Attachment E.2
River Rye Monitoring
The water quality of the river water was monitored on the basis of the Irish standard S.1 294 of 1989, taken from the EC (Quality of Surface Water Intended for the Abstraction of Drinking Water) Regulations, 1989. These Regulations categorise surface water as Al, A2 or A3, depending on the suitability for the abstraction of surface water for drinking water. Al requires very little treatment and A3 would require more treatment. All reported parameters for each monitoring point are within the limits set out for surface waters in categories Al, A2 and A3.
The results obtained for this monitoring event are indicative of a good quality surface water environment. It is noted that the quality of the surface waters sampled from the River Rye are broadly similar both upstream and downstream of the Intel Ireland Site, indicating the surface water discharges from this site have no significant impact on its quality.
Monitoring Results for River Rye Water - May 28,2003
I pH Units 8.2 8.3 8.3 8.3 8.3 5.8-8.5
13.9 13.9 14.2 14.1 14.2 25 97.2 98.6 98.2 104.2 100.1 >60 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 5 Suspended Solids mg/l <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 50 For inspection purposes only. Consent1.5 of copyright 1.4 owner required1.4 for any other1.6 use. 1.5 11.3 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 - Ammonia (as N) mg/l 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.2 18.4 17.8 17.9 19.2 18.2 250 co.1 0.1 1 Phosphate (as P) mg/l <0.16 co.16 co.16 <0.16 co.16 0.22 pghll <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 50 <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 50 <2 <2 3 <2 <2 50 2 2 2 2 2 - <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 50 <2 <2 <2 <2 2 - <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 -
EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:54 Monitoring Results for River Rye Water - Sept, 2003
,,‘z:ii I I’ 2; $‘,“w,““‘ 1 _, ,, -. :<: %“F:r4” linn:“” * ,sj*, c i i“7*w. 49% I; ;q@,,, ;“: ,-~~~~.&~,~~~ ~~~~~~ :‘*g&gy,r.:j>f, (( 2 ~:,&@g gyg&” ,g@y ,_ ,,J&%m 7 ,s _, For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:54 Monitoring Results for River Rye Water - April, 2004 conductivity pS/cm 678 675 674 670 643 1000 Temperature “C 10.5 10.9 11.9 11.8 11.5 25 D.O. % 61 64 66 67 68 >60 BOD mgn <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 5 Suspended Solids wn <5 <5 <5 <5 <5 50 Nitrate (as N) WY 2.5 2.5 2.4 2.4 2.3 11.3 Nitrite w3n co.02 <0.02 <0.02 co.02 co.02 - Ammonia (as N) wn 0.1 0.06 0.06 0.03 0.04 0.2 Chloride mgn c 22.5 22.5 22.3 22.2 22.1 250 Fluoride mgn co.1 co.1 co.1 co. 1 co.1 1 Phosphate (as P) mgn 0.04 <0.16 co.16 co.16 co.16 0.22 Arsenic Ygn <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 50 Chromium wfl <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 50 Copper l-m <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 50 Nickel Ygn 5 4 4 4 4 Lead I-M <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 50 Tin /-en <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 - Cobalt clgn <2 <2 <2 <2 <2 - For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:54 Monitoring Results for River Rye Water - November, 2004 3’ s’_ PH pH Units 8.1 8.1 8.2 8.2 8.2 5.5-8.5 Conductivity @Vcrn 708 712 714 715 715 1000 Temperature “C 9.0 9.4 9.0 9.7 9.2 25 D.O. % 79.2 78.2 77.4 71.6 73.5 >60 BOD mg/l <2 3 <2 4 4 5 Suspended Solids wn <5 10 14 13 <5 50 Nitrate (as N) mgn 2.08 2.08 2.08 2.17 2.15 11.3 Nitrite wn 0.03 co.03 <0.03 co.03 <0.03 - Ammonia (as N) mgn 0.05 0.07 0.06 0.07 0.07 0.2 Chloride mgn 22.6 22.8 21.8 22.7 22.5 250 Fluoride wn co.1 For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:55 For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:55 For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:55 l IPPC Application Form Attachment E.3.1: Storm Water Quality Data Q4 2004 Results of Surface Water Analvses Emission Reference Point: SW1 Quarter: 4 Year: 2005 For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. Page I of I Intel Ireland EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:55 For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:55 TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 .O INTRODUCTION ...... 1 2.0 TOPOGRAPHY & GEOLOGY ...... 1 3.0 MATERIALS AM) METHODS ...... 2 3.1 Macroinvertebrate Community Assessment ...... 2 3.2 Fish Studies ...... 2 4.0 RESULTS ...... 4 4.1 Macroinvertebrate Surveillance ...... 4 4.1.1 Macroinvertebrate Community Composition ...... 4 4.1.2 Site 2-below Kilkock ...... 4 4.1.3 Site 4-Kildare Bridge ...... 4 4.1.4 Site 5-Sandford’s Bridge ...... 5 4.1.5 Site 7-Stone Landbridge ...... 5 4.1.6 Site S-Upstream of Aquaduct ...... 5 4.1.7 Site 11-Maynooth...... 6 4.1.8 Biological Assessment of Water Quality ...... 9 4.2 Fish Surveillance ...... 12 4.2.1 Salmonid Populations in Sections l-3...... 12 For inspection purposes only. 4.2.2 Age Composition ofConsent the of Salmonid copyright owner Populations required for any other ...... use. 12 4.2.3 Section 1 (SIC & SlE)...... 13 4.2.4 Section 2 (S2C, S2-El & S2-E2) ...... 14 4.2.5 Section 3 (S3C, S3-El, S3-E2 & S3-E3)...... 15 4.2.6 Length Frequency ...... 16 4.2.7 Growth ...... 17 4.2.8 Fish Condition ...... 19 4.2.9 Salmonid Stock Density & Biomass ...... 20 5.0 CONCLUDING REMARKS ...... 22 6.0 REFERENCES ...... 24 APPENDICES A-D ...... 25-36 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:55 1 .O INTRODUCTION The limnological survey of the Rye Water was first initiated in 1994 prior to a fisheries rehabilitation program and has continued annually since. The survey incorporates a physical, chemical and biological assessment of the river. The methods employed are outlined again for completeness in the ‘Materials & Methods’ section. They have remained consistent from year to year thus allowing true comparisons to be made with the data. The extent of the ecological information now available on the Rye is invaluable and any changes in the ecology of the river will thus be apparent. This report was compiled by AQUENS and commissioned by Intel Ireland Ltd. It is the eleventh report, presenting findings of the 2004 annual limnological survey of the Rye Water. It was undertaken over a two month period, June-July. 0 2.0 TOPOGRAPHY & GEOLOGY The Rye Water, a tributary of the River Liffey is approximately 26km in length. It rises in the north-central region of County Kildare. The Rye flows over a geology of Upper Carboniferous limestone. For much of its course, the Rye drains predominantly farmland with little or no gradient present. The main land-uses in the catchment area are agriculture with some residential housing. The Rye Water is considered one of the most important salmon spawning grounds in the Liffey catchment. For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. AQUENS I EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:55 3.0 MATERIALS & METHODS 3.1 Macroinvertebrate Community Assessment Three replicate fauna1 samples were collected from six sites in June 2004. The sites surveyed were: Site 11 the Lyreen River in Maynooth, Site 2 the Rye Water below Kilcock, Site 4 the Rye Water at JSildare Bridge, Site 5 the Rye Water at Sandford’s Bridge, Site 7 the Rye Water at the Stone Landbridge and Site 8 the Rye Water above the Aquaduct at Leixlip. The twenty-second kick sampling method was employed at all sites. Samples were stored in 70% alcohol. All samples were passed through a 355 om sieve before sorting in a white tray. Macroinvertebrates were identified to the highest taxonomic level possible. Simuliids, chironomids and oligochaetes were counted. A Q-value was assigned to each site using the Environmental Protection Agency water quality rating (McGarrigle et al., 2002) (Appendix A). This system is a five point scale, Ql (serious pollution) to Q5 (unpolluted) based on the relative abundance of five categories fauna from pollution sensitive to pollution tolerant fauna. The BMWP (Biological Monitoring Working Party) score and the ASPT (Average Score per Taxon) were determined for each site (Appendix B). The BMWP score is based on the presence of pollution tolerant to pollution sensitive families. Each family is assigned a score. For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. The BMWP score is the sum of these scores. Families that are sensitive to pollution are assigned higher scores than pollution tolerant families. A high overall score indicates that the water quality is good. The ASPT is determined by dividing the BMWP score by the number of scoring taxa. 3.2 Fish Studies Electrofishing operations were carried out on a stretch of the Rye Water located downstream of Sandford’s Bridge. Nine sites in total were fished, they were: SlC, Sl E, S2C, S2-El, S2- E2, S3C, S3-El, S3-E2, S3-E3. The surveys took place over the months of June and July 2004. The length and width of each stretch was measured. Stop nets were used to isolate each river stretch and contain the fish. This allowed quantitative results to be generated. Each Section was fished repeatedly using two boats mounted with generators, in order to achieve an adequate depletion. An estimate of population size could then be derived. If only AQUENS 2 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:55 two catches were considered necessary, then the population density was estimated by the two-catch method of Seber & Le Cren, (1967). The Zippin model was employed when three catches were necessary (Zippin, 1958). In the event that data were considered inadequate the number of fish captured was divided by the area fished in order to calculate a minimum population size. All fish were identified, measured and weighed. Scales were removed from below the dorsal fin, placed in envelopes and returned to the laboratory for age analysis. The scales were used to age and back-calculate the lengths of fish. They were then placed in Fyke nets in the river to ensure full recovery prior to release. Fish condition factors and biomass were also determined. For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. AQUENS 3 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:55 4.0 RESULTS 4.1 Macroinvertebrate Surveillance 4.1.1 Macroinvertebrate Community Composition A total of 46 taxa were recorded across all sites in the 2004 survey of the Rye Water (Table 1). Five taxa, namely, Asehs aquaticus (L.), Swatella ignita Poda, Elks aenea (Miller), Chironomidae and Oligochaeta, occurred at all sites. The abundance of each of these taxa generally differed from site to site. The Chironomidae predominant at every site. Six taxa had single site occurrences and were scarce in abundance. The sensitive Plecoptera group were represented by one individual, Leuctra hippopus Kempny. Another sensitive group the Heptageniidae were also poorly represented, recorded at two sites only. 4.1.2 Site 2-Below Kilcock A total of 19 taxa were recorded at this site. The Ephemeroptera were represented by three families, Ephemerellidae, Caenidae and Baetidae. The latter was poorly represented by two individual Baetis spp., a similar finding to the 2003 survey. The Coleoptera were represented by three species the most numerous of which was Brychius elevatus (Panzer). One trichopteran species was recorded. Chironomids were the dominant fauna (84%) at this site followed by the Swatella ignita Poda (7%). In 2003, the gammarids Fordominated, inspection purposes however, only. they were not recorded in high Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. abundance in the present survey. AseZZus spp. accounted for ~3% of the total fauna, compared to 18% in 2003. A further decline in the percentage contribution by SernteZZa ignita observed in 2003 was found. 4.1.3 Site 4Xildare Bridge This site supported 13 taxa compared to 24 in 2003. Two species of Ephemeroptera, Trichoptera and Coleoptera were recorded at this site. No Baetidae or Heptageniidae were found. Chironomids were again the most abundant taxa constituting 73% of the total abundance as in 2003. The AseZZus spp. was the next best represented group accounting for 11% of the total fauna. The Hirudinea had good abundance (6%). The Ephemeroptera accounted for less than 1% of the total fauna present compared to 8% in 2003. A further decline in mayfly abundance was observed again in 2004. The Coleoptera and Ganzmavus spp. each accounted for ~1% of the total fauna. AQUENS 4 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:55 (I,‘,IWl.4‘ Ll‘,,l,l”‘“X‘C“L I\CL/“,‘ ,“I L,‘c. I\“C ,,U‘C, L”“-r 4.1.4 Site 5-Sandford’s Bridge This site along with Site 8, shares the greatest diversity with 32 taxa recorded. This site also supported the best taxon richness in 2003. There were seven species of Ephemeroptera, six Coleoptera and five Trichoptera present. A total of seven species of mollusc were recorded from the samples. This site has maintained a high diversity since 2002. No gammarids were recorded at this site. As in 2003, the white-clawed crayfish Austropotamobius pallipes Lereboullet were found. The Heptageniidae were represented by one individual only, Ecdyonurus spp . Chironomids were the dominant fauna accounting for 78% of the total fauna. The gastropods were the next most abundant taxa at 8%. The mayfly constituted 8% of the total fauna, the Caenidae being most abundant within this group (5%). In the previous two years, the Chironomidae, Gastropoda and Caenidae also predominated. 4.1.5 Site 5-StoneLand Bridge A total of 28 taxa were recorded at Site 5, one taxon less than in 2003. The Ephemeroptera were the most diverse group being represented by six species the most numerous of which was Caenis rivulorum spp. Five Trichoptera and four species of Coleoptera were recorded. The molluscs were represented by four species though in low abundance. As in 2003, Hydropsyche siEtaZai (Diihler) were the only Hydropsychid encountered. For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. The dominant fauna at this site was the Gastropoda accounting for 5 1% of the total fauna, 0 followed by the Chironomidae (26%). The reverse pattern was observed in 2003. The percentage contributed by the Caenidae of 2% was lower than the figure of 13% in 2003 and 15% in 2002. 4.1.6 Site S-Upstream of the Aquaduct This site supported 32 taxa. It was the only site where the Plecoptera were represented albeit by one individual Leuctra hippopus Kempny The sensitive mayfly Heptageniidae was also recorded here. Five other species of Ephemeroptera were found in the samples taken. Five trichopteran, six molluscs and four coleopteran species were recorded. As with the majority of sites, the Chironomidae were the dominant fauna (47%). The Gastropoda and Simuliidae accounted for 17% and 12%, respectively. The percentage AQUENS 5 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:55 representation of Trichoptera and Coleoptera was 9% and 6%, respectively. The Chironomidae and Gastropoda were also prevalent in 2003 and 2002. 4.1.7 Site 11-Maynooth This site located on the Lyreen, supported 24 taxa, representing a slight increase in diversity since 2003. The molluscs were the most diverse group though they occurred in low abundance. Three ephemeropteran species recorded two families, the Baetidae and Ephemereliidae. The Coleoptera and Trichoptera were each represented by one species. Two species of Hirudinea were found, HeZobdeEZa stagnaZis (L.) and ErpobdeZZa octoculata 6). The Chironomids dominated (58%) followed by Baetis rhodani (Pictet) (11%). The latter was recorded in high abundance at this site as compared to any other site surveyed. No Gammarus spp. was recorded. The Simuliidae and Hydracarina each accounted for 8% of the total fauna. Unlike 2003, the Gastropoda did not have a good percentage representation, accounting for ~1% of the fauna. For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. AQUENS 6 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:55 4.1.4 Site 5-Sandford’s Bridge This site along with Site 8, shares the greatest diversity with 32 taxa recorded. This site also supported the best taxon richness in 2003. There were seven species of Ephemeroptera, six Coleoptera and five Trichoptera present. A total of seven species of mollusc were recorded from the samples. This site has maintained a high diversity since 2002. No gammarids were recorded at this site. As in 2003, the white-clawed crayfish Austropotamobius pallipes Lereboullet were found. The Heptageniidae were represented by one individual only, Ecdyonurus spp. Chironomids were the dominant fauna accounting for 78% of the total fauna. The gastropods were the next most abundant taxa at 8%. The mayfly constituted 8% of the total fauna, the Caenidae being most abundant within this group (5%). In the previous two years, the Chironomidae, Gastropoda and Caenidae also predominated. 4.1.5 Site 5-StoneLand Bridge A total of 28 taxa were recorded at Site 5, one taxon less than in 2003. The Ephemeroptera were the most diverse group being represented by six species the most numerous of which was Caenis rivzdorum spp. Five Trichoptera and four species of Coleoptera were recorded. The molluscs were represented by four species though in low abundance. As in 2003, Hydropsyche siltalai (Dijhler) were the only Hydropsychid encountered. For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. The dominant fauna at this site was the Gastropoda accounting for 51% of the total fauna, followed by the Chironomidae (26%). The reverse pattern was observed in 2003. The percentage contributed by the Caenidae of 2% was lower than the figure of 13% in 2003 and 15% in 2002. 4.1.6 Site S-Upstream of the Aquaduct This site supported 32 taxa. It was the only site where the Plecoptera were represented albeit by one individual Leuctra hippopus Kempny The sensitive mayfly Heptageniidae was also recorded here. Five other species of Ephemeroptera were found in the samples taken. Five trichopteran, six molluscs and four coleopteran species were recorded. As with the majority of sites, the Chironomidae were the dominant fauna (47%). The Gastropoda and Simuliidae accounted for 17% and 12%, respectively. The percentage AQUENS 5 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:55 Table 1 Average number of each invertebrate species found at each site, June 2004. Taxon Family Species/genus Site 2 Site4 Site5 Site7 Site8 Site 11 Crustacea Asellidae Asellus aquaticus (L.) 63.67 27.33 4.00 5.00 3.33 40.33 Gunmzu~~rsduebeni (Lilj .) 2.33 3.33 - 0.33 - - Astacidae Austropotamobiuspallipes (L.) - 0.67 - 0.33 - Plecoptera Leuctridae Leuctra hippopus Kempny 0.33 - Ephemeroptera Baetidae Baetis spp. 0.67 - 5.67 1.67 19.00 4.33 Baetis rhoclani(Pictet.) 5.33 5.00 19.33 69.67 Baetis muticus (L.) 1.67 3.33 6.67 1.00 Baetis scambus Eaton 1.33 0.33 - - Ephemerelliidae Seratella ignita Poda 154.00 0.67 79.00 26.67 19.67 3.67 Caenidae Caenis rivulorum Eaton 6.33 - 130.33 46.67 95.33 - Caenis luctuosa Eaton 7.67 1.00 29.33 5.33 2.33 - Caenis spp. 0.67 - 7.33 2.33 2.00 - Heptageniidae Ecdyonunrs spp. 0.33 - 0.33 - Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Hydropsyche siltalai (Diihler) - 12.33 39.67 38.00 - Polcentropodidae Polycen~opus/7avomaculatus (Pictet.) - 4.00 0.33 1.33 - spp. indet - 0.33 - - - Rhyacophilidae Rh.vacophila dorsalis (Curtis) - 2.33 5.67 4.67 - Limnephilidae Hulesus radiutus (Curtis) 0.33 - 0.67 - - - Limnephilus Iunatus Curtis - 0.33 - - - 1.33 Leptoceridae Athripsodes spp. - 0.33 42.33 119.00 239.67 - Sericostomatidae Sericostoma personatum (Spence in K & S) - - - 0.33 0.33 - Trichoptera pupae spp. indet. 1.67 - - Hemiptera Veliidae V&a spp. 0.33 Coleoptem Elmidae Elmis aenea (Miiller) 5.33 2.33 52.33 91.33 192.00 11.33 Oulimnius mberczrlanrs Miiller 0.33 - 1.33 1.67 1.00 - Limnius volckmari (Panzer) - 0.67 0.33 0.33 - Haliplidae Blychius elevatus (Panzer) 21.00 - 1.67 2.67 1.33 - Dytiscidae Coelambus spp. - 0.67 - - - Helodidae Helodes spp. - 0.67 - - - Helophoridae Potamonectus depressus elegans - 0.67 - - - - Mollusca Sphaeriidae Sphaerium spp. 0.33 - 1.67 2.67 2.33 - Pisidium spp. 5.33 1.00 15.00 - 9.67 5.33 Hyrobiidae Potamopyrgus antipodatwn(Gray) - 239.67 1141.33 513.00 0.33 Valvatidae Valvata macrostoma Steenbuch 1.00 10.67 - 1.33 Valvatapiscinalis (Miiller) 0.33 - 0.67 1 .oo Physidae Physa spp. 0.33 - - 7.00 - 0.33 Ancylidae Ancyh~sJluviutilis (Miiller) 1.oo Lymnaeidae Lymnaeaperegra (Miiller) 21.67 - 0.33 - 1.67 3.00 Planorbiidae Planorbis spp. - 0.67 - 0.67 0.33 For inspection purposes only. Hirudinea Glossiphonidae Helobdella stagnalisConsent (L.) of copyright owner required28.33 for any 16.67other use. - - - 5.33 Erpobdellidae Erpobdellaoctoculata (L.) 15.00 - 5.00 - 0.33 1.00 Diptera Chironomidae spp. indet. 1824.00189.33 2384.00 594.00 1474.00 382.00 Simuhidae spp. indet. - 0.33 4.00 16.00 382.33 57.67 Tipulidae Dicranota spp. 0.67 - - Ceratopogonidae spp. indet. 0.33 0.33 1.33 Psychodidae spp. indet. 0.33 - - 1.00 0.67 - Empedidae spp. indet. 1.00 - 0.33 - 0.33 I .oo Diptera pupae spp. indet. 2.00 - - 20.67 - - Oligochaeta spp. indet. 26.00 12.67 2.33 3.67 4.67 10.67 Hydracarina spp. indet. - 4.00 34.00 113.67 88.67 57.67 Tricladida spp. indet. 1.00 Average Abundance 21X6.67260.00 3072.672271.003126.67 662.33 AQUENS 7 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:55 Table 2 Percentage occurrence of key macroinvertebrate groups used in determining Q- rating, June 2004. Family/Genus/Species Group Site 2 Site 4 Site 5 Site 7 Site 8 Site 11 Group A - Sensitive Heptageniidae A - - 0.01 - 0.01 - Group B - Less Sensitive Leuctra spp. B _ _ _ _ 0.01 - Baetidae (excl. Baetis rhodani (Pictet)) B - - 0.10 0.16 0.21 0.15 Cased Trichoptera B 0.02 0.26 1.40 5.31 7.73 0.20 Group C - Relatively Tolerani Gammarus spp. C 0.11 1.28 - 0.01 - - Baetis rhodani (Pictet.) c - - 0.17 0.22 0.62 10.63 Ephemerellidae C 7.06 0.26 2.58 1.19 0.63 0.56 Caenidae C 0.67 0.38 5.45 2.42 3.21 - Uncased Trichoptera c - - 0.62 2.03 1.42 - Hemiptera (excl. A. aestivalis) c _ - _ - - 0.05 Coleoptera C 1.22 1.15 1.87 4.27 6.27 1.73 Gastropoda (excl. L. peregra & fhysa spp.) c - - 7.88 51.30 16.56 0.61 Simuliidae c - 0.13 0.13 0.71 12.31 8.80 Tipulidae c - - - 0.03 - - Hydracarina c - 1.54 1.11 5.06 2.85 8.80 Platyhelminthes c _ - _ - - 0.15 Crustacea c - - 0.02 - 0.01 - Chironomidae D 83.57 72.82 77.76 26.45 47.46 58.26 Group D - Tolerant Asellus spp. D 2.92 10.51 0.13 0.22 0.11 6.15 Sphaeriidae D 0.26 0.38 0.54 0.12 0.39 0.81 Physa spp. D 0.02 - - 0.31 - 0.05 Lymnaeu peregra (Mi.iller) D 0.99 - 0.01 - 0.05 0.46 Hirudinea D 1.99 6.41 0.16 - 0.01 0.97 For inspection purposes only. Group E - Most Tolerant Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. Oligochaeta E 1.19 4.87 0.08 0.16 0.15 1.63 AQUENS 8 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:55 Table 1 Average number of each invertebrate species found at each site, June 2004. Taxon Family Species/genus Site2 Site4 Site5 Site 7 Site8 Site 11 Crustacea Asellidae Asehs uqunticfrs (L.) 63.67 27.33 4.00 5.00 3.33 40.33 Gammaridae Ganmnrxs duebeni(Lilj.) 2.33 3.33 - 0.33 - - Astacidae Atfs~opotnnzobilrsp~~~jpes (L.) - 0.67 - 0.33 - Plecoptera Leuctridae Lwcbn hippopzcs Kempny 0.33 - Ephemeroptera Baetidae Bnetis spp. 0.67 - 5.67 1.67 19.00 4.33 Bnetis rhodmi (Pictet.) - 5.33 5.00 19.33 69.67 Baetis nurticus (L.) 1.67 3.33 6.67 1.00 Baetis scambus Eaton 1.33 0.33 - - Ephemerelliidae SerMtella ignnita Poda 154.00 0.67 79.00 26.67 19.67 3.67 Caenidae Cnenk rivlrlorunz Eaton 6.33 - 130.33 46.67 95.33 - Cnenis hlctlrosn Eaton 7.67 1.00 29.33 5.33 2.33 - Cnenis spp. 0.61 - 7.33 2.33 2.00 - Heptageniidae Ecdyonnm spp. - 0.33 - 0.33 - Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Hydropvche silt&i (Diihler) - 12.33 39.67 38.00 - Polcentropodidae Polyce~z~optrs~uvonz~c~~~~~~s (Pictet.) - 4.00 0.33 1.33 - spp. indet. - 0.33 - - - Rhyacophilidae Rhyncophiln domalis (Curtis) - 2.33 5.67 4.67 - Limnephilidae Halems mdintus (Curtis) 0.33 - 0.67 - - - Linmephihs hmnb~s Curtis - 0.33 - - - 1.33 Leptoceridae Athripsodes spp. - 0.33 42.33 119.00 239.67 - Sericostomatidae Sekostonm pe~sonnhtm (Spence in K & S) - - - 0.33 0.33 - Trichoptera pupae spp. indet. 1.67 - - Hemiptera Veliidae Velin spp. 0.33 Coleoptera Elmidae Ebnis nenea (Miiller) 5.33 2.33 52.33 91.33 192.00 II.33 Uulimnius ttrberculotus Miiller 0.33 - 1.33 1.67 1.00 - Linmizs vol&no~i (Panzer) - 0.67 0.33 0.33 - Haliplidae Blychius elevatus (Panzer) 21.00 - 1.67 2.67 1.33 - Dytiscidae Coelnnrbus spp. - 0.67 - - - Helodidae Helodes spp. - 0.67 - - - Helophoridae Potnmolzectns depressus elegans - 0.67 - - - - Mollusca Sphaeriidae Sphaekrm spp. 0.33 - 1.67 2.67 2.33 - P&-idium spp. 5.33 1.00 15.00 - 9.67 5.33 Hyrobiidae Potanzopyr@ls nntipoda?um(Gray) - 239.67 1141.33 513.00 0.33 Valvatidae Vnlvata mawostomn Steenbuch 1.00 10.67 - 1.33 Vnlvutapiscinnlis (Miiller) - 0.33 - 0.67 1.oo Physidae Physn spp. 0.33 - - 7.00 - 0.33 Ancylidae Ancyltrsflrcvintilis (Miiller) 1.00 Lynmaeidae Lynmnea peregm (Miiller) 21.67 - 0.33 - 1.67 3.00 Planorbiidae Plnnorbis spp. 0.67 0.67 0.33 For inspection purposes only. - Hirudinea Glossiphonidae Helobdello stngnalisConsent (L.) of copyright owner required28.33 for any16.67 other use. - - - 5.33 Erpobdellidae Erpobdelln octoculnta (L.) 15.00 - 5.00 - 0.33 I .oo Diptera Chironomidae spp. indet. 1524.00 159.33 2384.00 594.00 1474.00 3S2.00 Simuliidae spp. indet. - 0.33 4.00 16.00 382.33 57.67 Tipulidae Diwanota spp. 0.67 - - Ceratopogonidae spp. indet. 0.33 0.33 1.33 Psychodidae spp. indet. 0.33 - - 1.00 0.67 - Empedidae spp. indet. 1.00 - 0.33 - 0.33 I .oo Diptera pupae spp. indet. 2.00 - - 20.67 - - Oligochaeta spp. indet. 26.00 12.67 2.33 3.67 4.67 10.67 Hydracarina spp. indet. - 4.00 34.00 113.67 SS.67 57.67 Tricladida spp. indet. I .oo Average Abundance 2186.67260.00 3072.672271.003126.67 662.33 AQUENS 7 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:55 4.1.8 Biological Assessment of Water Quality The percentage representation of the key macroinvertebrate groups of the EPA Q-rating system are presented in Table 2 and summarised in Table 3. The biotic scores generated are given in Table 4. The Group A (Sensitive) taxa were represented by one genus, an ephemeropteran, Ecdyonurus spp. This genus was rare in occurrence and low in abundance (~1%). Its presence could be considered incidental. This Group A fauna was also recorded in 2003 but at two different sites, Sits 4 and 7 as compared to Sites 5 and 8 in this survey. The Group B (Less Sensitive) fauna were also poorly represented. They occurred at all sites, though generally in low abundance (~8%). Three taxa represented the Group B fauna, they included; Leuctva spp., Baetidae and Cased Trichoptera. The tolerant Group C fauna dominated across all sites in excessive numbers (>78%). This group was represented by 14 taxa. The Group D (Very Tolerant) fauna were common at Site 11. Fair numbers were present at Sites 2, 4 and 11 and occurred in low abundance at the other sites. This group was represented by 5 taxa. The Oligochaeta were the only Group E (Most Tolerant) fauna present. They were scarce at all sites except at Site 4 where they occurred in small numbers. A Q-rating of Q3 was retained at Sites 2, and 11 in the present survey. A slight change in water quality has occurred at all the other sites. The change is largely attributable to the presence or absence of Group A fauna. For Sitesinspection 4 purposes and only.7 recorded Group A fauna in 2003 but Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. none in the present survey. These sites therefore received a slightly lower Q-rating of 43, indicating moderate pollution. Sites 5 and 8 on the other hand, recorded no Group A fauna in 2003 but they were found present in 2004. These sites, therefore received a slightly higher Q-rating of 43-4 indicating slight pollution. Overall the quality at all sites has remained relatively unchanged. The BMWP scores ranged from 65 (Site 2) to 129 (Site 8). This range was similar to that recorded in 2003. The ASPT values ranged from 4.1 (Site 11) to 5.6 (Site 8). It must be borne in mind that single occurrences of families can artificially elevate the biotic indices. Consequently the BMWP scores do not necessarily correspond with the Q-rating system. Conversely some taxa may go into decline without impacting the Q-rating until an entire or large portion of a group disappears. AQUENS 9 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:55 Site 11 and 2 had the lowest scores, (BMWP=69, ASPT=4.1 and BMWP=65, ASPT=4.3 respectively). Site 11 has consistently had the lowest scores since 2002 (Table 4). The scores achieved in the present survey are simlar to those achieved in 2003. A decrease in the scores has occurred at Site 2 since 2003. Site 5 and 8 achieved the highest scores, comparing well, in this case, with the Q-values assigned. The former achieved a BMWP score of 126 and an ASPT score of 5.3, while Site 8 had a BMWP score of 129 and an ASPT score of 5.6. Since 2003, the BMWP score at Site 5 had decreased while the ASPT score had increased slightly. The reverse was true for Site 8. Site 7, the highest scoring site of 2003 had slightly lower scores in the present survey (BMWP=106, ASPT=5.3). A slight decrease in the BMWP score (117-67) occurred at Site 4 while an increase was observed in the ASPT score (5.0-5.2). This was due mainly to the absence of some high scoring families in 2004 e.g. Heptageniidae, Sericostomatidae, Polycentropidae and Rhyacophilidae. Table 3 Summary of the percentage occurrence of groups used in determining the Q- rating, June 2004. Site 2 Site 4 Site 5 Site 7 Site 8 Site 11 Group A 0.01 0.01 Group B 0.02 0.26 1.50 5.48 7.95 0.36 Group C 92.62 77.56 97.59 93.71 91.34 89.58 Group D 6.17 17.31 For inspection 0.85purposes only. 0.65 0.56 x.44 Group E 1.19 Consent4.87 of copyright owner0.08 required for any other0.16 use. 0.15 1.63 Table 4 Summarv of Biotic Scores for the 6 Sites. No. of Taxa BMWP ASPT Q-value Interpretation Site 2 21 65 4.33 :i Moderately Polluted Site 4 14 67 5.15 Moderately Polluted Site 5 33 126 5.25 43-4 Slightly Polluted Site 7 29 106 5.30 43 Moderately Polluted Site 8 32 129 5.61 Q3-4 Slightly Polluted Site 11 24 69 4.06 03 Moderatelv Polluted AQUENS 10 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:55 Table 5 Summarv of Biotic Scores for the 6 sites since 1997. Site Date Q-value BMWP ASPT Site 2 1997 w 157 8.7 Site 2 1998 w 132 7.2 Site 2 1999 43-4 102 5.1 Site 2 2000 43-4 140 4.8 Site 2 2001 43-4 129 5.0 Site 2 2002 43-4 77 5.1 Site 2 2003 43 82 5.1 Site 2 2004 43 65 4.3 Site 4 1997 Q3-4 105 5.8 Site 4 1998 Q3 98 5.2 Site 4 1999 Q3 84 4.7 Site 4 2000 Q3 73 4.6 Site 4 2001 Q2-3 115 4.6 Site 4 2002 Q3-4 125 5.0 Site 4 2003 43-4 117 5.0 Site 4 2004 03 67 5.2 Site 5 1997 43-4 121 5.5 Site 5 1998 43 120 5.4 Site 5 1999 43 124 5.6 Site 5 2000 43-4 128 5.3 Site 5 2001 43-4 136 5.0 Site 5 2002 Q3-4 102 5.4 Site 5 2003 43 103 5.4 Site 5 2004 126 5.3 Site 7 1997 108 5.1 Site 7 1998 Q3-4 112 5.1 Site 7 1999 Q3 123 5.6 Site 7 2000 43 136 5.2 Site 7 2001 43-4 161 5.2 Site 7 2002 Q3-4 142 5.5 For inspection purposes only. Site 7 2003 43-4 130Consent of copyright5.5 owner required for any other use. Site 7 2004 Q3 106 5.3 Site 8 1997 Q3 121 5.5 Site 8 1998 Q3 120 5.3 Site 8 1999 Q3 141 5.6 Site 8 2000 Q3 112 5.1 Site 8 2001 Q3-4 164 5.5 Site 8 2002 Q3-4 106 5.3 Site 8 2003 Q3 85 5.3 Site 8 2004 Q3-4 129 5.6 Site 11 1997 Q2-3 43 3.9 Site 11 1998 Q2-3 39 4.0 Site 11 1999 43 46 4.2 Site 11 2000 43 49 3.8 Site 11 2001 43 75 4.2 Site 11 2002 Q3 74 4.6 Site 11 2003 Q3 60 4.6 Site 11 2004 03 69 4.1 AQUENS 11 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:56 4.2 Fish Surveillance 4.2.1 Salmonid Populations in Sections l-3 The 2004 electrofishing survey of the Rye Water showed a further increase in the total number of salmonids captured. A total of 1,869 salmonids were caught during the almual electro-fishing survey of the Rye Water, see Table 1. The 2004 returns confirmed that there had been an overall increase in the numbers of salmonids captured over the previous year (catch in 2003 was, 1,668). This is further confirmed by the total salmonid densities which had increased at the majority of sites (five). As the fishing effort can vary slightly from year to year, the densities of salmonids give a truer reflection of the stock status as compared to analysing the catch data in isolation. The salmonids were composed of brown trout and young salmon. Recruitment of each species varies annually. The brown trout Sdmo trutta (L.) returns for 2004 stood at 1,202 fish, an increase over the 2003 figures. This was reflected in the densities of the older trout, which had, increased at all sites while the trout fry densities had increased at half the sites studied. The catch of salmon, however, had decreased by 81 fish to 667. This was confirmed by the decrease in the salmon fi-y densities, which occurred at the majority of the sites. The densities of older salmon, however, had increased at all sites since 2003. Overall, it was felt that the current numbers were satisfactory, especially in view of the sewage spillage, which occurred last September 2003. Other species encountered during electrofishing operations included minnow Phoxinus For inspection purposes only. phoxinus L., lamprey Lampetra Consentspp., of copyrighteel Anguillu owner required anguilla for any other use.L., stoneloach Neomacheilus bartbntulus L., and stickleback Gasterosteus acuZeatus L. Table 1 Number of salmonids caught at each site within Sections l-3 in 2004. Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Grand Site SlC SlE S2C S2-El S2-E2 S3C S3-El S3-E2 S3-E3 Totals Brown trout 166 157 116 121 127 64 140 145 166 1202 Salmon 65 79 68 98 66 22 100 85 84 667 Totals 231 236 184 219 193 86 240 230 250 1569 4.2.2 Age composition The percentage representation for salmon and trout are presented in Table 2. The age structure of both species was determined by reading the fish scales removed from individual fish in the field. The brown trout were represented by five age classes, namely, 0+, l+, 2+, AQUENS 12 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:56 “,‘,‘UU‘ Ls&,,‘,‘“‘“~‘LU‘ IIG”“,L ,“I I,lC I\YC ,, U‘C, L”“-r 3+ and 4+. The majority belonged to the 0+ to 2+ classes (97%). Three age groups, O+, 1+ and 2+ were present in the salmon catch, the majority of which belonged to the fi-y and fish of the year (l+) (99%). The brown trout stock was dominated by the l+ age class (59%), differing from the 2003 findings, where the Ii-y dominated the trout population. The l+ group dominated across all sites with the exception of S2C where the 0+ dominated (53%). The overall percentage representation of the 0+ trout was lower (20%) than that observed in 2003 (39%) and 2002 (27%). The 2+ age class (IS%), overall was similar to the percentage representation of the 0+ class. The 2+ were strongest in Section 3 (S3C, S3-El, S2-E2 & S3-E3). Numerically, the 3+ and 4+ fish were poorly represented in the catches. Older fish have also tended to be poorly represented during earlier surveys. The salmon stock was dominated overall by the 1+ (72%) age class; this was mirrored across all sites. The 0+ salmon accounted for 28% of the overall population, less than the percentage reported in the 2003 survey where the salmon population was composed of 43% fry. As in 2003, the 2+ group accounted for a small proportion (~1%) of the total salmon population. Only one individual 2+ salmon was captured at S3C. Overall salmon recruitment was lower than in 2003 and older salmon were poorly represented. Table 2 Percentage representation of each For inspectionage class purposes of only.brown trout and salmon at the Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. nine sites. Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Grand SlC SlE S2C S2-El S2-E2 S3C S3-El S3-E2 S3-E3 Totals Brown trout o+ 7.23 2.55 52.59 39.67 36.22 15.63 7.14 15.17 16.87 20.05 1+ 75.90 73.25 42.24 42.15 49.61 67.19 65.71 55.17 53.01 58.82 2+ 13.25 19.75 5.17 18.18 11.02 14.06 23.57 20.69 29.52 17.97 3+ 2.41 4.46 0.00 0.00 3.15 3.13 3.57 6.90 0.60 2.75 4+ 1.20 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.07 0.00 0.42 Salmon o+ 20.00 30.38 19.12 35.71 15.15 18.18 39.00 21.18 35.71 27.89 1+ 80.00 69.62 80.88 64.29 84.85 77.27 61.00 78.82 64.29 71.96 2+ 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.55 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.15 AQUENS 13 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:56 4.2.3 Section 1 (SlC & SlE) All five age classes were represented at SIC. The l+ trout cohort dominated at this site, 76%. The next largest proportion of the population was contributed to by the 2+ trout (13%). This is in contrast to the findings of the 2003 survey where the fry dominated, followed closely by the l+ trout. The trout fry were poorly represented at this site (7%) as were the 3+ and 4+ groups, which accounted for less than 4% of the total trout population. The 1+ trout dominated at SlE (73%) while the 2-t trout were the next best represented group (20%) as was the pattern observed for SlC. Trout recruitment was poor returning to proportions observed in 2000. The 3+ trout were poorly represented and the 4+ age class were not present at S 1E. In contrast to the 2003 survey, where the salmon fi-y dominated in Section 1, the 1+ group dominated S 1C (80%) and S 1E (70%) in the present survey. The proportion of 1+ sahnon at S 1C and S 1E was 20% and 30% respectively. No salmon older than l+ were present in Section1 . Table 3 Total catch of trout and salmon in Section 1.2002-2004. Trout Salmon Year 2002 2003 2004 2002 2003 2004 2002 2003 2004 2002 2003 2004 Site SlC SlC SlC SLE SUE SlE SlC SlC SlC SlE SlE SlE o+ 1 91 12 1 34 4 2 76 13 1 35 24 1+ 45 54 126 34 47 115 37 16 52 28 32 55 For inspection purposes only. 2+ 23 20 22 Consent29 of copyright26 owner required31 for any other1 use. - - 1 1 - 3+ 434437------4+ 1 1 2 ------Totals 74 169 166 68 110 157 40 92 65 30 68 79 4.2.4 Section 2 (S2C, S2-El, S2-E2) In previous reports it has been stated that the age structure of Section 2 has been relatively static since 1996. The current study showed a shift in the relative proportions of the 0+ and l+ age classes. The trout fry no longer dominated across all sites. They remained dominant at S2C however, the 1+ dominated at S2-El and S2-E2 followed closely by the 0+ trout. The 2+ trout accounted for a small proportion of the population at each site. The 3+ class was poorly represented occurring at one site only (S2-E2 - 3%). In 2003, the 3+ cohort occurred at all three sites. No 4+ trout were captured as was the case in 2003. AQUENS 14 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:56 In contrast to 2003, where the salmon fry dominated, the salmon parr dominated at all sites within Section 2 in the present survey, accounting for between 65% (S2-El) and 85% (S2- E2). This pattern was observed in the 2002 survey. No salmon older than 1+ were captured during electrofishing operations. As can be seen from Table 4 the total number of salmon fry captured in 2004 has returned to the low numbers observed in 2002. Table 4 Total catch of trout and salmon in Section 2, 2002-2004. Trout Year 2002 2003 2004 2002 2003 2004 2002 2003 2004 Site s2c s2c s2c S2-El S2-El S2-El S2-E2 S2-E2 S2-E2 o+ 51 80 61 61 141 48 38 91 46 1+ 27 21 49 24 35 51 22 29 63 2+ 11 11 6 9 3 22 17 8 14 3 1 1 1 4 1 Totals 92 113 116 96 180 121 77 128 127 Salmon Year 2002 2003 2004 2002 2003 2004 2002 2003 2004 Site s2c s2c s2c S2-El S2-El S2-El S2-E2 S2-E2 S2-E2 o+ 9 86 13 30 171 35 9 55 10 1+ 73 46 55 100 59 63 82 47 56 2+ 5 - Totals 82 132 68 130 230 98 91 107 66 4.2.5 Section 3 (S3C, S3-El, S3-E2, S3-E3) As in 2003 the l+ trout dominated at all sites within Section 3 accounting for greater than For inspection purposes only. 50% of the trout population at eachConsent site. of copyright The owner2+ trout required representedfor any other use. the next largest proportion within the population at all sites except S3C, where a co-dominance of 0-t and 2+ class occurred (15%). Poor trout recruitment was observed at S3-El (7%). The 3+ cohort represented a small proportion of the total trout caught at each site. The 4+ trout were only encountered at S3-E2 (2%). Salmon fi-y recruitment continues to improve in Section 3, 0+ salmon were recorded at all four sites in record numbers (Table 5). The percentage represented by the salmon fry ranged from 18% (S3C) to 39% (S3-El). The 1+ age class dominated across all sites as in 2003. The 2+ group was represented here only by one individual salmon. Overall salmon recruitment had improved in this section since 2003. AQUENS 1.5 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:56 Table 5 Total catch of trout and sahnon in Section 3.2002-2004. Trout Year 2002 2003 2004 2002 2003 2004 2002 2003 2004 2002 2003 2004 Site s3c S3C S3C S3-El S3-El S3-El S3-E2 S3-E2 S3-E2 S3-E3 S3-E3 S3-E3 o+ 4 5 10 1 8 10 2 3 22 - 8 28 1+ 10 10 43 18 38 92 45 30 80 22 37 88 2+ 6 6 9 12 15 33 26 19 30 13 27 49 3+ 2 4 2 1 1 5 4 5 10 1 3 1 4+ - - - 1 - - - - 3 - 1 - Totals 22 25 64 33 62 140 77 57 145 36 76 166 Salmon Year 2002 2003 2004 2002 2003 2004 2002 2003 2004 2002 2003 2004 a Site s3c S3C S3C S3-El S3-El S3-El S3-E2 S3-E2 S3-E2 S3-E3 S3-E3 S3-ET- o+ - 7 4 1 6 39 - - 18 - 2 30 1+ 9 10 17 41 38 61 34 30 67 12 26 54 2+ - - 1 - - - - _ _ _ _ _ Totals 9 17 22 42 44 100 34 30 85 12 28 84 4.2.6 Length Frequency The length frequency distribution of trout and salmon all sections combined are illustrated in Figs. 1 and 2 respectively. Distinct modes for 0+, l+ and 2+ brown trout are apparent from Figure 1. The average observed lengths at age, presented in Table 6 agree well with the For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. modal lengths. The modes for 0+ and 1-t salmon are also distinct and the modal lengths agree well with the observed lengths at age. The length frequency distribution of trout and salmon for each site are illustrated in Appendix C. AQUENS 16 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:56 Trout 1+ n - Length (cm) Fig. 1 Length frequency distribution of brown trout in the Rye Water (Sections 1,2 & 3). Salmon 180 160 140 2 ,120 f 3100 For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. I; 80 ii ’ 60 40 20 0 Length (cm) Fig. 2 Length frequency distribution of salmon in the Rye Water (Sections 1, 2 & 3). 4.2.7 Growth The average observed length for each age class was calculated for both trout and salmon and presented in Table 6. Overall, for each of the age classes, the average lengths of trout and salmon were similar to those reported in earlier years. AQUENS EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:56 Table 6 The average length (cm) for brown trout and salmon. Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 Grand SlC SlE S2C S2-El S2-E2 S3C S3-El S3-E2 S3-E3 Totals Brown trout 0+ Average 5.51 6.08 6.71 6.84 6.72 4.94 5.13 5.80 5.23 5.88 Min 4.20 5.20 5.20 5.10 5.40 4.00 4.20 4.70 4.30 4.00 Max 6.60 7.10 9.20 9.70 8.90 6.20 6.40 6.80 6.20 9.70 n 12 4 61 48 46 10 10 22 28 241 l+ Average 14.15 14.57 16.19 16.62 16.09 14.43 15.04 14.66 14.18 15.10 Min 9.80 8.50 10.60 13.50 13.00 11.20 10.70 10.70 9.90 8.50 Max 19.80 25.40 19.50 20.50 19.40 18.40 18.30 17.80 17.40 25.40 n 126 115 49 51 63 43 92 SO 88 707 2+ Average 23.11 23.59 20.98 19.91 21.10 21.42 21.15 20.54 20.28 21.34 Min 17.60 17.00 16.10 15.60 16.20 17.40 16.00 15.60 15.40 15.40 Max 28.00 27.80 25.20 25.50 27.00 25.20 29.80 25.20 25.20 29.80 n 22 31 6 22 14 9 33 30 49 216 3+ MinAverage 26.2029.53 27.4029.59 - - 24.2025.28 25.4027.25 21.5025.20 23.2027.69 24.20 21.5026.96 0 Max 31.50 32.20 - - 26.20 29.10 29.30 32.50 24.20 32.50 n 4 7 - - 4 2 5 10 1 33 4+ Average 31.65 ------28.57 - 30.11 Min 31.50 ------24.50 - 24.50 Max 31.80 ------32.00 - 32.00 n 2 ------3 - 5 Salmon 0+ Average 4.09 4.3s 5.46 5.40 5.59 4.13 4.62 41.44 4.32 8.83 Min 3.60 3.30 4.50 4.30 5.10 3.80 3.20 3.50 3.30 3.20 Max 4.70 9.50 6.50 7.70 6.20 4.30 9.50 4.90 5.40 9.50 n 13 24 13 35 10 4 13 18 30 160 For inspection purposes only. l+ Average 10.82 11.35 Consent12.23 of copyright12.03 owner required12.37 for any other11.22 use. 11.37 11.08 11.04 11.50 Min 9.00 9.70 10.10 10.30 10.60 10.00 9.30 8.90 9.40 8.90 Max 13.10 19.80 14.30 14.30 16.50 13.20 13.10 13.80 13.60 19.80 n 52 55 55 63 56 17 61 67 54 480 0 2+ Average - - - - - 21.60 - - - 21.60 Min _ _ _ _ _ 21.60 - - - 21.60 Max _ _ _ _ _ 21.60 - - - 21.60 n 1 - - - 1 The average back-calculated lengths for trout and salmon are presented in Table 7. In general the figures generated agreed with those of previous years. The average length achieved by a trout after the first year was 8.86cm (compared to 9.5cm in 2003). The older trout reached average lengths of 17.69cm (2nd yr), 23.03cm (3rd yr) and 27.46 (4t’1 yr). The average length achieved in the 4th year is low when compared to the figure of 43.01~111 produced in 2003. The salmon growth observed was similar to previous years results. The average length AQUENS 18 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:56 reached by salmon after the first years growth was 5.96cm, slightly lower than the figure of 6.16cm reported in 2003. Table 7 Back-calculated length (cm) for brown trout and salmon from the Rye Water. Section 1 Section 2 Section 3 All SlC SlE S2C S2-El S2-E2 S3C S3-El S3-E2 S3-E3 Sections Brown trout L1 Average 8.92 9.23 8.48 8.98 8.35 9.11 9.01 8.93 8.70 8.86 Min 4.21 4.57 4.63 5.56 4.04 6.16 5.35 4.22 4.51 4.04 Max 23.58 15.02 12.90 13.58 12.00 12.59 12.77 12.19 13.18 23.58 n 154 153 55 73 81 54 130 123 137 960 * L2 Average 18.77 20.38 16.90 16.18 17.65 18.34 17.81 16.96 16.24 17.69 Min 9.71 11.13 10.75 12.37 9.72 14.50 11.32 12.23 8.24 8.24 Max 26.07 27.87 20.64 22.38 24.30 20.84 25.54 23.21 22.14 27.87 n 28 34 6 22 18 11 37 43 50 249 Ls Average 25.44 26.32 - - 22.03 22.43 22.78 23.62 18.62 23.03 Min 22.59 25.19 - - 16.98 20.61 18.92 18.98 18.62 16.98 Max 27.86 27.21 - - 24.68 24.25 25.18 29.02 18.62 29.02 n 6 5 - - 5 2 5 13 1 37 L4 Average 29.73 ------25.19 - 27.46 Min 29.68 ------23.46 - 23.46 Max 29.78 ------26.30 - 29.78 n 2 _ - - - - - 3 - 5 Salmon L1 Average 5.96 6.04 5.80 5.66 5.64 6.20 6.07 6.22 6.036 5.96 Min 4.10 4.31 4.25 3.17 3.73 4.44 4.20 4.13 4.174 3.17 Max 10.40 9.50 7.60 7.62 8.21 10.00 8.60 9.34 7.688 10.40 n 52 55 55 For63 inspection purposes56 only. 18 61 67 52 479 Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. Lr Average - - - - - 20.8 - - - 20.80 Min _ _ _ _ _ 20.8 - - - 20.80 Max _ _ _ _ _ 20.8 - - - 20.80 n 1 - - - 1 After the second years growth the average length achieved by the salmon was 20.80cm, however, this is not considered a true average as only one individual 2+ salmon was captured. 4.2.8 Fish Condition Using Fulton’s Condition Factor, the condition of the trout and salmon was assessed. The formula was applied to each age class and a mean condition factor was generated for all age classes. The results are shown in Table 8. A condition factor greater than 1 is indicative of satisfactory condition. All mean values for both species were G-1. Few fish achieved a K value of cl. AQUENS 19 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:56 Table 8 Fulton’s condition factor (K) for brown trout on the Rye Water. Brown trout Salmon 43 4% Grow Mean Min Max II Grow Mean Min Max n 1+ 1.42 0.71 2.50 698 1+ 1.49 0.77 2.56 474 2+ 1.27 0.80 2.38 213 2+ 1.25 1.25 1.25 1 3+ 1.19 0.78 1.54 33 4+ 1.14 0.99 1.26 5 4.2.9 Salmonid Stock Density and Biomass The density of salmon and trout fry, older salmon and trout and total sahnonids was estimated in terms of density per metre squared. The mean weights of each group were calculated and then used along with the densities to generate the biomass (g/m2) figures. Table 9 presents the results generated. The densities of brown trout and salmon for 2002, 2003 and 2004 are presented together in Table 10. The total salmonid densities differed from 2003 in that the total sahnonid density had increased at sites in Section 3 and decreased slightly at sites within Section 2. The total salmonid density values calculated for Section 1 sites were similar to 2003. Total salmonid density values ranged from 0.25nos./m2 (SIC) to 0.39 nos./m2 (S3C). Older brown trout densities ranged fi-om 0.11 nos./m2 (S2C) to 0.24 nos./m2 (S3C). Trout >O+ densities were higher across all sites when compared to the 2003 values. Brown trout fi-y densities ranged from 0.03 nos./m2 (SIC &S3-El) to 0.57 nos./m2 (S2C). The highest trout fry densities For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. occurred in Section 2. The 0+ trout densities were lower in Section 1 compared to the 2003 data. Older salmon densities ranged from 0.06 nos./m2 (SIC & S3-E3). Salmon parr densities had increased at all sites since 2003. The salmon fry on the other hand had decreased since 2003. The sahnon fry densities ranged from 0.01 nos./m2 (SIC) to 0.07 nos./m2 (S2-El). The total biomass was higher for all sites when compared to 2003. The values ranged from 14.70g/m2 at S3-E3 to 22.52 g/m2 at S3C. AQUENS 20 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:56 Table 9 Density and biomass of trout and salmon at the nine sites sampled in summer 2004. Brown trout Salmon Total Salmonids Section Site Density Biomass Density Biomass Density Biomass (nos./u?) Wm2) (nos./m2) Wm2) (nos./u?) (g/m2) sy >o+ fky >o+ fv >o+ fry >O+ All ages All ages Section 1 SlC 0.01* 0.16 0.03 11.15 0.01” 0.06 0.03 1.17 0.25 14.72 SlE 0.01” 0.21 0.01 17.13 0.03 0.11 0.07 2.39 0.33 21.45 Section 2 S2C 0.23 0.11 0.57 6.61 0.02 0.10 0.05 2.47 0.37 15.91 S2-El 0.15 0.12 0.38 8.68 0.07 0.10 0.14 2.53 0.38 18.77 S2-E2 0.10 0.14 0.24 10.31 0.02” 0.10 0.03 2.54 0.35 18.80 Section 3 S3C 0.04” 0.24 0.11 15.78 0.02” 0.08 0.03 2.30 0.39 22.52 S3-El 0.01 0.17 0.03 13.33 0.05* 0.08 0.10 2.08 0.32 19.83 S3-E2 0.06 0.18 0.14 15.78 0.03 0.10 * 0.05 2.10 0.34 21.89 S3-E3 0.05 0.15 0.12 9.96 0.03 0.06 0.07 1.14 0.28 14.70 Table 10 Density of trout and salmon at the nine sites for 2002-2004. Brown trout Density Salmon Density Total Salmonid Density INos./m21 (Nos./m2) (Nos./m’) Section Site fry >o+ fry >o+ all 2002 2003 2004 2002 2003 2004 2002 2003 2004 2002 2003 2004 2002 2003 2004 Section 1 SIC 0.001 0.100 0.0100.0730.080 0.1600.001 0.090 0.0100.0420.020 0.060 0.117 0.280 0.250 Sl-El 0.001 0.050 0.0~00.1050.100 0.2100.0010.060 0.0300.0430.050 0.110 0.151 0.270 0.330 Section 2 S2C 0.102 0.180 0.2300.0720.060 0.1100.025 0.210 0.0200.1370.080 0.100 0.335 0.530 0.370 S2-El 0.083 0.300 0.1500.0450.070 0.1200.052 0.340 0.0700.1330.100 0.100 0.313 0.800 0.380 s2-E~ 0.066 0.200 0.1000.0680.060 0.1400.0200.150 0.0200.1510.090 0.100 0.306 0.500 0.350 Section 3 S3C 0.014 0.020 0.0400.0660.090 0.240 - 0.060 0.0200.035 0.040 0.080 0.114 0.210 0.390 S3-El 0.002 0.010 0.0100.049 0.080 0.1700.002 0.010 0.0500.068 0.060 0.080 0.120 0.150 0.320 S3-E2 0.002 - 0.0600.1210.080 0.180 - - 0.0300.063 0.070 0.100 0.186 0.160 0.340 For inspection purposes only. S3-E3 - 0.010 0.0500.040 0.080Consent 0.150 of copyright - owner- required0.030 for0.013 any other 0.030 use. 0.060 0.053 0.120 0.280 AQUENS 21 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:56 5.0 CONCLUDING REMARKS The macroinvertebrate surveillance revealed continuing enrichment of the Rye Water by nutrients contained in runoff from agricultural land in the upper Rye and Lyreen catchments. This over-enrichment resulted in a reduction of the sensitive taxa contained in the macroinvertebrates. Such taxa were recorded at two sites only, Sites 5 and 8, consequently they received the highest Q-rating of 43-4 assigned to any of the sites. These values were slightly higher than the 2003 results. Similarly, Sites 4 and 7 were assigned a slightly lower Q-rating (Q3) in the present survey when compared to the previous year (Q3-4). The lower value was caused by the absence of sensitive taxa. No changes were observed at Sites 2 and 11, both retaining the Q-value assigned to them in 2003. Overall, little change has occurred in the macroinvertebrate composition over the past twelve months, apart from an obvious increase in the abundance of the Chironomidae (non-biting midges). All sites surveyed were classified as exhibiting slight to moderate pollution in the Rye Water. The findings of the fish studies show an overall increase in the catch of sahnonids (1,668 in 2003 to 1,869 in 2004). The differences were due to slight increases in the numbers of brown trout caught as the numbers of salmon captured had decreased since 2003. Overall, an increase in the densities of the older trout and salmon was also observed. Densities of salmon fi-y had decreased in Sections 1 and 2 but increased at three sites within Section 3 since 2003. The density of trout fi-y increased at some sites but decreased at others. Generally poor For inspection purposes only. recruitment of both species was apparent.Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. Ten months earlier a spillage of raw sewage entered the Rye upstream of the survey sites on the 16’h September 2003. Fears were expressed that both the macroinvertebrates and the fish populations would be decimated by this incident. However, no major change was recorded in the community structures of the macroinvertebrates. The poor recruitment of trout and salmon could represent natural fluctuations within the population or it may be that spawning gravels were destroyed as a consequence of the spill. Measures have since been taken to prevent such an event from re-occurring in the fixture. These measures involved upgrading of the electrics at the pump house and the installation of an additional pump. Continuing efforts by Kidare County Council are central to the reduction of nutrient loads into the Rye Water. The main offender to the phosphate loading of the Lyreen was isolated and identified by Kildare County Council who insisted on the AQUENS 22 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:56 appropriate treatment systems being installed. In addition, the owners of a number of problem farms, identified in the last Kildare County Council survey, have been served Section 12 notices. These farms are receiving additional help from Kildare County Council and their farms are being monitored on a regular basis. In terms of the fishery potential of the Rye Water, Dr. Martin O’Grady, has undertaken further fisheries enhancement of the river. Tree pruning operations have been carried out in a heavily shaded section of the river downstream of the Aquaduct. Behind the Intel complex, stone weirs have been constructed in the river to increase flow and create holding pools for the older fish. Spawning gravel has also been imported. Intel Ireland Ltd., continue their commitment to improving the trophic status of the Rye Water and conserving the river as a natural resource. The findings of the limnological survey confirm, yet again, that Intel are in no way responsible for any pollution of the Rye. For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. AQUENS 23 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:56 6.0 REFERENCES q Armitage, P-D., Moss, D., Wright, J.F. & Fur-se, M.T. (1983) Theperformance ofa new biological water quality score system based on macroinvertebrates over a wide range of unpolluted running-water sites. Water Research 17. o M. L. McGarrigle, J. J. Bowman, K. J. Clabby, J. Lucey, P. Cunningham, M. MacCarthaigh, M. Keegan, B. Cantrell, M. Lehane, C. Clenaghan and P. F. Toner (2002) Water quality in Ireland 1998-2000. Published by The Environmental Protection Agency, Ireland. 123pp o Seber, G.A.F. & Le Cren, E.D., (1967). Estimating population parameters from catches large relative to the population. Journal of Animal Ecology, 36, 63 l-643. CI Zippin, C., (1958). The removal method of population estimation. Journal of Wildlife Management, 22 (l), 82-90. For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. AQUENS 24 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:56 Annual Limnological Reportfor the Rye Water 2004 APPENDIX A Table TAXA Group A-Sensitive Croup B-Less Sensitive Group C-Tolerant Group D-Very Tolerant Group E-Most Tolerant Plecoptera All except Leuctra spp. Leuctra spp. Ephemeroptera Heptageniidae Baetidae (excl. B. rhodani) Baetis rhodani Siphlonuriidae Leptophlebidae Caenidae Ephemera danica Ephemerellidae Trichoptera Cased spp. Uncased spp. Odonata All taxa Megaloptera Sialidae Hemiptera Aphelocheirus aestivalis All except A. aestivalis Coleoptera Coleoptera Diptera Chironomidae (excl. Chironomus Chironomus spp. SPP.) Simuliidae Eristalis spp. Tipulidae Hydracarina Hydracarina Crustacea Gammarus spp . Asellus spp. For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright ownerAustropotamobius required for any otherpallipes use. Crangonyx spp. Gastropoda Gastropoda Lymnaea peregra (excl. L. peregra & Physa spp.) Physa spp. Lamellibranchiata Margarittfera margaritifera Anodonta spp. Sphaeriidae Hirudinea Piscicola sp. All except Piscicola sp. Oligochaeta Tubificidae Platyhelminthes All AQUENS 25 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:56 Annual Limnological Reportfor the Rye Water 2004 APPENDIX A contd. Table 2 Biotic Indices (Q-Values) and typical associated macroinvertebrate community structure and abundance levels (McGarrigle et al.2002). Fauna1 Groups Q5 Q4 Q3-4 h3 Q2 Ql Croup A At least 3 taxa At least I taxon At least 1 taxon Absent Absent Absent well represented in reasonable numbers Few - Common Group B Few to Few to Numerous Few/Absent to Few/Absent Absent Absent Numerous Numerous Group C Common to Numerous Common to Excessive Few Baetis rhodani often (usually Dominant or Dominant to Few or Absent Absent Abundant Excessive) Excessive Others never Excessive Group D Few or Absent Few or Absent Few/Absent to Few/Absent to Dominant to Few or Absent Common Common Excessive Group E Few or Absent Few or Absent Few or Absent Few or Absent Few I Absent to Dominant Common Table 3 Abundance categories and relationship to percentage frequency of occurrence (After McGarrigle et al., 2002). Table 4 Interpretation of quality ratings (After McGarrigle et al., 2002). Abundance Approx. Percentage Quality ratings Pollution status Category frequency of occurrence QS, 44-5 and Q4 Unpolluted For inspection purposes only. Absent no specimens Consent of copyright43-4, owner required for any other use. Slightly polluted Present 1 or 2 individuals Q3 and 42-3 Moderately polluted Scarce/few c 1% of the total fauna Q2, Ql-2 and Ql Serious pollution Small numbers <5% Fair Numbers 510% Common 1O-20% Numerous 25 -50% Dominant 50 -75% Excessive >75% AQMNS 26 0 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:56 *,‘,‘b%u‘ lA,r‘rr”‘“~;rcLa‘ ,,rf/vr L/V’ ‘I‘C I\*.5 ,r ULC, L”“-r APPENDIX B BMWP (Biological Monitoring Working Party) Score (after Armitage et al, 1983). Families Score Siphlonuridae, Heptageniidae, Ephemerellidae, Leptophlebiidae, Potamanthidae, 10 Ephemeridae, Taeniopterygidae, Leuctridae, Capniidae, Perlididae, Chloroplidae, Aphelocheiridae, Phyrganidae, Molannidae, Beraeidae, Odontoceridae, Leptoceridae, Goeridae, Lepidostomatidae, Brachycentridae, Sericostomatidae, Perlodidae Astacidae, Lestidae, Agriidae, Gomphidae, Cordulegarsteridae, Aeshnidae, 8 Cordulliidae, Libellulidae, Psychomyidae, Philopotamidae Caenidae, Nemouridae, Rhyacophilidae, Polycentropodidae, Limnephilidae Neritidae, Viviparidae, Ancylidae, Hydroptilidae, Unionidae, Corophidae, Gammaridae, Platycnemididae, Coenagriidae Mesovelidae, Hydrometidae, Gerridae, Nepidae, Naurcoridae, Notonectidae, Pleidae, Corixidae, Halipildae, Hygrobiidae, Dytiscidae, Gyrinidae, Hydrophilidae Clambeidae, Helodidae, Dryopidae, Elmidae, Chrysomelidae, Curculonidae, Hydropschyidae, Tipulidae, Simuliidae, Planariidae, Dendrocoelidae Baetidae, Sialidae, Piscicolidae 4 Valvatidae, Hydrobiidae, Lymnaeidae, Physidae, Planorbidae, Sphaeridae, 3 Glossophoniidae, Hirudinidae, Eropbellidae, Asellidae Chironomidae For inspection purposes only. 2 Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. Oligochaete 1 List the families present in the sample, assign the appropriate BMWP score to each family present. Sum these to get the total BMWP score. The average score per taxon (ASPT) value is then computed by dividing the total BMWP score by the number of scoring taxa present in the sample. The resulting BMWP value is between 1 and 10. EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:56 For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:57 For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:57 For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:57 APPENDIX D Macroinvertebrate list with abundances for Site 2, Rye Water June 2004 Taxon Family Specied~enus Site 2 Crustacea Asellidae Asellus aquaticus (L.) 81 94 16 191 Gammaridae Gammarus dz&eni (Lilj.) 4 3 0 7 Astacidae Austropotamobiuspallipes (L.) 0 0 0 0 Plecoptera Leuctridae Leuctra hippopus Kempny 0 0 0 0 Ephemeroptera Baetidae Baetis spp. 0 2 0 2 Baetis rhodani (Pictet.) 0 0 0 0 Baetis muticus (L.) 0 0 0 0 Baetis scambus Eaton 0 0 0 0 Ephemerelliidae Seratella ignita Poda 222 224 16 462 Caenidae Caenis rivulorum Eaton 6 II 2 19 Caenis Iuchrosa Eaton I 10 6 23 Caenis spp. 1 0 1 2 Heptageniidae Ecdyonurus spp. 0 0 0 0 Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Hydropsyche silta[ai (D8hler) 0 0 0 0 Polcentropodidae Polycentropus/7avomaczdatus (Pictet.) 0 0 0 0 spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Rhyacophilidae Rhyacophila dorsalis (Curtis) 0 0 0 0 Limnephilidae Halesus radiatzzs (Curtis) 1 0 0 1 Limnephilus lunatus Curtis 0 0 0 0 Leptoceridae Athripsodes spp. 0 0 0 0 Sericostomatidae Sericostoma person&an (Spence in K & S) 0 0 0 0 pupae indet. 0 0 0 0 Hemiptera Veliidae Velia spp. 0 0 0 0 Coleoptem Elmidae Elmis aenea (Miiller) 3 12 1 16 Uulimnius tuberculatzzs Miiller 0 1 0 1 Limnizzs volchmari (Panzer) 0 0 0 0 Haliplidae Bzychz’zzselevatus (Panzer) 11 25 27 63 Dytiscidae Coelanzbus spp. 0 0 0 0 Helodidae Helodes spp. 0 0 0 0 Helophoridae Potamonechzs depressus elegans 0 0 0 0 Mollusca Sphaeriidae Sphaerium spp. 0 0 1 1 Pisidium spp. 10 4 2 16 Hyrobiidae fotamopyrgxs an tipodarum (Gray) 0 0 0 0 Valvatidae Valvata nzacrostoma Steenbuch 0 0 0 0 Valvatapiscinalis (Miiller) 0 0 0 0 Physidae Physa spp. For inspection purposes only. 0 0 1 1 Ancylidae Ancy~zzsjhzviati~isConsent of copyright(Miiller) owner required for any other0 use. 0 0 0 Lymnaeidae Lymnaeaperegra (Mtier) 37 16 12 65 Planorbiidae Planorbis spp. 0 0 0 0 Hirudinea Glossiphonidae Helobdella stagnalis (L.) 5 15 65 85 Erpobdellidae Erpobdella octoculata (L.) 12 13 20 45 Diptera Chironomidae spp. indet. 1728 1920 1824 5472 Simuliidae spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Tipulidae Dicranota spp. 0 0 0 0 Ceratopogonidae spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Psychodidae spp. indet. 0 0 1 1 Empedidae spp. indet. 0 2 1 3 Diptera pupae spp. indet. 6 0 0 6 Oligochaeta spp. indet. 11 46 21 78 Hydracarina spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Tricladida spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Abundance 2145 2398 2017 6560 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:57 APPENDIX D contd. Macroinvertebrate list with abundances for Site 4. Rve Water June 2004 Taxon Family Species/genus Sire 4 A B C TOTAL Crustacea Asellidae Asellus ngmticus (L.) 39 37 6 82 Gammaridae Gnnznzaws duebeni(Lilj .) 2 4 4 IO Astacidae Arrs~opotan~obiuspdl~es (L.) 0 0 0 0 Plecoptera Leuctridae Leuchn hippoprrs Ketnpny 0 0 0 0 Ephemeroptera Baetidae Bnetis spp. 0 0 0 0 Bnefis rkodmi (Pictet.) 0 0 0 0 Baetis wuticrls (L.) 0 0 0 0 Baetis scumbus Eaton 0 0 0 0 Ephemerelliidae Semtella igrzitn Poda 0 2 0 2 Caenidae Cnenis rivulomnr Eaton 0 0 0 0 Cmnis lz~tuosn Eaton 0 3 0 3 Caenis spp. 0 0 0 0 Heptageniidae Ecdyonurus spp. 0 0 0 0 Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Hydropsyche sihhi (Diihler) 0 0 0 0 Polcentropodidae Polycen~oprlsflnvolllnclrlnttcs (Pictet.) 0 0 0 0 spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Rhyacophilidae Rlzyacophila dorsalis (Curtis) 0 0 0 0 Limnephilidae Halesus radiatus (Curtis) 0 0 0 0 Linmephihs hfnntzrs Cutis 0 1 0 1 Leptoceridae Athripsodes spp. I 0 0 1 Sericostomatidae Sericosfonm persmntw @pence in K & S) 0 0 0 0 pupae indet. 0 0 0 0 Hemiptera Veliidae Velia spp. 0 0 0 0 Coleoptera Elmidae Elmis aenen (Miiller) 5 I I 7 Oulimrzirrs tubercttlattrs Miiller 0 0 0 0 Limnius volckmnri (Panzer) 0 0 0 0 Haliplidae &y&u elevnhrs (Panzer) 0 0 0 0 Dytiscidae Coelnnzbus spp. 0 0 0 0 Helodidae Helodes spp. 0 0 0 0 Helophoridae Potnmonectus depressus elegflns 0 2 0 2 Mollusca Sphaeriidae SpkaefYw~~spp. 0 0 0 0 Pisiditrm spp. 0 2 1 3 Hyrobiidae Potclmopyrgta nntipodnrtm~(Gray) 0 0 0 0 Valvatidae Vnlvcltamonostoma Steenbuch 0 0 0 0 Valvntapiscinnlis (Miiller) 0 0 0 0 For inspection purposes only. Physidae PhysnConsent spp. of copyright owner required for any other use.0 0 0 0 Ancylidae Ancylt~fltrviatilis (Miiller) 0 0 0 0 Lynmaeidae Lymwenperegm (Miiller) 0 0 0 0 Planorbiidae Plnnorbis spp. 0 0 0 0 Hirudinea Glossiphonidae Helobdella stqdis (L.) IO 23 17 50 Erpobdellidae Erpobdella octoculatn (L.) 0 0 0 0 Diptera Chironomidae spp. indet. 210 176 IS2 56s Simuliidae spp. indet. I 0 0 1 Tipulidae Dicr~notn spp. 0 0 0 0 Ceratopogonidae spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Psychodidae spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Empedidae spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Diptera pupae spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Oligochaeta spp. indet. 6 8 24 3s Hydracarina spp. indet. 2 6 4 I2 Tricladida spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Abundance 276 265 239 780 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:57 APPENDIX D contd. Macroinvertebrate list with abundances for Site 5, Rye Water June 2004 Taxon Family Species/genus Site 5 AB C TOTAL Crustacea Asellidae Asellus aquaticus (L.) 1 8 3 12 Gammaridae Gammark duebeni (Lilj.) 0 0 0 0 Astacidae Austropotamobiuspallipes (L.) 0 I I 2 Leuctridae Leuctra hippopus Kempny 0 0 0 0 Ephekeroptel ra Baetidae Baetis spp. 3 3 II 17 Baetis rhodani (Pi&et.) 5 0 II 16 Bnetismuticus (L.) 3 0 2 5 Baetis scambus Eaton 3 0 1 4 Ephemerelliidae Seratella ignifa Poda 114 I6 107 237 Caenidae Caenis rivulorum Eaton 82 149 160 391 Caenis hrctuosa Eaton I6 54 I8 88 Caenis spp. I4 4 4 22 Heptageniidae Ecdyonurus spp. I 0 0 I Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Hydropsychesiltalai (D8hler) I7 I 19 37 Polcentropodidae Po!vcentropusflavomaculatus (Pictet.) 7 4 I 12 spp. indet. I 0 0 I Rhyacophilidae Rhyacophila dorsalis (Curtis) 1 0 6 7 Limnephilidae Halesus radiatus (Curtis) 0 1 I 2 Limnephilus lunatus Curtis 0 0 0 0 Leptoceridae Athripsodes spp. 6 I2 109 127 Sericostomatidae Sericoslonza person&an (Spence in K & S) 0 0 0 0 pupae indet. 0 0 0 0 Hemiptera Veliidae Velia spp. 0 0 0 0 Coleoptera Elmidae Elmis aenea (Mtier) 76 4 77 157 Oulimnius tuberculatus Miiller 0 3 1 4 Limnius volckmari (Panzer) 0 0 2 2 Haliplidae Biychius elevatus (Panzer) 0 3 2 5 Dytiscidae Coelambus spp. 0 2 0 2 Helodidae Helodes spp. 0 2 0 2 Helophoridae Potamonectus depressus elegant 0 0 0 0 Mollusca Sphaeriidae Sphaerium spp. 3 0 2 5 Pisidilrm spp. 26 IO 9 45 Hyrobiidae Potamopyrgus antipodarum(Gray) 196 294 229 719 Valvatidae Valvata macrostoma Steenbuch 0 1 2 3 Valvatapiscinalis (Miiller) I 0 0 I Physidae Physa spp. For inspection purposes only. 0 0 0 0 Ancylidae AncyhtsfIuviatilisConsent of copyright (Miiller) owner required for any other0 use. 0 0 0 Lymnaeidae Lynznaeaperegm (Miiller) 0 1 0 1 Planorbiidae Planorbis spp. 0 2 0 2 Hirudinea Glossiphonidae Helobdella stagnalis (L.) 0 0 0 0 Erpobdellidae Erpobdella octoculata (L.) I2 0 3 I5 Diptera Chironomidae spp. indet. 2912 872 3368 7152 Simuliidae spp. indet. 4 0 8 I2 Tipulidae Dicranota spp 0 0 0 0 Ceratopogonidae spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Psychodidae spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Empedidae spp. indet. 0 0 I I Diptera pupae spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Oligochaeta spp. indet. 2 5 0 7 Hydracarina spp. indet. 2X 26 48 102 Tricladida SDD. indet. 0 0 0 0 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:57 APPENDIX D contd. Macroinvertebrate list with abundances for Site 7. Rve Water June 2004 Taxon Family Species/genus Site I Crustacea Asellidae AseNtrsaqlrnticlrs (L.) I 1 I3 15 Gammaridae Gnn~nwtrs riuebeni (Lilj .) 0 1 0 I Astacidae A2lst~aporcln2obillsynNipes (L.) 0 0 0 0 Leuctridae Leucb~~Iuppop~s Kempny 0 0 0 0 Eohemerootera Baetidae Baetis spp. 0 1 4 5 Baetis rhodmi (Pictet.) 6 2 7 I5 Baetis nmticus (L.) 2 2 6 IO Baetis scambus Eaton 1 0 0 I Ephemerelliidae Seratella ignita Poda 28 22 30 so Caenidae Caenis ~iwrlomnt Eaton 41 35 64 140 Caenis lttcbrosa Eaton 2 0 I4 I6 Caenis spp. 0 2 5 I Heptageniidae EcdyatzzlJxsspp. 0 0 0 0 Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Hydropqxhe siltalai (Diihler) 40 27 52 I19 Polcentropodidae Polycentroprrsj7avomacztlahu (Pictet.) 0 I 0 I spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Rhyacophilidae R/z-vacophila dorsalis (Curtis) 7 5 5 17 Limnephilidae Halesus radiahrs (Curtis) 0 0 0 0 Linmephiltrs hmahrs Curtis 0 0 0 0 Leptoceridae Athripsodes spp. 217 57 s3 357 Sericostomatidae Sericostorw persmzahmz (Spence in K h S) 0 0 I 1 pupae indet. 2 2 I 5 Hemiptera Veliidae Velia spp. 0 0 0 0 Coleoptera Ehnidae Elks aenea (Miiller) ss 54 132 274 Oulinmizrs tuberczdahls Miiller 0 4 1 5 Linznius volclinmri (Panzer) 0 0 1 I Haliplidae BJYC~Z~US elevafus (Panzer) 3 0 5 S Dytiscidae Coelanzbus spp. 0 0 0 0 Helodidae Helodes spp. 0 0 0 0 Helophoridae Potamonecha depressus elegmls 0 0 0 0 Mollusca Sphaeriidae Sphaer~itmz spp. 2 2 4 S Pisiditm~ spp. 0 0 0 0 Hyrobiidae Potanzopyrgus nntipodmxnz (Gray) 1120 742 1562 3424 Valvatidae Valvata macrostoma Steenbuch 4 s 20 32 Valvatapiscblalis (Miiiier) 0 0 0 0 For inspection purposes only. Physidae PhysaConsent spp. of copyright owner required for any other use.0 3 IS 21 Ancylidae Ancyltrsfltrvinfilis (Miiller) 0 0 0 0 Lymnaeidae Lynmaeaperegra (Miiller) 0 0 0 0 Planorbiidae Planorbis spp. 0 0 0 0 Hirudinea Glossiphonidae Helobdella stag~zalis (L.) 0 0 0 0 Erpobdellidae Erpobdella octocdata (L.) 0 0 0 0 Dipten Chironomidae spp. indet. 660 417 705 l7S2 Simuliidae spp. indet. 26 I2 IO 48 Tipulidae Diclanota spp. 0 0 2 2 Ceratopogonidae spp. indet. 1 0 0 I Psychodidae spp. indet. I I 1 3 Empedidae spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Diptera pupae spp. indet. 14 IS 30 62 Oligochaeta spp. indet. 5 3 3 II Hydracarina spp. indet. 90 27 224 341 Tricladida spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:57 APPENDIX D contd. Macroinvertebrate list with abundances for Site 8, Rye Water June 2004 Taxon Family Species/genus Site 8 Crustacea Asellidae Aselhrs aquaticus (L.) 7 3 0 IO Gammaridae Gunmza~trs citrebeni (Lilj.) 0 0 0 0 Astacidae Austropotamobiuspallipes (L.) I 0 0 1 Plecoptera Leuctridae Leuctra hippopus Kempny 1 0 0 I Ephemeroptera Baetidae Baetis spp. 8 22 27 57 Baetis &odani(Pictet.) 4 9 45 58 Baetis muticus (L.) 6 J J 20 Baetis scambus Eaton 0 0 0 0 Ephemerelliidae Seratella ignita Poda I9 I7 23 59 Caenidae Caenis ricrrlorum Eaton 126 105 55 286 Caenis hickrosa Eaton 5 I 1 J Cuenis spp. 3 2 1 6 Heptageniidae Ecdyonurus spp. 0 0 1 I Trichoptera Hydropsychidae f+dropsyche siltalai (DBhler) 4 29 81 114 Polcentropodidae Polycen~oplrsflavo:onlaculahls (Pictet.) I I 2 4 spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Rhyacophilidae Rhyacophila dorsalis (Curtis) 5 4 5 14 Limnephilidae Halesus radiakts (Curtis) 0 0 0 0 Limnephiha lunarus Curtis 0 0 0 0 Leptoceridae Athripsodes spp. 172 298 249 719 Sericostomatidae Sericostoma personabun @pence in K & S) 0 I 0 I pupae indet. 0 0 0 0 Hemiptera Veliidae Velia spp. 0 0 0 0 Coleoptera Elmidae Elmis aenea (Miiller) 173 231 172 576 Oulimnius krberculakti Miiller 3 0 0 3 Limnius t~olckmari (Panzer) I 0 0 I Haliplidae Btychius elevatus (Panzer) 3 1 0 4 Dytiscidae Coelambus spp. 0 0 0 0 Helodidae Helodes spp. 0 0 0 0 Helophoridae Potamonechis depressus elegans 0 0 0 0 Mollusca Sphaeriidae Sphaerium spp. 0 I 0 7 Pisiditmm spp. 1 18 IO 29 Hyrobiidae P otamopyrgus antipodarum (Gray) 734 297 508 1539 Valvatidae Valvata macrostoma Steenbuch 0 0 0 0 Valvutupiscinalis (Mtiler) 1 1 0 2 Physidae Physa spp. For inspection purposes only. 0 0 0 0 Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. Ancylidae Ancylusfluviatilis (Miiller) 0 0 0 0 Lymnaeidae Lymnaeaperegru (Miiller) 3 2 0 5 Planorbiidae Planorbis spp. 0 0 2 2 Hirudinea Glossiphonidae Helobdella sfagnalis (L.) 0 0 0 0 Erpobdellidae Elpobdella octoculata (L.) 0 I 0 1 Diptera Chironomidae spp. indet. I JO4 1554 1164 4422 Simuliidae spp. indet. 31 787 329 II47 Tipulidae Dicranota spp. 0 0 0 0 Ceratopogonidae spp. indet. 0 0 1 I Psychodidae spp. indet. 0 2 0 2 Empedidae spp. indet. 0 0 I 1 Diptera pupae spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Oligochaeta spp. indet. 1 7 6 14 Hydracarina spp. indet. 89 64 113 266 Tricladida spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Abundance 3106 3471 2803 9380 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:57 APPENDIX D contd. Macroinvertebrate list with abundances for Site 11, Rye Water June 2004 Taxon Family Species/genus Site 11 Crustacea Asellidae Asehs aquaticus (L.) 66 31 24 121 Gammaridae Gnnwnar~~sdueber;i(klj.) 0 0 0 0 Astacidae Atrs~opotanzobiuspa[[ipes (L.) 0 0 0 0 Plecoptera Leuctridae Leucbn hippopus Kempny 0 0 0 0 Ephemeroptem Baetidae Baetis spp. 8 4 1 13 Baetis rhodani (Pictet.) 110 50 49 209 Baetis muticus (L.) 2 0 1 3 Baetis scambus Eaton 0 0 0 0 Ephemerelliidae Serafella ignita Poda 3 6 2 11 Caenidae Caenis ~ivulof*tmrEaton 0 0 0 0 Caenis hrctuosa Eaton 0 0 0 0 Caenis spp. 0 0 0 0 Heptageniidae Ecdyonufw spp. 0 0 0 0 Trichoptera Hydropsychidae Hydropsyche siltalai (Diihler) 0 0 0 0 Polcentropodidae Polvce?lh’opllsflrvoowncrl[clhrs (Pictet.) 0 0 0 0 spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Rhyacophilidae Rhyacophila dorsalis (Curtis) 0 0 0 0 Limnephilidae Haleszfs indiatus (Curtis) 0 0 0 0 Lifmephilus fzmatzfsCurtis I 2 I 4 Leptoceridae Athripsodes spp. 0 0 0 0 Sericostomatidae Sericostonm personatm (Spence in K Sr S) 0 0 0 0 pupae indet. 0 0 0 0 Hemiptera Veliidae Velia spp. 0 1 0 I Coleoptera Elmidae Elmis aenea (Miiller) IS 12 4 34 Ozdinznius tzrbemdatus Miiller 0 0 0 0 Lifmius volckmari (Panzer) 0 0 0 0 Haliplidae Bfychius elevates (Panzer) 0 0 0 0 Dytiscidae Coelambus spp. 0 0 0 0 Helodidae Helodes spp. 0 0 0 0 Helophoridae Potamonectus depressus elegam 0 0 0 0 Molh~sca Sphaeriidae Sphashmz spp. 0 0 0 0 Pisidim spp. 5 6 5 I6 Hyrobiidae Potanropyrgm arztipodamm (Gray) 1 0 0 I Valvatidae Valvata n~acrostoma Steenbuch 2 2 0 4 Valvatapiscinalis For inspection (Miiller) purposes only. 0 I 2 3 Physidae PhysaConsent spp. of copyright owner required for any other0 use. I 0 I Ancylidae Ancylt~Juviatilis (Miiller) I I I 3 Lymnaeidae Lymnaeaperegra (Miiller) 5 3 I 9 Planorbiidae Planorbis spp. 0 I 0 1 Hirudinea Cilossiphonidae Helobdella stagnalis (L.) s 3 5 I6 Erpobdellidae Erpobdella octoctdata (L.) I 2 0 3 Diptera Chironomidae spp. indet. 4so 342 324 1146 Simuliidae spp. indet. 115 2s 30 173 Tipulidae Dicranota spp. 0 0 0 0 Ceratopogonidae spp. indet. 0 2 2 4 Psychodidae spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Empedidae spp. indet. I 2 0 3 Diptera pupae spp. indet. 0 0 0 0 Oligochaeta spp. indet. I4 I1 7 32 Hydracarina spp. indet. 84 57 32 173 Tricladida spp. indet. I 1 I 3 Abundance 926 569 492 19s7 EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:57 For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:57 IPPC Application Form Attachment E.3.4 Firewater Risk Assessment March 2003 See Attachment J For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. Attachment E.2.3 Pflge 1 of I Intel Ireland EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:57 IPPC Application Form ATTACHMENT E.4 REVIEW OF GROUND CONDITION E.4 Environmental Setting and Existing Site Condition E.4.1 Geological Setting The Leixlip area is underlain by an extensive tract of Lower Carboniferous Limestone and mudstones. The Intel site is mainly underlain be basinal limestone facies that consist of dark argillaceous and calcareous shales. The limestone is fine-grained and bedding thickness is generally less than 0.5m. These rocks are part of the Dublin formation and outcrop along the Laneway immediately to the east of the existing plant and also along the banks of the Rye Water. The overburden cover consists of glacial tills which vary in thickness from 0 - 8.5 metres. The thinnest cover occurs in the extreme east of the plant and the thickest cover is 0 in a trough that runs beneath the existing Intel Plant. The geological sequence underlying the site to be as follows: l Made-Ground l Glacial Tills l Limestones and Mudstone E.4.2 Hydrogeological Setting The Dublin formation, which underlies most of the Intel property, has varying aquifer status depending on the degree of fracturing at a particular location. This formation is capable of single well yields ca. 5000 cubic metres per day. Whilst such yields are not possible everywhere, the limestone Forbeneath inspection purposesthe site only. is considered a locally important Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. aquifer. 0 The unconsolidated glacial tills will have little groundwater potential except where outwash and alluvial deposits are present. Two distinct water-bearing strata are present beneath the Intel property, a discontinuous saturated perched zone within the uppermost glacial tills and a confined bedrock aquifer in the Dublin Formation limestone’s. The perched water table is ephemeral and is dependent on recent precipitation for recharge. E.4.3 Groundwater Conditions Beneath the Site Intel Ireland currently has a network of groundwater monitoring wells located along the northern, eastern and southern site boundaries. The network currently comprises 19 groundwater-monitoring wells. A total of 11 of these wells are located down-gradient of the main manufacturing and storage facilities between the site and the Rye Water. Attachment E.4 Page I of 2 Intel Ireland EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:57 IPPC Application Form Data obtained from on site groundwater monitoring wells indicates that groundwater beneath the site flows in an approximate north/north-easterly direction towards the Rye Water, which forms a discharge boundary to the north of the site. The deeper regional position may be controlled by discharge to the River Liffey and the coast at Dublin Bay. The groundwater monitoring results are fairly consistent from one sampling event to another with water quality being reported as being free of industrial contamination. There are no known groundwater abstractions in close proximity to the Intel site. For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. Attachment E.4 Page 2 of 2 Intel Ireland EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:57 For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:57 CD Placeholder This page denotes that a CD entitled Intel Ireland Ltd, Collinstown Industrial Park, Leixlip, Co. Kildare IPPC Application February 2005 Noise Modelling File 1 of 1 CD was submitted as part of this licence application. The CD is held by the EPA at Licensing Unit, OLG, EPA, P.O. Box 3000 Johnstown Castle Estate, Wexford. For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:57 / ~~-___- - x--~- a-c-- - “$- M_l -Jj--- -7 I r~ il- Intel Ireland Ltd Collinstown hdustrial Park Leixlip, Co.KiIdare II IPPC Appli&ion February 2005 Noise Modelling File 1 of1 CD For inspection purposes only. Consent of copyright owner required for any other use. . EPA Export 25-07-2013:15:36:57