposed Determination be issued subject to the conditions and for the reasons as drafted in the RD

Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note

I n the event that no objections are application a licence will be granted in

received to the Proposed Determination ccordance with Section 87(4) of the Enviro

of the mental

Protection Agency Acts 1992 as amended as soon as may be after the expiration of the appropriate period

33

I

Site visit I 26 July 2016 (ELP) 1 1 Installation and Applicant

Mr Stephen Hall operates a poultry (broiler) rearing farm on land owned by Herbert Hall a t Lattacapple Cootehill Co Cavan

The installation currently accommodates approximately 90000 broilers in 2 poultry houses Poultry farming has been carried out on this site since 2004 Planning permission Ref 01715 was granted by Cavan County Council on 17 April 2002 for one poultry house this house was constructed in 2004 House 2 was completed in 2015 under planning permission Ref 14286 granted on 18 November 2014 Retention for alterations to planning 14286 was granted on 17 February 2016 under planning Ref 15470

The present enterprise provides full-time employment for the applicant The main activities a t this installation occur during normal working hours between 600 am and 800 pm Stock inspections are carried out every day including weekends and bank holidays and additional essential activities may be undertaken outside of core working hours The installation currently operates in accordance with the requirements of the Department of Agriculture Food and the Marine and the Bord Bia Poultry Products Quality Assurance Scheme (PPQAS)

2 Process description

The process involves the rearing of stock specifically bred for lean poultry meat production from day olds delivered from the hatchery until they are removed from the site to the processing installation (approximately 5 - 6 weeks) At the end of each rearing cycle the houses are destocked and the birds are sold for processing Following a period of 2 weeks to allow for removal of the poultry litter (organic fertiliser) and complete drying after the cleaning process the houses are restocked

The type of broiler house used for this activity is a simple closed building of block and timberwood construction on an impervious concrete base The houses are thermally insulated with a forced computer controlled ventilation system and artificial lighting Automatic feeding and ventilation systems operate on a 24 hour basis The solid flooring of each broiler house is bedded with wood shavings over its entire area immediately prior to housing each new batch bought from the hatchery

The principal inputs to the operation are feed water veterinary medicines and energy (electricity and gas for heating) The main by-product of poultry rearing is poultry litter (organic fertiliser) These are discussed in further detail below

I

3 Planning Permission EIS and E IA Requirements 31 EIA Screening

I n accordance with Section 83(2A) of the EPA Act 1992 as amended the Agency must ensure that before a licence or revised licence is granted that the application is made subject to an environmental impact assessment (EIA) where the activity meets the criteria outlined in Section 83(2A)(b) and 83(2A)(c) I n accordance with the EIA Screening Determination the Agency has determined that the activity is likely to have a significant

I Any fer t i l iser other than that manufactured by indust r ia l process and inc ludes l i ves tock manure dungsteacl manure f a rmyard manure slurry so i led water si lage eff luent non - fa rm organic substances such as sewage s I uclge i n cl us t r i a I by - prod uc ts a ntl res i dues from fi s h fa r i m

2


32 Plannins status







14286






I

I



3









i







I 8









4

i - 4 Submissions













5

I









- 6 Emissions




6












7

64 Surface Water








I 1

8














9









10



672 Washwater




11

- 8 Noise



- 7 Waste





Energy


12



Water



I Feed










- - -



13

i

i( Ii














European Site

(Site code)


Lough Oughter



72km west




~ ~~

Habitats



I

I 14

and Associated ~

Loughs SAC (000007)





mtly known as Depz

of the installation













15

I






-



16

I

I

i I

i

I

13










17

15 Site Visit



16


Technical Ability


Leaal Standinq


Financial Standinq




17




18

17(a) Human Beings


Odour nuisance









Mitigation Measures






19








Conclusion






Mitigation Measures



-

20 I

i I

i

- - - - -



Conclusion











21







Mitigation Measures




Conclusion


22

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I


32 Plannins status







14286






I

I



3









i







I 8









4

i - 4 Submissions













5

I









- 6 Emissions




6












7

64 Surface Water








I 1

8














9









10



672 Washwater




11

- 8 Noise



- 7 Waste





Energy


12



Water



I Feed










- - -



13

i

i( Ii














European Site

(Site code)


Lough Oughter



72km west




~ ~~

Habitats



I

I 14

and Associated ~

Loughs SAC (000007)





mtly known as Depz

of the installation













15

I






-



16

I

I

i I

i

I

13










17

15 Site Visit



16


Technical Ability


Leaal Standinq


Financial Standinq




17




18

17(a) Human Beings


Odour nuisance









Mitigation Measures






19








Conclusion






Mitigation Measures



-

20 I

i I

i

- - - - -



Conclusion











21







Mitigation Measures




Conclusion


22

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I









i







I 8









4

i - 4 Submissions













5

I









- 6 Emissions




6












7

64 Surface Water








I 1

8














9









10



672 Washwater




11

- 8 Noise



- 7 Waste





Energy


12



Water



I Feed










- - -



13

i

i( Ii














European Site

(Site code)


Lough Oughter



72km west




~ ~~

Habitats



I

I 14

and Associated ~

Loughs SAC (000007)





mtly known as Depz

of the installation













15

I






-



16

I

I

i I

i

I

13










17

15 Site Visit



16


Technical Ability


Leaal Standinq


Financial Standinq




17




18

17(a) Human Beings


Odour nuisance









Mitigation Measures






19








Conclusion






Mitigation Measures



-

20 I

i I

i

- - - - -



Conclusion











21







Mitigation Measures




Conclusion


22

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I

i - 4 Submissions













5

I









- 6 Emissions




6












7

64 Surface Water








I 1

8














9









10



672 Washwater




11

- 8 Noise



- 7 Waste





Energy


12



Water



I Feed










- - -



13

i

i( Ii














European Site

(Site code)


Lough Oughter



72km west




~ ~~

Habitats



I

I 14

and Associated ~

Loughs SAC (000007)





mtly known as Depz

of the installation













15

I






-



16

I

I

i I

i

I

13










17

15 Site Visit



16


Technical Ability


Leaal Standinq


Financial Standinq




17




18

17(a) Human Beings


Odour nuisance









Mitigation Measures






19








Conclusion






Mitigation Measures



-

20 I

i I

i

- - - - -



Conclusion











21







Mitigation Measures




Conclusion


22

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I

I









- 6 Emissions




6












7

64 Surface Water








I 1

8














9









10



672 Washwater




11

- 8 Noise



- 7 Waste





Energy


12



Water



I Feed










- - -



13

i

i( Ii














European Site

(Site code)


Lough Oughter



72km west




~ ~~

Habitats



I

I 14

and Associated ~

Loughs SAC (000007)





mtly known as Depz

of the installation













15

I






-



16

I

I

i I

i

I

13










17

15 Site Visit



16


Technical Ability


Leaal Standinq


Financial Standinq




17




18

17(a) Human Beings


Odour nuisance









Mitigation Measures






19








Conclusion






Mitigation Measures



-

20 I

i I

i

- - - - -



Conclusion











21







Mitigation Measures




Conclusion


22

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I












7

64 Surface Water








I 1

8














9









10



672 Washwater




11

- 8 Noise



- 7 Waste





Energy


12



Water



I Feed










- - -



13

i

i( Ii














European Site

(Site code)


Lough Oughter



72km west




~ ~~

Habitats



I

I 14

and Associated ~

Loughs SAC (000007)





mtly known as Depz

of the installation













15

I






-



16

I

I

i I

i

I

13










17

15 Site Visit



16


Technical Ability


Leaal Standinq


Financial Standinq




17




18

17(a) Human Beings


Odour nuisance









Mitigation Measures






19








Conclusion






Mitigation Measures



-

20 I

i I

i

- - - - -



Conclusion











21







Mitigation Measures




Conclusion


22

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I

64 Surface Water








I 1

8














9









10



672 Washwater




11

- 8 Noise



- 7 Waste





Energy


12



Water



I Feed










- - -



13

i

i( Ii














European Site

(Site code)


Lough Oughter



72km west




~ ~~

Habitats



I

I 14

and Associated ~

Loughs SAC (000007)





mtly known as Depz

of the installation













15

I






-



16

I

I

i I

i

I

13










17

15 Site Visit



16


Technical Ability


Leaal Standinq


Financial Standinq




17




18

17(a) Human Beings


Odour nuisance









Mitigation Measures






19








Conclusion






Mitigation Measures



-

20 I

i I

i

- - - - -



Conclusion











21







Mitigation Measures




Conclusion


22

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I














9









10



672 Washwater




11

- 8 Noise



- 7 Waste





Energy


12



Water



I Feed










- - -



13

i

i( Ii














European Site

(Site code)


Lough Oughter



72km west




~ ~~

Habitats



I

I 14

and Associated ~

Loughs SAC (000007)





mtly known as Depz

of the installation













15

I






-



16

I

I

i I

i

I

13










17

15 Site Visit



16


Technical Ability


Leaal Standinq


Financial Standinq




17




18

17(a) Human Beings


Odour nuisance









Mitigation Measures






19








Conclusion






Mitigation Measures



-

20 I

i I

i

- - - - -



Conclusion











21







Mitigation Measures




Conclusion


22

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I









10



672 Washwater




11

- 8 Noise



- 7 Waste





Energy


12



Water



I Feed










- - -



13

i

i( Ii














European Site

(Site code)


Lough Oughter



72km west




~ ~~

Habitats



I

I 14

and Associated ~

Loughs SAC (000007)





mtly known as Depz

of the installation













15

I






-



16

I

I

i I

i

I

13










17

15 Site Visit



16


Technical Ability


Leaal Standinq


Financial Standinq




17




18

17(a) Human Beings


Odour nuisance









Mitigation Measures






19








Conclusion






Mitigation Measures



-

20 I

i I

i

- - - - -



Conclusion











21







Mitigation Measures




Conclusion


22

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I



672 Washwater




11

- 8 Noise



- 7 Waste





Energy


12



Water



I Feed










- - -



13

i

i( Ii














European Site

(Site code)


Lough Oughter



72km west




~ ~~

Habitats



I

I 14

and Associated ~

Loughs SAC (000007)





mtly known as Depz

of the installation













15

I






-



16

I

I

i I

i

I

13










17

15 Site Visit



16


Technical Ability


Leaal Standinq


Financial Standinq




17




18

17(a) Human Beings


Odour nuisance









Mitigation Measures






19








Conclusion






Mitigation Measures



-

20 I

i I

i

- - - - -



Conclusion











21







Mitigation Measures




Conclusion


22

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I

- 8 Noise



- 7 Waste





Energy


12



Water



I Feed










- - -



13

i

i( Ii














European Site

(Site code)


Lough Oughter



72km west




~ ~~

Habitats



I

I 14

and Associated ~

Loughs SAC (000007)





mtly known as Depz

of the installation













15

I






-



16

I

I

i I

i

I

13










17

15 Site Visit



16


Technical Ability


Leaal Standinq


Financial Standinq




17




18

17(a) Human Beings


Odour nuisance









Mitigation Measures






19








Conclusion






Mitigation Measures



-

20 I

i I

i

- - - - -



Conclusion











21







Mitigation Measures




Conclusion


22

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I



Water



I Feed










- - -



13

i

i( Ii














European Site

(Site code)


Lough Oughter



72km west




~ ~~

Habitats



I

I 14

and Associated ~

Loughs SAC (000007)





mtly known as Depz

of the installation













15

I






-



16

I

I

i I

i

I

13










17

15 Site Visit



16


Technical Ability


Leaal Standinq


Financial Standinq




17




18

17(a) Human Beings


Odour nuisance









Mitigation Measures






19








Conclusion






Mitigation Measures



-

20 I

i I

i

- - - - -



Conclusion











21







Mitigation Measures




Conclusion


22

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I

i

i( Ii














European Site

(Site code)


Lough Oughter



72km west




~ ~~

Habitats



I

I 14

and Associated ~

Loughs SAC (000007)





mtly known as Depz

of the installation













15

I






-



16

I

I

i I

i

I

13










17

15 Site Visit



16


Technical Ability


Leaal Standinq


Financial Standinq




17




18

17(a) Human Beings


Odour nuisance









Mitigation Measures






19








Conclusion






Mitigation Measures



-

20 I

i I

i

- - - - -



Conclusion











21







Mitigation Measures




Conclusion


22

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I

and Associated ~

Loughs SAC (000007)





mtly known as Depz

of the installation













15

I






-



16

I

I

i I

i

I

13










17

15 Site Visit



16


Technical Ability


Leaal Standinq


Financial Standinq




17




18

17(a) Human Beings


Odour nuisance









Mitigation Measures






19








Conclusion






Mitigation Measures



-

20 I

i I

i

- - - - -



Conclusion











21







Mitigation Measures




Conclusion


22

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I

I






-



16

I

I

i I

i

I

13










17

15 Site Visit



16


Technical Ability


Leaal Standinq


Financial Standinq




17




18

17(a) Human Beings


Odour nuisance









Mitigation Measures






19








Conclusion






Mitigation Measures



-

20 I

i I

i

- - - - -



Conclusion











21







Mitigation Measures




Conclusion


22

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I

I

I

i I

i

I

13










17

15 Site Visit



16


Technical Ability


Leaal Standinq


Financial Standinq




17




18

17(a) Human Beings


Odour nuisance









Mitigation Measures






19








Conclusion






Mitigation Measures



-

20 I

i I

i

- - - - -



Conclusion











21







Mitigation Measures




Conclusion


22

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I

15 Site Visit



16


Technical Ability


Leaal Standinq


Financial Standinq




17




18

17(a) Human Beings


Odour nuisance









Mitigation Measures






19








Conclusion






Mitigation Measures



-

20 I

i I

i

- - - - -



Conclusion











21







Mitigation Measures




Conclusion


22

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I

17(a) Human Beings


Odour nuisance









Mitigation Measures






19








Conclusion






Mitigation Measures



-

20 I

i I

i

- - - - -



Conclusion











21







Mitigation Measures




Conclusion


22

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I








Conclusion






Mitigation Measures



-

20 I

i I

i

- - - - -



Conclusion











21







Mitigation Measures




Conclusion


22

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I

i I

i

- - - - -



Conclusion











21







Mitigation Measures




Conclusion


22

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I







Mitigation Measures




Conclusion


22

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I

I












Effect assessed in







Mitigation Measures


23

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I

-

- -

- - -



Conclusion






Effect assessed in

section



Conclusion



17(d) Water


sectian


24

17(a)(iii) 1









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I









Mitigation Measures



25

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I

I


- - -

- -

- -









Conclusion



26


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I


17(e) Air















27

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I

i



I










Mitigation Measures


Co ncl us ion





28






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion










Effect assessed in

section 17(g)(i)

17(g)( ii)

29

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I

i




17( g)( iii)





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion






Mitigation Measures


Conclusion



30





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I





Mitigation Measures


Conclusion





31










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I










32

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I

i

I I

i

19 Charges


20 Recommendation


Signed

Eimer Godsil

Procedural Note



of the mental


33

I

I From: Eimer Godsil Environmental Licensing Program meFrom: Eimer Godsil Environmental Licensing...

Documents

Transcript of I From: Eimer Godsil Environmental Licensing Program meFrom: Eimer Godsil Environmental Licensing...