This document has been cleared for submission to the Board by the Senior Inspector, Dr Karen Creed a Signed: ~.-~f~;~~~7~Date: iH5- LPll\r>ll\W cu l\fic9uul\bm VU&.

INSPECTORS REPORT ON A WASTE WATER DISCHARGE LICENCE APPLICATION Directors 11 From: Aoife Loughnane Environmental Licensing Programme 11 Date: 14th September 2012 Application for a Waste Water Discharge Licence from RE: 1 County Council for the agglomeration, Reg. No. D0352-01.

SEhedule ad blscharge ritad: 'Discharges from agglomerations with a population equivalent of 1,001 to 2,000. L)cemapplkatfon rwdved: 12/06/2009 Mbtlaes under flqulatlstll8(3)(b] issued: 21/09/2010, 26/06/2012 Inbrmatlon under Regulation it3[3)[b) 14/07/2011, 3/07/2012 redwed: We mthdwxk; 26/06/2009 5ik vlsit: 22/07/2010 (Anne Pearson, OCLR) submlssbm ml&: Ten: I > Mr. P.E. Lusby 19/02/2010, 25/05/2012, 30/08/2012, 5/09/20 12, 10/09/2012 & 13/09/2012 > Mr. Mark McGavigan 10/02/2012 > NPWS 9/07/2012 > Loughs Agency 11/07/2012 > NIEA 10/9/2012 1. Agglomeration This application relates to the Lifford agglomeration in eastern Donegal. Lifford is located on the west bank of the Foyle, across the river from , Co. Tyrone. The two border towns are linked by the . Approximately 250m upstream of Lifford Bridge, the is formed at the confluence of the River Finn which drains large areas of Donegal, and which drains large areas of Northern . The River Foyle becomes the Foyle estuary (tidal/transitional waters) approximately 50m downstream of Lifford Bridge (see map in Appendix A). The Foyle estuary enters coastal waters 30km north-east of Lifford. Donegal County Council has identified the existing population equivalent (p.e.) of the Lifford agglomeration as 1,969. Growth to 2,041 p.e. is projected based on planning permissions granted for developments yet to commence. A revised licence may be required should the p.e. of the agglomeration exceed 2,000. The breakdown in contribution is approximately 74% domestic, 14% commercial, 10% institutional and 2% leisure/tourism. There are no identified sources of industrial waste water in Lifford.

Page 1 of 17

I The waste water collection network is predominantly a combined system. Most of the network dates from the 1960s, with extensions along the N15 Stranorlar Road and the N14 Letterkenny Road. There is one pumping station and two storm water overflows on the collection network. Lifford’s waste water currently undergoes primary treatment in a 125m3 septic tank, prior to discharging to the Foyle estuary. The septic tank is located east of the town and was installed in 1967 to serve a population of 1,550. It has not received any major refurbishment since. There is a coarse bar screen on the inlet to the tank. Because the plant is overloaded, it provides limited treatment of waste water. The tank is desludged occasionally by a mobile dewatering unit, and the sludge is transported for treatment to the sludge hub at Donegal Town. The Lifford agglomeration is below the 2,000 p.e. threshold for discharges to estuaries, at which the emission limit values specified in the Urban Waste Water Treatment Regulations apply (25: 125:35 mg/l for B0D:COD:SS respectively). For agglomerations below this threshold, ‘appropriate treatment’ was required by 3lSt December 2005, as specified in Article 7 of the Regulations. The term ‘appropriate treatment’ is defined in the Regulations as ‘treatment of urban waste water by any process and/or dispod system which after discharge allows the receiving waters to meet the relevant quality objectives and the relevant provisions of the Directive and of other Community Directives!. The existing septic tank in Lifford provides primary treatment and is significantly overloaded (1,550 p.e. capacity compared to a current loading of 1,969 p.e.). The current level of treatment is not considered appropriate treatment. A new WWTP is required to provide, as a minimum, secondary treatment. Lifford sewerage scheme is not listed on the Water Services Investment Programme (WSIP) 2010-2012. Donegal County Council has acknowledged that secondary treatment is required in order to meet National and European legislation. The preliminary report on the upgrade needs has not yet been prepared. Donegal County Council has identified a number of specific issues in the licence application, including:- inadequate treatment and capacity at the existing WWTP, inadequate capacity and condition of sewers, flooding at the pumping station during wet weather when pumps and rising mains are unable to cope with the inflow, and 0 storm overflows that frequently discharge unscreened waste water. The Foyle estuary is classified as ‘moderate’ status under the Water Framework Directive. The objective is to restore to ’good’ status by 2021. In the North Western IRBD Transitional and Coastal Waters Action Plan, the Foyle estuary is identified as “at risk” or “probably at risk” from point source pressures - WWTPs, combined sewer overflows and treatment plant overflows. The Rnn/Derg/Foyle Water Management Unit Action Plan identifies Lifford WWTP as a point pressure and “at risk due to future insufficient WWTP capacity”. The measures/capital works set out in the plan are to increase the capacity of Lifford WWTP. The timeframe is identified as 2015+. I have consulted with the DoECLG Inspector for waste water services in Donegal regarding the upgrade of Lifford sewerage scheme. He has confirmed that the preparation of the preliminary report on the upgrade needs is due to commence in the near future, and he outlined the timelines involved in the preparation and approval of the preliminary report and contract documents, the tendering process and construction works. He has identified that 2017 is a realistic timeframe for completion of the sewerage scheme upgrade.

Page 2 of 17 Having regard to the fact that Lifford sewerage scheme is not listed on the current WSIP, the preliminary report on the upgrade needs has not yet commenced and the Foyle estuary has an extended deadline until 2021 to be restored to good status, the Recommended Licence (RL) requires secondary waste water treatment to be provided in Lifford by 31‘ December 2017. The legislation under which the discharges from the waste water works are to be licensed does not provide any regulatory powers with regard to odour, noise or management of the waste water works infrastructure. Therefore, the RL does not specifically refer to, or set operating conditions, in relation to these areas.

2. Discharges to waters Primaty Discharqe The primary discharge (SWOOl) is the outfall from the septic tank to the Foyle estuary. The discharge point is located approximately 450m downstream of Lifford Bridge. As the primary discharge is into transitional waters, it is not possible to accurately measure the flow in the receiving water due to tidal variation. However, a conservative estimate of flow can be determined using the 95%ile flow in the River Foyle at Lifford Bridge, which is 7.98 m3/sec (provided by the Agency’s Office of Environmental Assessment Hydro Tool model). The normal flow rate of Lifford’s waste water discharge is 443 m3/day (0.0051 m3/sec). These flow rates indicate there are significant dilutions available in the receiving water, in the order of 1,564 dilutions of the waste water discharge at 95Ohile river flow. Tidal influences add further to the dilution capacity. The primary discharge is routinely grab sampled by Donegal County Council under their urban waste water monitoring programme. The average levels of BOD, COD and suspended solids are shown in Table 1, based on six samples per year. Table 1: Lifford waste water monitoring results, 2008 - 2009

The WWTP provides primary treatment, however because the plant is overloaded it provides limited treatment and the monitoring results indicate there is little or no effective treatment of waste water in the septic tank. Settlement of some solids, grit and heavier materials is all that is being achieved. The RL requires secondary waste water treatment to be provided in Lifford by 31st December 2017. Schedue A of the RL specifies emission limit values (ELVs) for the primary discharge from a new/upgraded WWTP, which will apply from 31St December 2017 (25 mg/l cBOD, 125 mg/l COD, 25 mg/l Suspended Solids, 10 mg/l Ammonia and 5 mg/l Ortho-phosphate). These ELVs are set with the aim of restoring good status in the Foyle estuary by 2021.

In the meantime, Schedue A of the RL sets interim ELVs (primary treatment Oh reduction standards in accordance with the UWWT Directive) on the primary discharge, although these ELVs may be difficult to achieve given the infrastructure that is currently in place. Condition 3.4 of the RL requires the licensee to take such measures as are necessary to ensure that no deterioration occurs in receiving water quality as a result of the discharge.

Page 3 of 17

I Secondary Discharges There are no secondary waste water discharges from the agglomeration. Storm Water OverRows (SWOs) There are two identified SWOs on the collection network, one at Hart's Bar, Bridge Street (SW002) and one at Lifford Roundabout (SW003), which both discharge at the same location into the River Foyle, just upstream of Lifford Bridge. Donegal County Council has stated that neither SWO complies with the DoECLG criteria and it is not known at this time whether they will be decommissioned as part of the sewerage scheme upgrade works. The RL requires the SWOs either to cease or be upgraded to comply with DoECLG criteria by 31' December 2017. Emergency OverROws (EOs)

Table 2. Receiving waters Characteristic Class1ficatton Comment Receiving water Foyle estuary Transitional waters name and type Resource use None reported No drinking water abstraction downstream (d/s) of SWOO1. Amenity value Fishing Popular with anglers Applicable UWWT Regulations Note Appropriate treatment required Regulations as <2,000 p.e. discharging to an estuary. EO Regulations Note Water quality u/s & d/s of SWOOl complies with EQOs for Transitional waters. Designations River Finn SAC (site code 002301) All discharges are directly into River Foyle and tributaries SAC (N. the SACS. Ireland) EPA monitoring Upstream: River Finn station 1100: llkm upstream of SWOO1. stations 43 in 2007, 43-4 in 2011 Downstream: None Transitional waters WFD status Moderate WFD Risk Cateaorv Not available WFD Objective Restore to good status by 2021 WFD protected areas Salmonid Waters - River Finn 2.7 km upstream of SWOOl Other discharges Strabane WWTP Discharge point is located - design capacity 38,000 p.e. 550m d/s of SWOO1. - current loading 23,000 p.e.

Page 4 of 17 Approximately llkm upstream of Lifford, water quality in the River Finn was moderately polluted (43) in 2007, improving to slightly polluted (43-4) in 2011. The Agency's Office of Environmental Assessment (OEA) does not carry out biological monitoring of the River Foyle or Foyle estuary. Ihave consulted with the Environment Agency (NIEA) regarding water quality in the Foyle estuary. They have confirmed that the waterbody is classified as 'moderate' status under the Water Framework Directive. The objective is to restore to 'good' status by 2021. In the North Western IRBD Transitional and Coastal Waters Action Plan, the Foyle estuary is identified as "at risk" or "probably at risk" from point source pressures - WWTPs, combined sewer overflows and treatment plant overflows. Other Discharqes Strabane WWTP discharges into the same stretch of the Foyle estuary, 550m downstream of Lifford's primary discharge. Ihave consulted with the NIEA to get an overview of Strabane WVVTP. It is a secondary treatment system, designed for 38,000 p.e. and currently serving just over 23,000 p.e. Northern Ireland Water Limited is the consent holder for this discharge. The discharge consent was first issued in March 2007, and re-issued in May 2010. The discharge consent authorises five discharges into the Foyle from one outlet point (grid reference 234130 398920), subject to a number of conditions:

0 Discharge A: Secondary treated waste water 0 Discharge B: Settled storm waste water Discharge C: Screened storm waste water and screened waste water in an emergency 0 Discharge D: Screened waste water in an emergency Discharge E: Settled waste water in an emergency. Spot samples of the secondary treated waste water must comply with the following limits, expressed as 95%ile limits and upper tier limits respectively: BOD: 30 mg/l O2and 65 mg/l 02; 0 Suspended Solids: 50 mg/l and 125 mg/l;

0 Ammoniacal Nitrogen (as N): 10 mg/l and 40 mg/l; in addition to limits for pH and a number of specified priority pollutants (cadmium, lead, mercury, copper, zinc, gamma hexachlorocyclohexane, dichlorovous, fenthion, tributyltin oxide). Impact of Discharaes from Lifford WWTP

'aramebr (mg/l) Upstream Downstream Environmental Quality I NoCe 1 Nob 2 Standards -' BOD 2.12 2.49 s 4.0 mgfl Ortho-Phosphate (as P) 0.02 0.024 s 0.060 Ammonia (as NI 0.06 0.08 nla Total Oxidised Nitrogen (as N) 1.08 0.97 nla

Page 5 of 17

I There are no drinking water abstractions from the Foyle estuary downstream of Lifford. There are no designated bathing waters in the vicinity of the waste water discharges. The closest shellfish designated waters (under Northern Ireland legislation) are located in Lough Foyle, greater than 30km downstream of Lifford. Due to the scale of Lifford’s discharges and the distance to the receptor, these shellfish waters are not considered to be adversely impacted by Lifford’s waste water discharges. The primary discharge is directly into a cross-border Special Area of Conservation (SAC); designated as the River Finn SAC in the and the River Foyle and Tributaries SAC in Northern Ireland. An appropriate assessment was undertaken to assess if the discharge from Lifford WWTP is likely to have a significant effect on the European Sites. The Appropriate Assessment concluded that the discharge from Lifford WWTP will not adversely affect the integrity of the SAC subject to the mitigation measures proposed, i.e., the upgrade of Lifford WWTP to secondary treatment. 4. Site Visit Anne Pearson (Inspector, Environmental Licensing Programme) visited the Lifford agglomeration on 22”d July 2010 and met with representatives of Donegal County Council. During the site visit, they viewed the location of the septic tank, the primary discharge location, the storm water overflows and the upstream and downstream monitoring locations on the Foyle estuary. 5. Ambient Monitoring Schedule B: Ambient Monitoring of the RL specifies the parameters, analysis, method and frequency for which ambient monitoring upstream and downstream of the primary discharge shall be carried out. Monitoring shall be undertaken at national monitoring stations RSOlF011500 (upstream), and RSOlF011400 (downstream). 6. Combined Approach The Waste Water Discharge Authorisation Regulations 2007, as amended, specify that a ‘combined approach’ in relation to licensing of waste water works must be taken, whereby the emission limits for the discharge are established on the basis of the stricter of either or both, the limits and controls required under the Urban Waste Water Treatment Regulations (S.I. No. 254 of 2001) as amended, and the limits determined under statute or Directive for the purpose of achieving the environmental objectives established for surface waters, groundwater or protected areas for the water body into which the discharge is made. The RL as drafted gives effect to the principle of the ‘combined approach’ as defined in S.I. No. 684 of 2007. 7. Discharges from agglomerations where no treatment/insufficient treatment is in place Lifford WWTP currently provides primary treatment and is significantly overloaded. An upgrade and expansion of Lifford sewerage scheme is required in order to meet relevant statutory legislation. The programme of improvements specified in the RL is discussed under the next section of this report. 8. Programme of Improvements Lifford sewerage scheme is not listed on the Water Services Investment Programme (WSIP) 2010-2012. It had been listed on the previous WSIP 2007-2009 as a scheme to advance through planning. Donegal County Council acknowledges that secondary treatment is required in order to meet National and European legislation.

Page 6 of 17 I have consulted with the DoECLG Inspector for waste water services in Donegal regarding the upgrade of Lifford sewerage scheme. He has confirmed that the preparation of the preliminary report is due to commence in the near future, and he outlined the timelines involved in the preparation and approval of the preliminary report and contract documents, the tendering process and construction works. He has identified that 2017 is a realistic timeframe for completion of the sewerage scheme upgrade. Having regard to the fact that Lifford sewerage scheme is not listed on the current WSIP, the preliminary report on the upgrade needs has not yet commenced and the Foyle estuary has an extended deadline until 2021 to be restored to good status, the RL requires the provision of secondary treatment in Lifford by 31' December 2017, and the cessation or upgrade of non-compliant SWOs by the same date. These improvements works are specified with a view towards the restoration of good status in the Foyle estuary by 2021. 9. Compliance with EU Directives In considering the application, Ihave had regard to the requirements of Regulation 6(2) of the Waste Water (Discharge) Authorisation, Regulations 2007 and 2010, notably: Water Framework Directive [2000/60/ECI The RL transposes the requirements of the Water Framework Directive. In particular, Cunditiun 3: Discharges provides conditions regulating discharges to waters while Schedule A: Discharges specifies limit values for those substances contained within the waste water discharge. The upgrade of Lifford sewerage scheme will assist in improving water quality in the Foyle estuary, and will contribute towards the restoration of good status in the Foyle estuary by 2021. European Communities Environmental Objectives (Surface Water) Regulations 2009, S.I. No. 272 of 2009 The ambient monitoring data provided by the applicant shows that water quality in the Foyle estuary, both upstream and downstream of Lifford's primary discharge meets the EO Regulations standards for transitional waters. Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive r91/27l/EECI The agglomeration is below the 2,000 p.e. threshold for discharges to estuaries, at which the emission limit values specified in the UWWT Regulations apply. For agglomerations below this threshold, 'appropriate treatment' was required by 31' December 2005. The current WWTP provides primary treatment and is overloaded, therefore the current level of treatment is not considered appropriate treatment. Lifford does not comply with the UWWT Regulations, due to the failure to provide appropriate treatment by 31% December 2005. The RL has regard to the requirements of the UWWT Directive, however Lifford will not comply with the Directive until such time as secondary treatment is provided. The UWWT Directive requires secondary treatment for an agglomeration of greater than 2,000 p.e. discharging to an estuary. Therefore, if the Lifford agglomeration exceeds 2,000 p.e. in the future, the level of treatment will still comply with the UWWT Directive. Drinki ncl Water Directive The Lifford agglomeration discharges to transitional waters. There are no drinking water abstraction points downstream of Lifford WWTP.

Page 7 of 17 EC Freshwater Fish Directive [2006/44/ECl / Salmonid Requlations Upstream of Lifford, the River Finn is a designated salmonid river. However, neither the River Foyle or Foyle estuary are designated salmonid waters. Nonetheless, the upgrade of Lifford waste water works will assist in improving water quality in the Foyle estuary, and contribute to safeguarding the passage of migratory fish to and from the River Finn. Sensitive Waters The Foyle estuary is not classified as sensitive waters under the UWWT Regulations. Bathina Water Directive r2006/7/EC1 There are no designated bathing waters in the vicinity of the waste water discharges. Shellfish Waters Directive r2006/113/ECl There are no shellfish designated waters in the vicinity of Lifford. The closest shellfish designated waters (under Northern Ireland legislation) are in Lough Foyle, greater than 30km downstream of Lifford. Due to the scale of Lifford's discharges and the distance to the receptor, these shellfish waters are not considered to be adversely impacted by Lifford's waste water discharges. Dangerous Substances Directive r2006/1UEC] The applicant has provided once-off sampling results for dangerous substances in the primary discharge. The measured concentrations show exceedences of the EO Regulations standards for copper (90 pg/l compared to 5 pg/l) and zinc (92 pg/l compared to 40 pg/l). However, the EO Regulations specify ambient standards which apply to receiving waters and are not directly applicable to the primary discharge. There are no known industrial sources of copper or zinc in the Lifford agglomeration. The Agency's 'Dangerous Substances Regulations National Implementation Report' (2005) identifies that the geology and the soft waters of Donegal contribute to copper and zinc exceedences recorded in this region. Condition 4.18 of the RL requires the licensee to carry out a risk assessment to determine the priority substances to be monitored, in accordance with the 'Guidance on the Screening for Priority Substances for Waste Water Discharge Licence$ issued by the Agency. Monitoring for the identified priority substances shall be carried out at least annually, unless a case for less frequent monitoring is agreed by the Agency. Birds Directive [79/409/EECl & Habitats Directive r92/43/EEC] The primary discharge is directly into a cross-border Special Area of Conservation (SAC), designated as the River Finn SAC in the Republic and the River Foyle and Tributaries SAC in Northern Ireland. River finn SAC (site code 002301] The River Finn SAC comprises almost the entire freshwater element of the Finn and its tributaries, and includes where the river rises and the tidal stretch of the Foyle north of Lifford to the border. The SAC contains the following Annex I habitats; active blanket bog, lowland oligotrophic lakes, lowland wet heath and transition mires, and also contains Annex I1 species; Atlantic Salmon and Otter. River Fo-yle and Tributaries SAC (N. Ireland) (site code UK0030320) The River Foyle and Tributaries SAC is a large cross-border river, which contains the Annex I habitat; water courses of plain to montane levels with the Ranunculion fluitantis and Callitricho-Batrachion vegetation (plant communities), and the Annex I1 species; Atlantic Salmon and Otter.

Page 8 of 17 Submissions were received from both the NPWS and Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA) regarding the impact of Lifford's waste water discharge on the SACS. Both bodies identify that the sites are potentially vulnerable to deleterious influence on water quality and the proposed consent to discharge requires an assessment under the Habitats Directive. The submissions are discussed further under section 12 of this report. An Appropriate Assessment was undertaken to assess, in view of best scientific knowledge and the conservation objectives of the sites, if the activity, individually or in combination with other plans or projects is likely to have a significant effect on the European Sites. The assessment was completed having regard to the Agency's Waste Water Discharge Licensing Appropriate Assessment Guidance Note. The water-dependent qualifying interests that were identified as being potentially affected by the WWTP discharge are (i) Atlantic Salmon and (ii) Otter. (i) Atlantic Salmon - Likely significance of impacts In the Loughs Agency's 2008 report on the status of Atlantic Salmon in the Finn, they regard the species as being at favourable conservation status. The National Parks and Wildlife Service (NPWS) site synopsis states "The Finn system is one of Ireland's premier salmon waters... . Commercial nething on the Foyle does not begin un~lJune and this gives spring fish a good opportuni&y to get into the Finn. The Finn is important in an international context in that i& populations of spring salmon appear to be stable while declining in many areas of Ireland and ." The Foyle and tributaries has the largest population of Atlantic salmon in Northern Ireland, with around 15O/0 of the estimated spawning numbers. The majority of the salmon returning are grilse (single wintering salmon), with a smaller but important number of spring salmon (multi-wintering salmon) also occurring. Ambient monitoring carried out by Donegal County Council shows that water quality in the Foyle upstream and downstream of Lifford's primary discharge meets the EO Regulations standards for transitional waters. Overall, there is no evidence to suggest that the Lifford waste water discharge is having a significant impact on the status of Atlantic Salmon in the River Finn or River Foyle and Tributaries SAC. (ii) Otter - Likely significance of impacts The main prey of the otter includes fish, frogs, crayfish and eels. Chemical vulnerability relates to prey (principally fish) and the possibility of PCB contamination. Otters are very mobile and the level of human activity in the area is likely to be having a more prevalent effect on the local presence of otters within the vicinity of the discharge. It is unlikely that the Lifford waste water discharge is having a significant effect on the otter population of the catchment, given that water quality upstream and downstream of the primary discharge meets the water quality standards in the Environmental Objectives Regulations. Overall, the Appropriate Assessment demonstrates that the discharge from Lifford WWTP will not adversely affect the integrity of the European Sites subject to the mitigation measures proposed, i.e., the upgrade of Lifford WWTP to provide secondary treatment. The RL requires a high level of protection to the designated sites, as it requires that all discharges from the agglomeration are provided with an appropriate level of treatment.

Page 9 of 17

I Environmental Liabilities Directive [2004/35/ECl Condition 7.2 of the RL satisfies the requirements of the Environmental Liabilities Directive in particular those requirements outlined in Article 3(1) and Annex I11 of 2004/35/EC. Environmental Impact Assessment Directive r85/337/EECl An EIS was not required to be submitted with the licence application and should one be required as part of any programme of improvements/new WWTP, it will be dealt with as per Condition 1.8 of the RL. 10. Cross Office Liaison I have consulted with Inspector David Shannon of the Agency's Ofice of Environmental Enforcement (OEE) in relation to the complaint files PAE2012/85 and PAE2012/23 (see section 12 of this report). Ihave consulted with Rebecca Quinn, Ofice of Environmental Assessment (OEA), regarding 95%ile flow data in the River Foyle. Ihave also consulted with Martin McGarrigle (OEA) regarding water quality in the River Foyle. He has confirmed that the OEA do not monitor this stretch of river. I have consulted with Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA) regarding Strabane WWTP and water quality in the Foyle estuary. Ihave consulted with the DoECLG Inspector for waste water services in Donegal regarding the upgrade of Lifford sewerage scheme. Advice and guidance issued by the Technical Working Group (TWG) was followed in my assessment of this application. Advice and guidance issued by the TWG is prepared through a detailed cross-ofice co-operative process, with the concerns of all sides taken into account. The Board of the Agency has endorsed the advice and guidance issued by the TWG for use by licensing Inspectors in the assessment of wastewater discharge licence applications. 11. Compliance As a discharge to estuarine waters from an agglomeration of less than 2,000 p.e., Lifford does not comply with the UWWT Regulations due to the failure to provide 'appropriate treatment' by 31Q December 2005. 12. Submissions Ten submissions were received in relation to this application. Submissions No. 1,3,6,7,8 81 10 Dates Received Mr. P.E. Lusby, Carrowhugh, Greencastle, Co. Donegal 19/02/2010, 25/05/2012, 30/08/2012, 5/09/2012, 10/09/2012 & 13/09/2012 Mr. Lusby's first submission identifies that he owns a 160 acre island farm 'Islandmore' in the Foyle estuary. He is concerned about the effects of sewage on crops and grazing on his island if the levies (embankments) were breached. Potatoes from his &land are sold to wholesalers in , who supply to schools. Mr. Lusby's second submission identifies that Donegal County Council were prosecuted by the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commissiod in Letterkenny

The Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission (FCILC) is legislated for by the NorthJSouth Co- operation (Implementation Bodies) (NI) Order 1999 and the British-Irish Agreement Act 1999. The functions of the FCILC in relation to the Foyle and Carlingford Areas are exercised by the Loughs Agency of the FCILC.

Page 10 of 17 District Court on 13/12/2010, for the unlawful dscharge of deleterious matter from Lifford WWTP. Mr. Lusby's third submksion refers to a recent noticd served on him by Donegal County Council which he claims will mean that he is no longer in a position to prevent his island from being contaminated by polluted water. He identifies that the pollution emanates from Lifford and Coolatee waste water discharge poink. Mr. Lusby has contacted the Food Safety Authority of Ireland (FSAI) as the safety of food production is paramount. As a landowner affected by this pollution, Mr. Lusby requests written assurance from the Agency that harmful bacteria are not contained in these discharges which have polluted his property in the past (he refers to Donegal County Councirs report3 of sewage on Islandmore in 2000 and 2011). Mr. Lusby's third submision contains a number of attachmenix 0- A booklec 'Protecting You and Your family from Brucellosis produced by HSENI (Health and Safety Executive for Northern Ireland). (F) A Donegal County Council internal report on the investMation of a complaint received from Mr. L usby regardng suspected pollution of his lands at Islandmore (January 2000). (iig A Donegal County Council pollution investMation report on Lifford septic tank, following a complaint received from Mr. Lusby that raw sewage had washed up on his property at Islandmore (May 201 1). (7v) Copies of two letters sent to Laura Burke, Director Genera4 EPA, from Mr. Lusby (received by the Agency on Ish and 1gh May 2012) concerning alleged water pollution of the Foyle by Donegal County Council. (v) A newspaper article 'The undiluted truth about chemicals in our waters' printed in the Irish Times, shJanuary 2012. Mr. L usby's fourth submission contains two attachmenix (I] The brucellosis advice booklet (as previously submitted); and 07) A copy of a letter from NPWY to Director of Services, Water, Environment and Emergency Services, Donegal County Council regardng sewage effluent discharge into the River Foyle (26h January 2012). Mr. Lusby's fifth submision contains a copy of the Loughs Agency case file on the prosecution of Donegal County Council by the FCILC in Letterkenny District Court on 13/12/2010. The case file contains copies of all correspondence between the relevant parties, the witness statemenk of the fisheries oficers, the technical investMation report on the examination of the sample taken from the River Foyle at Lifford, and a number of photographs taken during the investbation. Mr. L usby's sixth submision contains a publication from the Food Safety Authority of Ireland (FSAI) entitled 'Food Safety Implications of Land-spreadng Agriculturab MunicNaI and Industrial Organic Materials on Agricultural Land used for Food Production in Ireland: Mr. Lusby requesk that the Agency consider the fact3 in this document having regard to the historic' ongoing and potential health risks associated with the contamination of a food source (the island).

* In a telephone call on 28thAugust 2012, Mr. Lusby clarified that the notice served by Donegal County Council requires him to cease his quarrying activities at the island. The notice has not been included as part of the submission. The letter from NPWS to Donegal County Council outlines the same issues regarding Appropriate Assessment as those raised in the NPWS submission below (Submission No. 4).

Page 11 of 17

I Response: The contents of these submissions, including all attachments, have been taken into consideration. Mr. Lusby’s island farm is located approximately 900m downstream of Lifford’s primary discharge (see map in Appendix A). It is noted that Strabane WWTP outfall is located approximately 550m downstream of Lifford’s primary discharge and therefore approximately 350 upstream of the island farm. In addition to his written submissions, Mr. Lusby has also made a number of phone calls and sent emails to Agency staff to express his concerns regarding the waste water discharges from Lifford and Coolatee housing development. Inspectors Patrick Byrne and Aoife Loughnane met with Mr. Lusby and his advisor, Mr. Padraig O’Siochain, on 27th October 2011 to discuss their concerns and to explain the waste water discharge licensing process. During this meeting, Mr. Lusby identified that in 1997 there was an outbreak of Brucellosis in his cattle, which he attributes to sewage washing up on his island. He also referred to Donegal County Council’s pollution investigation following his complaint that raw sewage had washed up on his island in May 2011. He stated that the results of split samples taken from the Lifford septic tank outlet, analysed in an independent laboratory on his behalf, differ significantly from the results measured by the Council. The Council’s report on the investigation appears to cast doubt over the origin of the sample presented by Mr. Lusby, stating that “it is analytically very different from the sample obtained from DCC‘S &charge from Lifford Septic tank. This suggests that it emanated from another treatment system or septic tank, possibly even a domestic septic tanK’. Notwithstanding the variance in sample results, the fact remains that the current waste water works in Lifford is inadequate in terms of the failure to provide appropriate treatment prior to discharge to the Foyle estuary. The RL requires a major upgrade of Lifford waste water works, including the provision of a secondary WWTP and upgrade of the waste water collection network. The RL sets timeframes for the upgrading works to be completed and requires monitoring of the final effluent and receiving water quality. The overall objective is to restore good status in the Foyle estuary by 2021. In the meantime, the RL sets interim ELVs on the primary discharge until the new WWTP is put in place, and Condition 3.4 requires the licensee to take such measures as are necessary to ensure that no deterioration occurs in the receiving water quality as a result of the discharge. Coolatee housing development, identified by My. Lusby, is located outside the Lifford agglomeration boundary. On 2”d August 2012, the OEE instructed Donegal County Council to submit a Certificate of Authorisation application for the discharge from Coolatee housing development. The Certificate of Authorisation application was received by the Agency on 6th September 2012 and is currently being assessed. Donegal County Council have provided details of the prosecution taken by the Foyle, Carlingford and Irish Lights Commission (FCILC) in Letterkenny District Court on 13/12/2010. The offence, to which the Council pleaded guilty, was that on 15/12/2009, it caused/permitted deleterious matter to fall into the River Foyle at Lifford contrary to Section 171(1) of the Fisheries (Consultation) Ad, 1959 as extended to the Moville area (the part of the Foyle area in line within this state) by Section 10 of the Foyle Fisheries (Amendment) Act, 1961 and as amended On 15/12/2009, officers of the FCILC discovered a serious discharge of effluent coming from the pipe just below the Council’s septic tank at Lifford. The pipe entered the River Foyle at that location and the discharge was found to be grey in colour which was believed to be coming from the settlement tank. They took a sample at the discharge point and the analysis subsequently showed a BOD concentration of 239 mg/l and suspended solids concentration of 206 mg/l. This was

Page 12 of 17 taken to confirm that the discharge was deleterious matter. No upstream or downstream samples were taken. Donegal County Council entered a guilty plea, as this was a strict liability offence and the Council had no licence to discharge. The application to the EPA for a waste water discharge licence was pending at that date. In making a case for mitigation, the Council committed to doing what it could to minimise the discharges but that the long term solution lay in replacement with a modern treatment plant. Donegal County Council claim they made the point that the river at this location is a wide free flowing river in which there would be substantial dilution of any effluent entering into it, and particularly at the time of year this incident occurred. The Judge imposed a fine of €500 plus total costs and expenses in the sum of €1,705.50. The OEE is also dealing with Mr. Lusby's complaints (Ref. PAE2012/85) and have requested Donegal County Council, pending the proposed WPupgrade, to review the operation of the existing WWTP to ensure that its operation is optimised and that a regular maintenance programme is in place, including desludging and maintenance of screens. Donegal County Council have informed OEE that they installed a new bar screen at Lifford septic tank last year, and they are currently designing new access chambers to allow for the desludging of the tank. The OEE requested further information on plant inspections, maintenance programme, procedures for operation and maintenance of screens, visual assessments of plant impacts, records of desludging carried out at the plant, and all maintenance and improvement actions taken at the plant over the past six months along with any plans to optimise the operation of the existing primary treatment system. Donegal County Council have informed OEE that the bar screen is cleaned every second day as a matter of routine, and there is no mechanical or electrical plant on-site so the maintenance consists of site inspections by Donegal County Council personnel, who clean the bar screen. Donegal County Council have informed the Agency that a contract has been awarded for the work required to allow access to the tank for desludging. The OEE file on this complaint remains open.

I Submission No. 2 I DateReceived I I Mr. Mark McGavigan, Curraghalane, Lifford, Co. Donegal I 10/02/20K! I This submission was received as a complaint to OEE on a C3 complaint form4, and was forwarded to the ELP for consideration as part of the licence application. Mr. McGavigan is a resident of Curraghalane, Lifford. He states that sewage has been running into his rear garden from an overflowing manhole at Beechwood Grove for the past 10 years and it is getting worse. The wall at the rear of his garden collapsed in October 2011 because of the volume of water overflowing from the manhole. He states that Donegal County Council has not sorted this problem since the construction of houses in Beech wood. Response: The contents of this submission have been noted. The OEE is dealing with this complaint (Ref. PAE2012/23) and a report submitted by Donegal County Council suggests that the overflow is mainly groundwater but is also influenced by sewage, possibly linked with a private septic tank. The matter has not yet been

A 'C3 complaint form' relates to local authority environmental protection responsibilities, and may be Submitted by a member of the public to the Agency's Office of Environmental Enforcement (OEE) if that person believes that a local authority has failed to respond to their complaint and the environmental pollution problem persists. The OEE will, generally, only investigate complaints relating to local authority functions where there is clear evidence that the local authority has been made aware of the complaint and has been given an opportunity to deal with and resolve the issue.

Page 13 of 17

I satisfactorily resolved however, and the exact source of the flooding has not been verified. The OEE file on this complaint remains open. Condition 5.6 of the RL requires the licensee to investigate the source of these uncontrolled spillages within six months of the date of grant of licence. If the source is Donegal County Council’s waste water works (which they suggest it is not), then they must identify & implement appropriate improvement measures to eliminate these uncontrolled spillages.

I Submission No. 4 I Date Received ~~ ~ ~~~ ~ Mr. William Cormacan, Divisional Ecologist, National Parks & 09/07/2012 Wildlife Service, Department of Arts, Heritage &the Gaeltacht, Ballinafad, via Boyle, Co. Sligo. Mr. Cormacan states that following complaints, NPWS staff have inspected the discharge OUMOWat Lifford on a number of occasions. They noted relatively untreated sewage effluent being discharged from Lifford WWTP OUMOWp@e into the River Foyle. This section of the River Foyle is part of the River Finn SAC (site code 002301), a Natura 2000 site. The NPWS are of the opinion that the &charge of relatively untreated sewage effluent into the River Foyle has the potential to significantly impact on the integrity of the Natura 2000 site. They are of the view that this activity could s@nificantly damage/destroy the habitat of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) and Otter (Lutra lutra), both of which are species listed in Annex II of the Habitats Directive and are qualifj/ing featuresbnterests for the River Finn SAC. The Otter is also listed in Annex IV of the Habitats Directive. Any proposal that would be likely to cause impact on the breeding or resting habitat of this species would directly contravene Regulation 51 of the European Communities (6irds and Natural Habitats) Regulations 2011, and the EUjudgement against Ireland in case C-183/05. The NPWS are also of the view that this activity could signficantly damage/destroy wet grassland, and habitats prone to and maintained by flooding, which are important components of the SAC. The potential impacts would be caused by the deterioration of the water quality in the River Foyle resulting from pollution from the discharge and the consequential effects on the habitats and species listed above. Mr. Cormacan draws attention to Regulation 27 of the European Communities (Birds and Natural Habitats) Regulations 2011, which refers to the duties of public authorities in relation to nature conservation. Mr. Cormacan also draws attention to the Water Framework Directive and EC (Water Policy) Regulations 2003. It is a national oblBation to achieve good status in all waters by 2015 and to ensure that status does not deteriorate in any waters. Mr. Cormacan states that an Appropriate Assessment (as outlined in Article 6(3) of the Habitats Directive) is required as part of the waste water discharge authorisation proces, as the discharge of waste water into the River Foyle has the potential to s@nificantlyimpact on the integrity of a Natura 2000 site. It is the opinion of the NPWS that the discharge of waste water into the River Foyle by Donegal County Council may not be fully in compliance with the Habitats Directive and the Water Framework Directive. They trust that the Agency will fully consider the above and will ensure that the waste water discharge authorisation process will be in compliance with the requirements of the Habitats Directive, the Birds Directive and the EC (6irds and Natural Habitats) Regulations 2011.

Page 14 of 17 Response: The contents of this submission have been noted. The matter of Appropriate Assessment under the Habitats Directive has been discussed earlier in this report under Section 9. Compliance with EU Directives - Birds Directive [79/409/EEC] & Habitats Directive [92/43/EEC]. Overall, the Appropriate Assessment demonstrates that the activity will not adversely affect the integrity of the European Sites subject to the mitigation measures proposed, i.e. the upgrade of Lifford WWTP to provide secondary treatment. The provision of secondary treatment in Lifford will contribute to improved water quality in the Foyle estuary.

Submission No. 5 Date Received Mr. John McCartney, Director of Conservation & Protection, 11/07/2012 Loughs Agency, 22 Victoria Road, Prehen, Londonderry, BT47 2AB The loughs Agency is the statutory body charged with the consewation, protection and development of inland fisheries within the Foyle and Carlingford systems, the promotion of development of loughs Foyle and Carkngford, and catchments for commercial and recreational purposes in respect of marine, fishery and aquaculture issues and the development of marjne tourism. The loughs Agency considers that the current treatment and the infiastructural network at Lifford are unsatisfactory. They have received complaints about sewage oveh'ow from a pumping station at Lifford and would kke to see immediate action taken by the local authority to address the above issues. The Lifford works final effluent should be treated to a standard compliant with the UWWT Directive as a minimum. Howevec given the proximity and hydrological connectivity to the River Foyle and THbutarfes SAC, the River Rnn SAC and the current consewation status and vulnerabikty of the Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar), the 1oughs Agency would prefer to see appropHate secondary treated &charge for BOD, suspended solids and ammoniacal nitrogen of a modern standard in the range Ofi o BOD: 20-4Omg/l o SS: 30-6Omg/l o NH3: 5 - 15 mg/l (subject to any appropriate model). Furthermore, all storm or emergency &charges must have a maximum of 6mm bar screens. Telemetry should be available on pumping stations to indicate failure. There should be an evaluation of the network system to assess storm ingress. If the Wwrw is to be upgraded, consideration should be given to extendng the network to any areas where there is inadequate provision or accumulation of septic tanks. The applicant and licensing authority must also demonstrate compliance with the Water Framework and Habitats Directives as required. The applicant should also be aware that it is an offence under section 41 of the Foyle Rsheries Act (1952) to cause pollution which is det~mentalto fisheries interests. Response: The contents of this submission have been noted. The RL requires a major upgrade of Lifford waste water works, including the provision of a secondary WWTP and upgrade of the waste water collection network. The following provisions of the RL address the issues raised in the submission: o Schedule A: Dkcharges and Discharge MonitoHng specifies limits of 25mg/I BOD, 125 mg/l COD, 25mg/1 Suspended Solids, 10 mg/l Ammonia and 5 mg/l

Page 15 of 17 Ortho-Phosphate on the primary discharge from the upgraded secondary WWTP. o Schedule C: Specified Improvement Programme requires upgrading of storm water overflows to comply with DoECLG criteria. o Condition 5.2.4 requires the licensee to assess all emergency overflows to determine the effectiveness of their operation. Any remedial actions shall be included in the specified improvement programme under Schedule C. o Condition 5.2.2 requires an assessment of the integrity of the waste water works having regard to infiltration by storm-water, amongst other items.

I Submission No. 9 I DateReceived I Mr. Bob Davidson, Conservation Designations & Protection, 10/09/2012 Northern Ireland Environment Agency, Klondyke Building, Cromac Avenue, Gasworks Business Park, Belfast Bl7 2JA Northern Ireland Environment Agency (NIEA) Conservation Designations and Protection (CDP) is responsible for the protection of Northern Ireland's designated site network. CDP expresses concerns regarding the quality of effluent discharging from Lifford WWTP to the River Foyle and Tributaries SAC. The features of the site include Atlantic salmon, Otter and River Habitat. The site also acts as a migration route for Atlantic salmon with respect to the Owenkillew River SAC. As such, these sites are potentially vulnerable to deleterious influence on water quality and the proposed consent to discharge will require an assessment under the Habitats Directive. CDP advises that the Agency only issue consent to discharge to Donegal County Council where it can be certain beyond reasonable scientific doubt that there will be no significant adverse effects on the integrity of the aforementioned SACS. In the event that any doubt exists as to the ability of the WWTP to produce a final effluent of suficient quality to protect the receiving environment, CDP would advise that the application is refused. CDP also advises that all other relevant water quality protection measures are enforced with regard to this proposaJ. They note that Donegal County CounciJ has readily acknowledged in its application, an inability of the current facility to meet the requirements of the Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive. Therefore, it is of paramount importance that the site is upgraded to the relevant standard. Response: The contents of this submission have been noted. The existing WWTP is not considered to provide appropriate treatment and an upgrade of Lifford WWTP is required. The matter of Appropriate Assessment under the Habitats Directive has been discussed earlier in this report under Section 9. Compliance with EU Directives - Birds Directive [79/409/EEC] & Habitats Directive [92/43/EEC]. Overa II, the Appropriate Assessment demonstrates that the activity will not adversely affect the integrity of the European Sites subject to the mitigation measures proposed, i.e. the upgrade of Lifford WWTP to provide secondary treatment. The RL requires the upgrade to secondary treatment within a specified timeframe, i.e., by 31/12/2017. This will contribute to improved water quality in the Foyle estuary.

Page 16 of 17 13. Charges The RL sets an annual charge for the agglomeration at €5,238.50 and is reflective of the monitoring and enforcement regime being proposed for the agglomeration.

14. Recommendation I recommend that a Final Licence be issued subject to the conditions and for the reasons as set out in the attached Recommended Licence.

Signed

Inspector Environmental Licensing Programme

Page 17 of 17 Appendix A: Lifford waste water discharges & receiving waters

wD

swos (SW002 & SW0031 I