Basic NEScessities of Life

The first 2 months of implementation

February 2012

James Corbett, Auckland Council

Penny Kneebone, Tonkin & Taylor Ltd.

AbstractThe new Auckland Council is assessing how the contaminated land rules for

each of the seven legacy district council plans and the regional plan can be amalgamated. That process now needs to account for the introduction of the proposed National Environmental Standard for Assessing and Managing Contaminants in Soil to Protect Human Health (NES), introduced in January 2012.

• This paper reviews the impact the NES is likely to have on policy, regulation and operations.

• Does the NES clarify the management of land contamination?   • Does it make consenting easier, or more complex? • Is it likely to result in more remedial works or less? • What issues have arisen for Council and contaminated land practitioners?• Discussion of EHO experiences with the NES to date.

Outline

Auckland Council

NES and its application

The first 2 months: Auckland Council, consultants, EHOs

Discussion

Auckland Council - A Unified Future with the NES

• 1 Regional Plan• 7 Territorial/City Plans UNITARY PLAN

NES

Nov 2011 2013 (?)

Pre Auckland Council Auckland Council today

Auckland Council of future

Rodney

Franklin

Auckland City

Papakura

Manukau

Waitakere

North Shore

Auckland Regional

Unitary Council

Nov 20

10

Size & Complexity Auckland Council

Service Delivery

Operations (LCPM)

Regulatory (Regional & Territorial)

Service Specification

Policy (Spatial Plan &Unitary Plan)

Largest Council in AustralasiaAbout 8,500 staffOver 1.4M served

Specification: Policies, PlansDelivery: Enforcement, Services

Land Contamination Specialists

Land Management Operations Parks, Stormwater, Property, othersCCOs e.g. ACPL, WDA, AT

What does the NES do?• Protects Human Health• Appropriate identification and

assessment of contaminated land before it is developed

• TAs to give effect to/enforce• Overlay plan chapter• Imposes timing / costs• Requires more information

– May not be welcome in areas where information requirements or rules have been less visible

• Not retrospective• Rapid introduction - surprised?

Main changes• Nationally consistent

planning controls

• Nationwide Soil Contaminant

Values

• Activity categories; triggers

for activities

• Information baseline

• Incorporates Guidelines by

reference

Consultant issues in first 2 months• PSI/DSI o suitably qualified environmental professionalo cost estimates

• Rules interpretation– Change in land use e.g. drycleaner changing to a takeaway

– Production land e.g. fruit processing plant on orchard

– Early discussions with Council to confirm activity status and information requirements

• Review previous assessments

Council impacts in first 2 months• Training • Process - mapping; no integration;

Planners identify NES application; EHOs status

• Operational policies – reject where no reference to NES

• Communication – between departments; customers

• Information management: resources, legacy systems

• Issues – Alternate methods – discr default– Conflict Regnl Rules Tank pulls – Default land use categories

EHO issues in first 2 months Q’s, Confusions, Conspiracies:• Are you coping with the change?• What don’t you get?• What would you like assistance with?• Where do you see the greatest challenges?• What experiences can you tell us all about?• Any tips?

CASE STUDIES

Case Study: Omana Sheep Dip

• About 15m long, 1m wide and 1.5m deep

• a few metres from the beach at Maraetai

• Historically significant feature

• Used in the 1930s• High use reserve

Case Study: Omana Sheep Dip

• Investigations– Preliminary Region-wide

Sheep Dip Study– Detail Site Investigation

• Contaminants– Arsenic

• Remedial Works– Temporary fencing– Removal of contaminated

material

Case Study: Omana Sheep Dip

Case Study: Omana Sheep Dip

Remediation• Work plan unlikely to have

been changed

Consent required• Restricted discretionary for

works near tree & stream• Restricted discretionary for

disturbance & exceeding SCS

As (mg/kg)

2,290 Max

80 Auckland City

100 NES

Case Study: Stokes Point

• Investigations– Preliminary Soil Sampling– Detailed Site Investigation– Human Health Risk

Assessment

• Contaminants– Lead– BaP

• Remedial Works– Temporary fencing– Hot spot isolation

Case Study: Stokes Point

Case Study: Stokes Pointmg/kg Max Mean 95% UCL ACC HHRA NES

Lead 840 162 220 600 4,000 880

BaP 83 7.1 10 2 21 40

No gross contaminationHotspots concentrations were too high to disregardNES would not have changed the work planIf lead concentrations had been higher, the NES would have required extensive remediation

Conclusion• The NES will enable Auckland Council to more

effectively manage human health risks consistently across the region

• Key factors for success include:– information management, – process integration, – training

• Cost impact on remediation programme – potentially minimal for most contaminants– HHRA for default land use categories increases cost