Noleen Roche
Environmental Protection Agency
PO Box 3000
Johnstown Castle Estate
Co. Wexford
Ireland
30th June 2006
Re: Request for information regarding Exel Meats Reg No. 781 in accordance with
Article 11(2)(b)(ii) of the EPA Licensing Regulations 1994 to 2004.
ot
he
ru
se
.
Dear Ms Roche
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
Further to correspondence received from Frank Clinton dated 17/05/06 and
subsequent telephone conversations and e-mails to Breen Higgins, please see enclosed
information as requested by the EPA in support of the IPPC application for Exel
Meats (Reg. No. 781).
ns
en
Included with this letter is one signed original, 2 copies in hardcopy format and 2
copies in electronic searchable PDF format on CD-ROM as requested.
Co
Should you require any other information please do not hesitate to contact me.
Yours Sincerely
John Collins
Managing Director
Enc.
Cc. Denver Willis
Victoria Kerr
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:05
IPPC Application Form
SECTION A NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY
Non-Technical Summary of IPPC Licence Application
A non-technical summary of the application is to be included here. The summary should
identify all environmental impacts of significance associated with the carrying on of the
activity/activities, and describe mitigation measures proposed or existing to address
these impacts. This description should also indicate the normal operating hours and
days per week of the activity.
The following information must be included in the non-technical summary:
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
A description of:
− the installation and its activities,
− the raw and auxiliary materials, other substances and the energy used in or
generated by the installation,
− the sources of emissions from the installation,
− the conditions of the site of the installation,
− the nature and quantities of foreseeable emissions from the installation into each
medium as well as identification of significant effects of the emissions on the
environment,
− the proposed technology and other techniques for preventing or, where this not
possible, reducing emissions from the installation,
− where necessary, measures for the prevention and recovery of waste generated by
the installation,
− further measures planned to comply with the general principles of the basic
obligations of the operator i.e.
Co
ns
en
(a) all the appropriate preventive measures are taken against pollution, in
particular through application of the best available techniques;
(b) no significant pollution is caused;
(c) waste production is avoided in accordance with Council Directive
75/442/EEC of 15 July 1975 on waste; where waste is produced, it is
recovered or, where that is technically and economically impossible, it is
disposed of while avoiding or reducing any impact on the environment;
(d) energy is used efficiently;
(e) the necessary measures are taken to prevent accidents and limit their
consequences;
(f) the necessary measures are taken upon definitive cessation of activities to
avoid any pollution risk and return the site of operation to a satisfactory state.
− measures planned to monitor emissions into the environment.
Supporting information should form Attachment No A.
EMK A.1
Page 10 of 165
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:05
IPPC Application Form
SECTION A NON-TECHNICAL SUMMARY
Introduction
Exel Meats (Kilbeggan) (Rostella) is part of the Dungannon Meats Group which is a family
owned business by two brothers Jim and Jack Dobson. The installation slaughters Cattle and
produces sides and quarters for further processing and direct sales to other sites. The average
daily processing figure for Exel Meats (Kilbeggan) is 272 cattle.
Operating hours are as follows:
Slaughter Process
7.00 – 19.30
Lairage Area & Yard Area
2.00 – 19.30
The days of operation for the site are Monday to Friday perhaps with an occasional Saturday
during peak times of year.
The Exel Meats (Kilbeggan) installation is located just off the N52, approximately 2Km
South East of Kilbeggan in Westmeath.
he
ru
Abatement of point source emissions to air
There are two main sources of emissions to air, the Boiler plant and Generator plant.
There are currently 3 abatement technologies used for the reduction of point source
emissions to air:
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
•
se
.
1. Emissions and their control
Abatement of point source emissions to surface water and sewer
There are two releases to surface water from the site and these are from the Integrated
Constructed Wetlands (ICWs), and the yard run off (Storm water). The emissions from
these points are regulated by the EPA.
Co
•
ns
en
1. Use of Low Sulphur Diesel to reduce Sulphur emissions to air
2. Preventative Maintenance programme for the Generator and Boiler to ensure
expected efficiencies are met and that emissions to air are optimised.
3. The use of an appropriate stack height for the boiler to ensure sufficient particulate
dispersal.
Abatement technologies used within the ICW system are:
1. Continual gross cleaning within production areas with brush and shovel
2. Catchpots within foul drainage network within the production areas
3. Initial Screening to 1mm removing gross solids
4. Further settling and removal of solids within initial lagoon
5. Individual settling and removal of solids and organics within subsequent treatment
ponds
Abatement technologies used for storm water discharge are:
1. An oil-water interceptor.
2. Yard water only goes to storm from the clean yard area, the dirty yard area drains to
the ICW.
•
Abatement of point source emissions to groundwater
Groundwater flow is thought to flow to the North/Northwest of the site.
There is as a matter of course a small amount of infiltration to the ground from each of
the ponds but this is strictly monitored by sampling at the 3 borewells and lysimeters as
highlighted in Section F.
EMK A.1
Page 11 of 165
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:05
IPPC Application Form
Abatement technology used to reduce point source emissions to groundwater are the
engineered geotextile liner of the main settling lagoon and also engineered and compacted
clay liners of the sequential treatment ponds to 300mm depth.
Control of fugitive emissions to air
Refrigeration gas Ammonia (NH4), Maintenance Aerosols, and Fuel (Gas Oil) are used on
the installation. There is preventative leak detection for the refrigeration system including
the cooling tower and pipe work is regularly checked within the preventative maintenance
system. There are minimal emissions to air from the refrigeration system. Maintenance
Aerosols are used and are applied direct to plant and machinery where air emissions are
released; these are kept to a minimum and used when required. Fuel such as, Gas Oil is
used for the main combustion equipment within the installation and are BAT for the
installation thus reducing potential emissions.
•
Control of fugitive emissions to surface water, sewer and ground water
The installation has a number of storage vessels and tanks with substances varying from
Fuels, Blood, Effluent, Chemicals (Cleaning and Maintenance). These are all stored on
hardstanding and either/ and / or bunded and linked to a foul drainage system to ensure
that fugitive emissions are mitigated as best possible.
•
Odour
An odour assessment for the installation was not deemed necessary, as putrescible wastes
are removed on a daily or bi-weekly basis. Odour is deemed to have an insignificant
impact, see section E1.C (Odour and Potential Emissions). Also there have been no
complaints relating to odour recorded by Westmeath County Council in the past four
years.
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
•
3. Management
Exel Meats will be implementing an Environmental Management System as detailed
within EMKIP. Exel Meats is currently undergoing the introduction of a management
system and has a dedicated environmental team to implement policies, procedures,
materials and improvements.
Co
ns
en
•
4. Material Inputs
•
Raw Materials selection
Raw materials selection for the installation is well controlled as no chemical, oil, fuel is
allowed within the installation before being reviewed by Health and Safety, Technical,
Maintenance, Purchasing and Environmental Departments. Materials such as cleaning
chemicals and cooling water chemicals are required to meet certain specification to
ensure both hygiene, environmental and safety levels before storage and use on site, and
suppliers and regulating authorities are consulted on usage amounts and concentrations.
•
Water Use
The installation is performing efficiently as the water usage is below the upper
benchmark comparison for the sector with approx. 853.03 litres per animal. However this
is still above the lower benchmark and further methods to reduce water usage will be
investigated in the planned water audit.
•
Waste handling
¾ Waste minimisation
EMK A.1
Page 12 of 165
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:05
IPPC Application Form
Minimisation of waste for Exel Meats is difficult due to the nature of the process
where there is a lot of unavoidable waste. However, there is widespread re-use of
pallets and re-usable crates.
¾ Waste recovery or disposal
The main waste products from this site are animal by-products. These are divided
into Category 1,2 and 3. All category 1 & 2 material with the exception of manure
and digestive tract contents is collected and sent for rendering as is required by
legislation and all manure and digestive tract contents is taken for landspreading.
Category 3 material is split between being used for pet food or sent for rendering.
Energy
There are plans to implement an Environmental Management System where further
objectives will be made in tandem with current in-house measures.
•
Accidents and their environmental consequences
Exel Meats is not a COMAH top tier or lower tier site and Section J has shown that there
are no unacceptable risks / potential for release for the installation.
•
Noise and vibration
Further to a noise assessment that was carried out in January 2006, the results in Section
E and Section I show that there is little likelihood that noise from the installation will lead
to an unacceptable noise impact at Noise Sensitive Receptors.
•
Monitoring
Monitoring is currently carried out in house on the emission from the ICWs after
treatment of the effluent to surface water and the discharge is also monitored by
Westmeath County Council. Emissions to air for boiler plant are carried out yearly along
with yearly services.
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
•
Co
ns
en
Other monitoring will be reviewed and implemented as agreed with the regulator.
•
De-commissioning
De-commissioning will be carried out as agreed with the regulator and as within Section
K of the application. The site will be returned to its original state with all plant, pipework
and buildings removed.
•
Habitats
The Exel Meats installation is not within 2km of any SPAs or cSACs. Therefore the
likelihood of an environmental impact from the installation affecting these areas is highly
unlikely. However there are two NHAa within 5Km of Exel Meats. Grand Cannal 3.5
Km to the North East of the site and Derrygolan Esker 4 Km South West of the site.
There is a very low potential for impact to these areas as the storm water discharge and
the ICW discharge drain to the River Brosna, which does not connect, to the Grand
Cannal. Also the emissions to air from the boiler are of such a minor nature that they
should not cause any negative impacts to either the Grand Cannal or Derygolan Esker.
While emissions from the generator are so infrequent that it would cause no impact either.
EMK A.1
Page 13 of 165
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:05
1. The Daily Operating Hours at the Slaughtering Facility
Slaughter Process
7.00-19.30
Lairage & Yard Area
24 hours on production days
(Both Cattle intake & Wash Down)
Days of Operation
Mondays-Fridays with an occasional Saturday
during busy periods.
2. The Average Daily Processing Figures for the Activity Expressed as Head of
Cattle
Date
25/11/05 to 24/05/06
25/05/05 to 24/05/06
Number of Kill Days
105
229
Number of Animals Killed
29,824
60,908
Therefore the average daily processing figure for Exel Meats (Rostella) is 272 cattle.
3. Disposal Route Undertaken by SRM
Co
ns
en
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
There are three categories of animal by-product waste.
Category 1: Skull including the brain & eyes
Tonsils
The vertebral column excluding the vertebrae of tail and the transverse
process of lumbar vertebrae and thoracic vertebrae and the wings of
the sacrum, but including dorsal root ganglia.
Spinal cord
Intestines (from the duodenum to the rectum)
Mesentery
Unborn Calves
The sticking wound
Uterus
Category 2:
Spleen
Condemned low risk lungs, livers & hearts
Forelegs
Bladder
Trimmings from the belly room
Omasum (manifold)
Abomasum
Ears
Feet
Veterinary high risk condemned material
Trimmings, muzzle from the offal room
Trimmings from despatch
Testicles
Horns
Digestive tract contents & manure
Jawbone
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:06
Category 3:
Liver
Lungs
Tripe
Trachea
Oesophagus
Gullet
Front shin bone
Dirty Head Fat
Blood
Disposal Route of Animal By-products
SRM is collected in bins, and trays that are clearly marked as SRM/Cat
1. All floor waste is handled as Cat 1 waste and all floor sweepings in
areas where SRM material is either removed or handled is to be treated
as SRM. All SRM bins/dolavs containing SRM/Cat 1 waste are leak
proof and SRM is stained using a blue dye and are emptied into the Cat
1 trailer only. All trailers are leak proof and labelled as Cat 1 For
Disposal Only and covered at all times when not being filled,
especially when leaving Exel Meats.
ru
se
.
Category 1:
All Category 2 waste (with the exception of manure and digestive tract
contents) is disposed of in the same skip as the category 1 waste.
Therefore according to the lowest denominator rule, category 2 waste
is then identified and treated as category 1. (See above)
Co
ns
en
Category 2:
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
All Category 1 waste trailers are collected by Premier Proteins,
Ballinasloe, Co. Galway for disposal by rendering. (Premier Proteins
(R915) provide the carrier to transport the waste from Exel to
Ballinasloe)
The manure and digestive tract contents are collected in a biaxial
trailer and the trailer collected by Anneville Agri-services for
landspreading at Anneville, Gaybrook, Mullingar, Co. Westmeath &
Bracklyn Estate, Bracklyn, Raharney, Co. Westmeath. Approximately
1135 tonnes are collected by Anneville Agri-services for landspreading
each year. The trailer used to collect this waste is collected twice a
week and is covered prior to being removed from site.
Category 3:
Liver, lungs, tripe & trachea are stored in dolavs and collected by
Slaney Foods. This material is taken to Slaney Foods Intermediate
Plant, Ryland Bunclody, Co Wexford where it is used to make pet
food. Approximately 696 tonnes of Cat 3 animal by-products are
collected by Slaney Foods to be used as pet food each year. Dolavs
containing this material intended for pet food are collected every in a
refrigerated container lorry.
Blood is collected in a bleed trough and then pumped to a tank, where
it is stored until it is collected by APC Technologies. Citric Acid is
added to the blood to keep it from clotting, and the blood tank is
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:06
washed out on a daily basis after every collection by APC
Technologies. APC Technologies take the blood to, 2 Silverwood
Industrial Estate, Co. Armagh where it is used to make pet food.
Approximately 736 tonnes of blood are collected by APC
Technologies to be used as pet food every year.
Oesophagus, gullet, front shinbone, and dirty head fat, are collected in
dolavs and then transferred to a skip. The skip is collected by Dublin
Products, and taken to Dublin Products Ltd., Dunlavin, Co. Wicklow
for rendering.
Approximately 3085 tonnes of Category 1 and Category 3 animal by-products are
taken away as waste from Exel Meats every year. This is not including the tonnages
listed above for blood and liver, lungs, tripe and trachea or for the manure and
digestive tract contents.
4. Tonnage of Waste Removed from Exel Meats (Rostella)
Waste
2
3
3
1 & 2 (Goes as 1)
Manure & Digestive Tract Contents
Liver, Lungs, Tripe, Trachea (For Pet Food)
Blood
SRM and other category 2 waste not
mentioned in table above.
Oesophagus, gullet, front shin bone & dirty
head fat.
Total Animal By-products Waste Collected
from Site
se
ru
he
ot
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
3
.
Category
Annual Tonnage
(T)*
1135
696
736
3085
(Includes Cat 3)
See Above
5652
Co
ns
en
*Weights taken from October 04-September 05
5. Sensitive Habitats Located Within a 5Km Radius of the Facility
There are no Special Areas of Conservation (SACs) or Special Protection Areas
(SPAs) within 5Km of Exel Meats. There are two National Heritage Areas (NHAs)
within 5Km of Exel Meats. Grand Canal pNHA, 002104 is 3.5 Km to the North East
of Exel Meats and Derrygolan Esker pNHA, 000896 is 4 Km South West of Exel
Meats.
There is a very low potential for impacts on the Grand Canal pNHA as the storm
water discharge and the discharge from the Integrated Constructed Wetlands are part
of an area that drains to the River Brosna which is not connected to the Grand Canal.
Also any emissions to air from the boiler are of such a minor nature that they should
not cause any negative impacts to the Grand Canal or to Derrygolan Esker, while
emissions from the emergency generator being so infrequent that it would cause no
impact either.
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:06
6. Details of Storm Water Discharge
Exel Meats Rainfall Related Discharge
Area Drained
Area
(m2)
Yard to Storm Including Weigh
Bridge
Roof to Storm
2206
Mean
Annual
Rainfal
l* mm
934.3
Mean
Annual
Discharge
m3
2061
Mean
Greatest
Daily
Daily
Discharge Rainfall
m3
* mm
5.6
69.8
Greatest
Daily
discharge
m3
154
2416
934.3
2257
6.2
69.8
168.6
Roof to Foul
304
934.3
284
0.8
69.8
21.2
Back Yard Area to Foul
2111
934.3
1972
5.4
69.8
147.3
Back Yard By-products Area
327
934.3
306
0.8
69.8
22.8
*Mean Annual Rainfall is taken from Met Eireann
ru
he
ot
322.6m3
11.8m3
4318m3
0m3
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
Total Maximum Daily Discharge to Storm
Total Mean Daily Discharge to Storm
Total Mean Annual Discharge to Storm
Total Minimum Daily Discharge to Storm
se
.
Rainfall Related Discharge to Storm
Rainfall Related Discharge to Foul
Co
ns
en
Total Maximum Daily Discharge to Foul
Total Mean Daily Discharge to Foul
Total Mean Annual Discharge to Foul
Total Minimum Daily Discharge to Storm
168.5m3
6.2m3
2256m3
0m3
See Appendix 1 for copies of the certificate of analysis for the storm water discharge
and the receiving water.
7. Technical Details on Storm Water Infrastructure & Oil Interceptor Details
The yard is constructed with a 1 in 60 concrete fall to the storm drain which is a
150mm PVC water pipe that is O-Ring water pipe jointed as per standard wavin
detail. Storm manholes are 600mm diameter with 1500mm concrete rings and heavyduty manhole cover screwed down.
See Appendix 2 for details of oil interceptor. It is Nominal Size NSBD38 as
highlighted in Appendix 2.
8. Borehole Logs
This information is not available, as no borehole logs were recorded when the
boreholes were drilled. However prior to the Integrated Wetland Construction several
trial holes were dug, the results of which were as follows:
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:06
Trial Hole Number
Trial Hole 1
Soil Type
0-0.2m Brown Clay
0.2-2.5m Marl
0-0.5mBrown Clay
0.5-2.5m Marl
0-0.2m Brown Clay
0.2-0.6m Marl
Drainage Pipe Uncovered at 0.6m
Trial Hole 2
Trial Hole 3
See Appendix 3 for the location of the trial holes.
From the trial holes dug there was consistency in the underlying soils, all were dark
grey indicating poor permeability. It was determined by the feasibility study that
sufficient depths of ideal soil were present.
9. Groundwater Flow Net Assessment
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
To generate ground water contours and ground water flow direction OGE used ground
water levels in the three existing on-site wells (Appendix 4 –Figure No. 6 of O’Neill
Ground Water Engineering Report). These levels were surveyed using a RTK GPS
system. Water is constantly pumped from well No.1 & well No. 2 for use in the
facility. Therefore, before measuring water levels in these wells the pump was
switched off and the water levels were allowed to recover for up to 4 hours.
Co
ns
en
Using the available water elevation data, ground water contours and the direction of
ground water flow was estimated (Appendix 4 – Figure No. 7 of O’Neill Ground
Water Engineering Report). The direction of groundwater flow is estimated to be to
the Northeast of the site. Given that the static water levels in borehole 1 and 2 may
not have fully recovered, the actual direction of ground water may probably be more
to the North- Northwest of the site.
The proposed optimum location for 3 No. monitoring wells North of the site and 4
No. monitoring wells to the Southwest of the site is shown in Appendix 4 – Figure
No. 6 & 7 of O’Neill Ground Water Engineering Report.
The full report can be found in Appendix 4 if more detail is required.
10. Provide Construction Details in Relation to All Proposed Groundwater
Monitoring Borehole Installations
The groundwater monitoring wells will be designed to recover ground water samples
from the bedrock and sand and gravel (if present) aquifers beneath the site and for
measuring the elevation of the water table.
The boreholes will be drilled at a nominal 200mm diameter through made ground and
subsoils into the underlying bedrock aquifer. Temporary mild steel casing 150mm ID
will be installed from ground level to top of bedrock to support the open hole.
Drilling will continue at a diameter of 150mm into bedrock to a maximum depth of
between 15-20m. Boreholes in sand and gravel deposits will be drilled 3-4m into the
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:06
saturated zone. The total depth of the borehole will depend on the thickness of
overlying subsoils.
The monitoring wells will be constructed using 2” (51.8mm) PVC casing and screen.
The screen section of the well will be installed in the bedrock aquifer to accommodate
ground water sampling. Regular PVC casing will be used to line the remainder of the
open hole back up to ground level.
In sand and gravel deposits the screen section of the well will be installed from 1m
above the water table to 3m below. Regular PVC casing will then be installed back to
ground level.
To exclude the entrance of fine silts, sands and clays into the monitoring well a filter
pack consisting of 4-10mm washed pea gravel will be installed into the annulus from
the base of the well to 1m above the top of the screen section.
ru
se
.
To prevent downward migration of contaminated surface water into the filter pack,
3m of bentonite pellets will be installed above the filter pack. The remainder of the
annulus will then be back filled with uncontaminated material to within 1m of the
ground surface.
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
Cement grout will then be used to fill the remaining 1m of annulus and a lockable
steel cap will be installed in the grout, leaving the cap approximately 0.3m above the
ground level.
The full report can be found in Appendix 4 if more detail is required.
11. Provide a Mass Balance for Fluid Movement Throughout the ICW System.
Co
ns
en
Flow charts showing all known losses and gains to the ICW system during winter and
summer are shown in Appendix 4 - Figure No. 8 of O’Neill Ground Water
Engineering Report.
To calculate this mass balance 30-year averages from Met Eireann were used to
calculate rainfall and evapotranspiration rates, and the maximum effluent input of
200m3, maximum discharge output of 100m3 and maximum infiltration rate for the
ICW system was used.
The full report can be found in Appendix 4 if more detail is required.
12. Provide Details on the Receiving Stream for the ICW Discharge in Terms of
its Route Prior to Confluence With the River Brosna.
The route of the receiving stream was traced until confluence with the River Brosna
and its route marked onto a map. This can be seen in Appendix 3.
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:06
13. Details of the Receiving Water Body, Including Flow Rates, 95%ile Dry
Weather Flow Rates and Assimilative Capacity Calculations.
A sample was taken from the receiving water, and from the discharge pond (Could
not be taken from discharge as there has been no discharge). However the sample
results from the discharge pond are not representative of the effluent quality that is
proposed to be discharged from this system, as the system has not yet been fully
established. Therefore for the purposes of calculating assimilative capacity the values
in the discharge license (Ref. No.ENV/W54/2004) were used.
The proposed discharge point is a drainage ditch on the Southwest boundary of the
site (Appendix 3) which eventually joins up with the River Brosna approximately 1.5
Km to the West of the site. Stream velocity and cross sectional area were measured
on 1st June 2006 to determine the discharge of the stream which was calculated as
4l/s. The maximum volume of effluent that is proposed to be discharged into the
stream is 100m3/day (1.151l/s).
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
These flow rates were used to calculate the assimilative capacity of the stream, as due
to the nature of the discharge OGE were unable to determine the 95%ile dry weather
flow rates. Given that the proposed effluent quality will be 5mg/l BOD and a
permitted BOD loading at low flow is 1.0Kg BOD/day, the maximum effluent
discharge rate that the stream can accept is 2.3l/s. The proposed discharge would be
1.15l/s. Therefore the assimilative capacity of the stream under these flow conditions
(4l/s) is adequate to accept the proposed effluent discharge without detrimental effect.
Under these flow conditions and with an effluent BOD of 5mg/l, the stream could
assimilate twice the proposed discharge volume.
The full report can be found in Appendix 4 if more detail is required.
Co
ns
en
14. Provide Details of Any Predicted Impact of Discharge on the Receiving
Water Body and Outline Proposed Mitigation Measures.
To predict any impact of the discharge on the receiving water, a mixing model was
used to predict concentrations of Nitrate, Ammonical Nitrogen, pH Suspended Solids
and Ortho Phosphate, 70m downstream of the discharge point.
From the results of the mixing model the proposed discharge does not appear to have
a qualitative impact on the discharge stream. For all parameters except Ortho
Phosphate the concentration downstream in the receiving water was lowered.
Therefore discharging into the stream will not raise the overall concentrations of these
parameters in the downstream water.
The concentration of Ortho Phosphate was slightly increased downstream as a result
of mixing. According to the mixing model, for Orthophosphate to not have an impact
on the stream during dry weather flows, the concentration in the discharge would have
to be equal or less than the concentration in the stream.
The full report can be found in Appendix 4 if more detail is required.
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:06
Co
ns
en
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
Storm Water results are not yet available as there has not been a sustained period of
rain to allow a storm sample to be taken in the last month. As soon as there is a
sufficient period of rain the storm water sample will be taken.
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:06
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:07
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ns
en
Co
se
ru
he
ot
.
ot
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
Report
he
ru
se
.
Exel Meats
Co
ns
en
Request For Further Information Regarding An Application For An IPPC Licence
(Reg No. 781) By Exel Meats, Kilbeggan, Co. Westmeath.
June 2006
PROJECT NUMBER : 590601
7, South Main Street, Naas, Co. Kildare.
045 895668 fax : 045 881705 mobile : 087 2300933
email : info@groundwatereng.ie
Registered Office as above. Registered No. 354725. VAT No. 3900664V
tel :
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:07
REQUEST FOR FUR THER IN FORM ATION R EGARDING AN APP LIC A TI ON F OR A N
IPPC LICENCE ( REG NO. 781) BY EXEL MEATS, KILBEGGAN, C O. WESTMEATH
1.0
Introduction
1.1
O’Neill Ground Water Engineering Ltd. (OGE) were engaged by Victoria Kerr of Exel Meats to
undertake a hydrogeological assessment regarding a request for further information for an IPPC
licence. An application has been made to the EPA by Excel Meats, Kilbeggan, Co. Westmeath for an
ru
se
.
IPPC licence (Reg No. 781). The principle activity of the facility is classified as Food and Drink
1.2
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
(paragraph 7.4.2).
The facility currently carries out the slaughter of animals in an installation where the daily capacity is
under 1,500 units. Effluent from the facility which is comprised primarily of wash down water, is
discharged into an Integrated Constructed Wetland (ICW) system made up of 11 ponds.
The site (NGR 234415 232995 ) is located in the townland of Rostalla, approximately 2.5km southeast of
ns
en
1.3
Co
Kilbeggan, Co. Westmeath (Figure No. 1).
1.4
The EPA have requested that the following information be submitted:
•
Under take a ground water flow net assessment of the area influenced by the ICWs to determine the
optimum location for the installation of 3 no. ground water monitoring wells to the north of the ICW and
a further 4 no. along the western flank of the ICW.
•
Provide construction details of the proposed ground water monitoring installations.
•
Provide a mass balance for fluid movements throughout the ICW system.
•
Provide details of any predicted impact of the discharge waters on the receiving water body and outline
the proposed mitigation measures.
7, South Main Street, Naas, Co. Kildare
T:045-895668
F:045-881705
Mb:087-2300933
Email: info@groundwatereng.ie
Directors: S O’Neill (Managing) O O’Neill
Registered Office as above. Registered No. 354725. VAT No. 3900664V
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:07
Exel Meats
IPPC Licence Application (Reg No. 781)
•
Page 2
Report
Project No. 590601
29/06/2006
Details of the receiving water body, including flow rates, 95%ile dry weather flow and the assimilative
capacity.
2.0
Scope of Work
2.1
Section one of this report deals with the desk study. It aims to compile data on the geology,
hydrogeology and hydrology of the site. The geological stratigraphy of the site will be compiled in
terms of overburden thickness and bedrock type. The hydrogeological regime of the site will be
established. This includes identifying the direction of flow beneath the site, permeabilities of the soil
and bedrock. The surface hydrology of the general area will also be covered.
2.2
Using information compiled in the desk study, section two of the report deals with the requested
information that is to be submitted as part of the IPPC licence application.
ru
se
.
SECTION 1 – DESK STUDY
Geology
5.1
Quaternary Geology
5.1.1
According to the Geological Survey of Ireland quaternary geology map, the subsoils beneath the site
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
5.0
consist of Glaciofluvial Sands and Gravels to the east of the site and Alluvium to the west of the site
ns
en
(Figure No. 2). These Alluvium deposits which are composed of clays and silts form in extensive
Co
depressions surrounded by glacial deposits.
5.1.2
Investigations carried out during the construction of the wetlands encountered clay and marl layers
down to a depth of 2.5m (Table No. 1). It is uncertain if sand and gravel is present beneath the site.
Table No. 1: Expected stratigraphy of subsoils beneath the site surface
Strata
Description
Thickness
-
Topsoil layer
0 – 0.2m
-
Brown Clay
0.2 – 0.04m
-
Marl
0.04 – 2.50m
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:07
Exel Meats
IPPC Licence Application (Reg No. 781)
Page 3
Report
Project No. 590601
29/06/2006
5.2
Bedrock Geology
5.2.1
The geological succession underlying the Kilbeggan area is composed mainly of the Carboniferous
Limestones. The geological succession is presented in Table No. 2.
Table No. 2: Geological Succession of the Kilbeggan Area
Period
Carboniferous
(354-290 Ma)
Age
Formation
Lower
Member
Description
-
Dark Limestone & shale
Visean Limestones
-
Undifferentiated
limestones
Allenwood Formation
-
Thick-bedded limestone,
locally peloidal
Waulsortian Limestones
-
Massive unbedded lime mudstone
-
Dark grey muddy
limestone
Lucan Formation
Carboniferous
-
-
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
5.2.2
Ballysteen
ot
-
he
ru
se
.
-
Examination of the regional geology (Figure No. 3) show that the site is underlain by the Allenwood
Formation towards the northwest of the site and the Visean Limestones towards the southwest of the
site.
ns
en
The Allenwood Formation consists of pale-grey, generally massive sometimes pelsparitic shelf
Co
5.2.3
limestones. Dolomitisation of the Allenwood Formation is widespread in this area.
5.2.4
The structural geology of both formations is influenced by a synclinal axis which is located to the
southeast of the site. Fold axis in bedrock, especially anticlinal axis result in increased fracturing. These
fractures run parallel to the axis of the fold.
5.3
Depth to Bedrock
5.3.1
No site specific data on depth to bedrock is currently available for the site. Logs of the existing wells
were not available. Results of a GSI well search indicate that the subsoils in this region could be up to
9m in thickness (Figure No. 4).
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:07
Exel Meats
IPPC Licence Application (Reg No. 781)
Page 4
Report
Project No. 590601
29/06/2006
6.0
Hydrology
6.1
Drainage
6.1.1
The site is located in the catchment of the River Brosna which is located approximately 1.5km to the
west of the site. A tributary of the River Brosna flows in a northeast to southwest direction to the north
of the site (Figure No. 4).
6.1.2
Drainage ditches run along the southwestern and northern boundary of the site. These ditches
eventually join with the River Brosna.
6.2
Water Balance
6.2.1
Rainfall and evapotranspiration data was sourced from Met Éireann records. The nearest rainfall gauge
is in Kilbeggan G.S (N335356). The mean annual and monthly rainfall for this station is presented in
.
Table No. 3.
6.2.2
Apr
57
Elevation (mAOD)
73
Jul
Aug
Sept
64
86
82
ot
Ref
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
Station
Kilbeggan G.S
Jan
Feb
Mar
86
64
66
he
ru
se
Table No. 3: Mean annual and monthly rainfall data for 1942 –1985 (mm)
May
67
June
63
Oct
91
Opened
1942
Nov
Dec
83
89
Closed
1985
Annual Mean
898
The closest synoptic station, at which the average monthly potential evapotranspiration (PE) is
ns
en
recorded, is at Birr, Co. Offaly for Met Éireann. This data is shown in Table No. 4.
Co
Table No. 4: Potential Evapotranspiration (mm) for Birr
6.2.3
Jan
Feb
Mar
Apr
May
June
Jul
Aug
Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Annual Mean
2.1
14
29.4
51.3
72.5
79.2
75.5
60.5
39.8
17.6
3.6
-0.7
445
The Average Annual Rainfall (AAR) is taken to be 898mm.
The Average Annual Potential
Evapotranspiration (PE) for the site is taken to be 445mm. Actual Evapotranspiration (AE) is estimated
to be 423mm/yr (assuming AE = 0.95PE). The Effective Rainfall (ER) for the site is therefore:
898mm/yr – 423mm/yr = 475mm/yr
6.2.4
Using the above data a water balance for the ICW system was calculated, this is presented in Section 2
of the report.
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:08
Exel Meats
IPPC Licence Application (Reg No. 781)
Page 5
Report
Project No. 590601
29/06/2006
7.0
Hydrogeology
7.1
Quaternary Deposits
7.1.1
The GSI quaternary geology map indicates that the eastern part of the site may be underlain by sands
and gravels. These deposits are generally poorly sorted, but often have lenses of better-sorted material
which can store significant volumes of water. It is uncertain if these deposits exist beneath the site.
7.1.2
The Alluvial deposits which appear to be present beneath the ICW system consist of clays and silts and
generally have a low permeability. A Permeability of 1 x 10-6 m/s was estimated for the subsoils
beneath the ICW system using on-site lysimeters. This estimate was obtained from the client and was
not calculated by OGE.
7.2
Classification of the Allenwood Formation and Undifferentiated Limestones
7.2.1
The Allenwood Formation and the Undifferentiated limestones, also know as pure shelf limestones are
ru
se
.
known to be intensely fractured in this area due to the presence of syncline axis which is located to the
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
south of the site. As a result these formations may have enhanced permeability. Main fractures in this
region are orientated in a northeast to southwest direction.
7.2.3
The Geological Survey of Ireland (GSI) has classified the Allenwood Formation and the
Undifferentiated Limestones as Regionally Important Karstified Aquifers (Figure No. 5).
Ground Water Vulnerability
7.4.1
Assuming the depth to bedrock in the vicinity of the site is between 2.5m and 9m, the vulnerability
Co
ns
en
7.4
according to DoELG/EPA/GSI 1999, will be High to Extreme.
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:08
Exel Meats
IPPC Licence Application (Reg No. 781)
Page 6
Report
Project No. 590601
29/06/2006
SECTION TWO – FURTHER INFORMATION REQUEST
1.0
Under take a ground water flow net assessment of the area influenced by the ICWs to determine the
optimum location for the installation of 3 no. ground water monitoring wells to the north of the ICW
and a further 4 no. along the western flank of the ICW.
1.1
The EPA have proposed that a total of 7 No. ground water monitoring wells are installed in the location
of Integrated Constructed Wetlands. It is proposed that 3 No. are positioned along the northern
boundary of the ICWs and further 4 No. along the southwest boundary.
1.2
To generate the ground water contours and ground water flow direction OGE used ground water levels
in the three existing on-site wells (Figure No.6). These levels were surveyed using a RTK GPS system.
Water is constantly pumped from well No. 1 and 2 for use in the facility. Therefore, before measuring
waters levels in these wells the pumps were switched off and the water levels were allowed to recover
for up to four hours. It is unlikely they recovered to static level. The levels are shown in Table No. 5
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
below.
Table No. 5: Ground Water levels
1.3
Coordinates
Water level (m
bgl)
Water Level Elevation
(m OAD)
Ground Level
Elevation (m OAD)
MW1
234527, 233128
8.38
64.67
73.05
MW2
234590, 232952
6.66
67.19
73.85
MW3
234192, 232965
1.62
67.47
69.09
Co
ns
en
Monitoring
Hole
Using the available water elevation data, ground water contours and the direction of ground water
flow was estimated (Figure No. 7). The direction of ground water flow is estimated to be to the
northeast, towards the tributary of the River Brosna. The very wide contour spacing between borehole
No. 3 and 2 may indicate the presence of high permeability material i.e. sand and gravel. The narrow
contour spacing between borehole No. 2 and 1 indicate lower permeability materials such as clays and
silts. Ground water gradients in high permeability formations such as gravels are normally low, as
water can flow through the formation easily. This results in a more uniform water level throughout the
ground water body.
1.4
Given that the static water levels in Borehole No. 1 and 2 may not have fully recovered, the actual
direction of ground water is probably more to the north – northwest. Taking into account the effect of
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:08
Exel Meats
IPPC Licence Application (Reg No. 781)
Page 7
Report
Project No. 590601
29/06/2006
pumping boreholes No. 1 and 2 on the local hydraulic gradient the proposed optimum location for 3
No. monitoring wells north of the site and 4 No. monitoring wells to the southwest of the site is shown
in Figure No. 6 and also in Figure No. 7.
2.0
Provide construction details of the proposed ground water monitoring installations.
2.1
The ground water monitoring wells will be designed to recover ground water samples from the
bedrock and sand and gravel (if present) aquifers beneath the site and for measuring the elevation of
the water table.
2.2
The boreholes will be drilled at a nominal 200mm diameter through made ground and subsoils into the
underlying bedrock aquifer. Temporary mild steel casing 150mm ID will be installed from ground level
to top of bedrock to support the open hole. Drilling will continue at a diameter of 150mm into bedrock
to a maximum depth of between 15 -20m. Boreholes in sand and gravel deposits will be drilled 3 – 4m
into the saturated zone. The total depth of the borehole will depend on the thickness of overlying
2.3
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
subsoils.
The monitoring wells will be constructed using 2” (51.8mm) PVC casing and screen. The screen section
of the well will be installed in the bedrock aquifer to accommodate ground water sampling. Regular
PVC casing will be used to line the remainder of the open hole back up to ground level.
2.4
In sand and gravel deposits the screen section of the well will be installed from 1m above the water
Co
ns
en
table to 3m below. Regular PVC casing will then be installed back to ground level.
2.5
To exclude the entrance of fine silts, sands ands clays into the monitoring well a filter pack consisting of
4 – 10mm washed pea gravel will be installed into the annulus from the base of the well to 1m above
the top of the screen section.
2.6
To prevent downward migration of contaminated surface water into the filter pack, 3m of bentonite
pellets will be installed above the filter pack. The remainder of the annulus will then be back filled with
uncontaminated material to within 1m of the ground surface.
2.7
Cement grout will then be used to fill the remaining 1m of annulus and a lockable steel cap will be
installed in the grout, leaving the cap approximately 0.3m above the ground level. See Appendix No. 1
for monitoring well designs.
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:08
Exel Meats
IPPC Licence Application (Reg No. 781)
3.0
Page 8
Report
Project No. 590601
29/06/2006
Provide a mass balance for fluid movements throughout the ICW system, the mass balance shall take
account of, but not limited to, any losses from the ICWs to ground water and atmosphere through
evapotranspiration.
3.1
Flow charts showing all known losses and gains to the ICW system during winter and summer are
shown in Figures No. 8. Inputs to the system include effluent from the facility and direct precipitation.
The ICW only receives effluent on Monday to Friday and not on holiday days. Outputs from the system
include infiltration to ground, evapotranspiratrion and discharge to ditch. Using these components a
mass balance for fluid movement through the system can be calculated for summer and winter
conditions. For rainfall and evapotranspiration data, 30 year averages were used (Tables No. 3 & 4).
3.2
In order to calculate a mass balance for the system the following data, which was obtained from the
client, were used:
- 200m2/d
Maximum discharge output
- 100m2/d
Infiltration rate for system
- 23.23m3/d (min) 28.98m3/d (max)
Total area of ICW system
- 50,000m2
To calculate a mass balance for the ICW the following equation was used:
ns
en
(Effluent Input + Average Precipitation) – (Discharge + Infiltration to Ground + Evapotranspiration) =
Change in Volume
Co
3.3
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
Maximum effluent input
Table No. 6: Winter Mass Balance (Oct - Mar)
Gains
Volume (m3)
Losses
Volume (m3)
Effluent input
25,000
Discharge output
18,200
Precipitation
23,950
Actual
Evaptranspitation
3,135
Infiltration to Ground
(max)
5,274
Total
26,609
Total
48,950
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:08
Exel Meats
IPPC Licence Application (Reg No. 781)
Page 9
Report
Project No. 590601
29/06/2006
Effluent input (200m3/d x 125 days) + Precipitation (0.479m x 50,000m2) – Discharge (100m3/d x 182 days) –
Infiltration (28,98m3 x 182 days) – Evapotranspiration (0.0627m x 50,000m2) = 22,341m3
Table No. 7: Summer Mass Balance (Apr – Sep)
Gains
Volume (m3)
Losses
Volume (m3)
Effluent input
25,000
Discharge output
18,300
Precipitation
20,950
Actual
Evapotranspiration
17,950
Infiltration to Ground
(max)
5,274
Total
41,524
45,950
Total
se
.
Effluent input (200m3/d x 125 days) + Precipitation (0.419m x 50,000m2) – Discharge (100m3/d x 183 days) –
3.4
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
Infiltration (23,28m3 x 183 days) – Evapotranspiration (0.359m x 50,000m2) = 4,426m3
The above calculations show that the fluid mass balance for the ICW does not balance for winter or
summer periods. In winter there is an excess volume of 22,341m3 and in summer there is an excess
volume of 4,426m3. Therefore the water level in the ICW is not at steady state and the system will
In calculating this fluid balance OGE have assumed a maximum input of 200m3/d, as this is the only
Co
3.5
ns
en
eventually back up and flood.
data currently available for effluent input into the system. Given that no flooding of the system has
been reported by Exel Meats, means that the actual effluent input is less than 200m3/d.
3.6
In order to calculate an accurate input volume, OGE would recommend monitoring the effluent input
from the facility. Only when this data is available can a representative mass balance be calculated.
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:08
Exel Meats
IPPC Licence Application (Reg No. 781)
4.0
Page 10
Report
Project No. 590601
29/06/2006
Details of the receiving water body shall be submitted to include flow rates, including 95%ile dry
weather flow rates and calculations on the assimilative capacity
A sample of effluent was taken from the balancing pond which is the final pond in the ICW system.
However this is not representative of the effluent quality that is proposed to be discharged into the
drainage ditch. As required by the discharge licence (Ref No. ENV/W54/2004), Exel Meats propose to
lower the concentration of parameters (Table No. 8) by further recycling of the effluent within the ICW
system. A sample of the receiving water in the ditch was also taken. The results of the hydrochemical
analysis are shown in Table No. 8. The certificates of analysis are shown in Appendix No. 2.
Table No. 8: Results of Hydrochemical Analysis
Effluent
Receiving Water
Effluent Quality
(ID 060302)
-
(ID 060301)
-
as per Licence**
-
<5.5 or >8.5
7.7
7.6
6-8
Parameter
Units
Water Reg.*
Temperature
degrees C
25
mg/l
-
43
µS/cm
1000
482
BOD
mg/l
5
13
Total
Phosphorous
mg/l
_
15.44
Chloride
mg/l
250
181
Nitrate as
NO3
mg/l
50
<0.3
mg/l
Ortho
Phosphate as
PO4
mg/l
Sulphate
Ammoniacal
Nitrogen as N
Kjeldahl
Nitrogen
Total
Nitrogen
Faecal
Coliforms
Total
Coliforms
<0.05
0.03
35.36
mg/l
200
4
mg/l
0.16
<0.2
mg/l
-
83
mg/l
--
83
cfu/100ml
_
20
_
170
ns
en
_
cfu/100ml
*Surface Water Regulations (1989)
ru
<10
967
5
-
2
5
he
ot
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
Nitrite as NO2
se
.
pH
Suspended
Soilds
Conductivity
Co
4.1
3.11
57
-
28.8
10.77
1
-
0.15
15
3.07 (as P04)
1 (as P)
-
6.7
<0.5
2
19
206
290
** Ref No. ENV/W54/2004
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:09
Exel Meats
IPPC Licence Application (Reg No. 781)
4.2
Page 11
Report
Project No. 590601
29/06/2006
The proposed discharge point is a drainage ditch on the southwest boundary of the site (Figure No. 6),
which eventually joins up with the River Brosna approximately 1.5km to the west of the site. Stream
velocity and cross sectional area were measured on the 1st of June 2006 to determine the stream
discharge, which was estimated to be 4l/s. The maximum volume of effluent that is proposed to be
discharged into the drainage ditch is estimated to be 100m3/d (1.15l/s).
4.3
Due to the nature of discharge stream OGE were unable to determine 95%ile dry weather flow rates.
OGE were also unable to estimate low flows using catchment size methods as the discharge stream up
gradient of the site could not be defined. Undertaking flow study calculations for catchments less than
100km2 is not accurate. Therefore in order to calculate the assimilative capacity of the stream, the flow
measured on the 1st June 2006 was used. Given the date it was recorded (1st June 2006), it is a good
estimation of the low flow in the discharge stream.
A comparison of the proposed final effluent water quality as per discharge licence (ENV/W54/2004)
and the hydrochemistry of the stream water can be used to determine if the assimilative capacity of the
he
ru
se
.
stream is adequate. The Waste Assimilation Capacity (WAC) at low flow is calculated as follows (Gray,
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
N.F., 1999):
WAC = (Cmax – Cback) x Flow x 86.4kg BOD/day
= (5mg/l – 2mg/l) x 0.004 m3/s x 86.4kg BOD/day
Where
ns
en
Assimilative Capacity = 1.0kg BOD/day
Cmax = maximum permissible BOD (mg/l) as per licence ENV/W54/2004
Cback = average background BOD of stream at discharge point (mg/l)
Flow = Measured flow (1/06/06) (m3/s)
Co
4.4
The most conservative value of 5mg/l was used for Cmax. This is the value for salmonid rivers
(Freshwater Fish Directive 78/659/EEC), although it is not known whether this stream supports any
salmonid fish population.
Given that the proposed effluent quality will be 5 mg/l BOD and a permitted BOD loading at low
flow is 1.0 kg BOD/day, the maximum effluent discharge rate that the stream can accept is 2.3l/s.
1.0kg BOD/day = 1.0 x 10-6 mg BOD/day = 11.5mg BOD/s
11.5mg/s ÷ 5mg/l = 2.3 l/s
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:09
Exel Meats
IPPC Licence Application (Reg No. 781)
Page 12
Report
Project No. 590601
29/06/2006
The proposed discharge would be 1.15 l/s. Therefore the assimilative capacity of the stream under
these flow conditions (4l/s) is adequate to accept the proposed effluent discharge without
detrimental effect. Under these flow conditions and with an effluent BOD of 5mg/l, the stream
could assimilate twice the proposed discharge volume.
5.0
Provide details of any predicted impacts of the discharge on the receiving water body and outline the
proposed mitigation measures.
5.1
To predict any impacts of the discharge on the receiving water, OGE have used a mixing model to
predict the concentrations of Nitrate, Ammonical Nitrogen, pH, Suspended Solids and Ortho
phosphate (P04), 70m down stream of the discharge point.
5.2
The model calculates the resulting concentrations by mixing the different solutions using the
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
calculation below (Aquachem v. 4.0, 2003).
Where Cz = Resultant concentration in stream (mg/l)
Qx = Discharge rate of effluent (l/s)
Cx = Concentration of parameter effluent (mg/l)
Co
ns
en
Qy = Discharge rate of stream (l/s)
Cy = Concentration of parameter in stream (mg/l)
5.3
The predicted concentrations of selected parameters downstream of the discharge point in the stream
after mixing with the discharge are presented in Table No. 9 below.
5.4
From the results of the mixing model, it is in the opinion OGE that the proposed discharge will not
have a qualitative impact on the discharge stream. For all parameters except Ortho phosphate the
concentration down stream in the receiving water was lowered. Therefore discharging into the stream
will not raise the overall concentrations of these parameters in the down stream water. The
concentration of Ortho phosphate in the down stream water was slightly increased as a result of
mixing. According to the mixing model, for Orthophosphate to not have an impact on the stream
during dry weather flows, the concentration in the discharge would have to be equal or less than the
concentration in the stream.
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:09
Exel Meats
IPPC Licence Application (Reg No. 781)
Page 13
Report
Project No. 590601
29/06/2006
Table No. 9: Results of Mixing Model
Discharge
Effluent (mg/l)
Receiving Water
(mg/l)
Downstream
Values
Nitrate
1
28.8
22.6
Ammoniacal
Nitrogen (N)
0.5
6.7
5.3
pH
7.7
7.6
7.6
Suspended Solids
5
10
8.8
Ortho phosphate
(PO4)
3.07
0.15
0.8
Co
ns
en
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
Parameter
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:09
Exel Meats
IPPC Licence Application (Reg No. 781)
Page 14
Report
Project No. 590601
29/06/2006
Appendix One
Co
ns
en
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
Monitoring Well Design
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:09
Exel Meats
IPPC Licence Application (Reg No. 781)
Page 15
Report
Project No. 590601
29/06/2006
Appendix Two
Co
ns
en
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
Analysis Certificate
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:09
Exel Meats
IPPC Licence Application (Reg No. 781)
Page 16
Report
Project No. 590601
29/06/2006
Co
ns
en
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
Appendix Three
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:09
Exel Meats
IPPC Licence Application (Reg No. 781)
Page 17
Report
Project No. 590601
29/06/2006
Appendix Four
Co
ns
en
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
Certificates of Analysis
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:09
9
ALcontrol Laboratories Ireland
Interim
Table Of Results
Validated
Ref Number: 06-B03464/01
Sample Type: WATER
Client: O'Neill Ground Water Engineering
Date of Receipt: 6/2/2006
Location:
Client Contact: David Broderick
(of first sample)
9
<1mg/l
KONE
<3mg/l
<0.3mg/l
<0.014mS/cm
9
9
9
METER
NEN6646/FIAS NEN-EN-ISO11732
SPECTRO
napH Units <0.5mg/l <0.2mg/l
9
9
pH
Kjeldahl Nitrogen*
Ammoniacal Nitrogen as
N
mg/l
10.77
<0.05
mg/l
0.15
35.36
mg/l
15
4
mg/l
10.0
<0.3
mS/cm
0.967
0.482
pH Units
7.55
7.74
mg/l
2.0
83.0
mg/l
6.7
<0.2
Co
ns
en
Conductivity (at 25 deg.
C)
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
METER
Total Oxidised Nitrogen
as N
mg/l
28.8
<0.3
9
KONE
Sulphate
mg/l
57
181
9
KONE
ortho Phosphate as PO4
mg/l
3.11
15.44
KONE
Nitrite as NO2
Chloride
mg/l
<10
43
9
Nitrate as NO3
Total Phosphorous
cfu/100ml cfu/100ml
206
290
20
170
KONE
<0.3mg/l <0.05mg/l <0.03mg/l
9
Total Suspended Solids
Total Coliforms*
Other ID
mg/l
2
13
Faecal Coliforms*
Sample Identity
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
BOD
ALcontrol Reference
060301
060302
9
KONE
.
<10mg/l <0.05mg/l
9
06-B03464-S0003
06-B03464-S0004
ICP IRIS
se
<1cfu/100ml <1cfu/100ml
GRAVIMETRIC
ru
<2mg/l
Filtration
he
5 DAY ATU Filtration
ot
Detection Method
Method Detection Limit
UKAS Accredited
Client Ref: Exec Meats
Notes : METHOD DETECTION LIMITS ARE NOT ALWAYS ACHIEVABLE DUE TO VARIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES BEYOND OUR CONTROL.
NDP = NO DETERMINATION POSSIBLE
THE DATA ON THIS PRELIMINARY REPORT IS NOT VALIDATED AND MAY BE SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Checked By :
Printed at 3:05 PM on 6/22/2006
Ann-Marie Ruttledge
* SUBCONTRACTED TO OTHER LABORATORY / ** SAMPLES ANALYSED AT THE CHESTER LABORATORY
Page 1 of 2
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:10
9
ALcontrol Laboratories Ireland
Interim
Table Of Results
Validated
Ref Number: 06-B03464/01
Sample Type: WATER
Client: O'Neill Ground Water Engineering
Date of Receipt: 6/2/2006
Location:
Client Contact: David Broderick
(of first sample)
Detection Method
Method Detection Limit
UKAS Accredited
Client Ref: Exec Meats
SPECTRO
<1mg/l
Sample Identity
Other ID
060301
060302
UNKNOWN
UNKNOWN
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
Total Nitrogen as N
ALcontrol Reference
06-B03464-S0003
06-B03464-S0004
Co
ns
en
mg/l
19
83
Notes : METHOD DETECTION LIMITS ARE NOT ALWAYS ACHIEVABLE DUE TO VARIOUS CIRCUMSTANCES BEYOND OUR CONTROL.
NDP = NO DETERMINATION POSSIBLE
THE DATA ON THIS PRELIMINARY REPORT IS NOT VALIDATED AND MAY BE SUBJECT TO CHANGE.
Checked By :
Printed at 3:05 PM on 6/22/2006
Ann-Marie Ruttledge
* SUBCONTRACTED TO OTHER LABORATORY / ** SAMPLES ANALYSED AT THE CHESTER LABORATORY
Page 2 of 2
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:10
MONITORING WELL DESIGN FOR GRAVEL AQUIFER
grout
chippings
50mm plain
casing
Co
50mm screen
with 1mm slot
ns
en
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
bentonite
gravel pack
50mm plain
casing
7, South Main Street, Naas, Co. Kildare.
tel : 045 895668 fax : 045 881705
mobile : 087 2300933
email : info@groundwatereng.ie
Client:
Excel Meats
Request for further information
Regarding an Planning Application
for Excel Meats
Ref: 590601
Drawn By: DB Date: June 2006
Project Title:
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:10
MONITORING WELL DESIGN FOR BEDROCK AQUIFER
grout
chippings
50mm plain
casing
Co
50mm screen
with 1mm slot
ns
en
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
bentonite
gravel pack
50mm plain
casing
7, South Main Street, Naas, Co. Kildare.
tel : 045 895668 fax : 045 881705
mobile : 087 2300933
email : info@groundwatereng.ie
Client:
Excel Meats
Request for further information
Regarding an Planning Application
for Excel Meats
Ref: 590601
Drawn By: DB Date: June 2006
Project Title:
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:10
Co
ns
en
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
0
0.5
1
kilometres
Map No. 48 1:50000 Discovery Series
Ordnance Survey Ireland Licence No. EN 0006105
Ordnance Survey of Ireland and
Government of Ireland
Client:
Exel Meats
Key:
Site Boundary
No Window
Project: Request For Further Information
7 South Main St,
Naas, Co. Kildare, Ireland
Ph:+353 45 895668
Fax:+353 45 881705
Mob:+353 87 2300933
info@groundwatereng.ie
Regarding An Application For An IPPC
Licence (Reg No.781) By Exel Meats,
Kilbeggan, Co. Westmeath.
Title:
Location Map
Scale: As per map
Datum: Malin
Date: June 2006
Checked: SON
Author: David Broderick
Figure no: 1
Drawn by:David Broderick
Reference: 590601
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:10
No Window
7 South Main Street,
Naas, Co. Kildare, Ireland
Ph:+353 45 895668 Fax:+353 45 881705 Mob:+353 87 2300933
info@groundwatereng.ie
Client:
Exel Meats
Project:
Title:
Request For Further Information Regarding an
Application for an IPPC Licence (Reg No. 781)
by Exel Meats, Kilbeggan, Co. Westmeath.
Quaternary Geology Map
Key:
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
Site Boundary
Glaciofluvial Sands and Gravels
Alluvium
Co
ns
en
Limestone Tills
0
0.5
kilometres
1
Scale:
Datum:
Malin
As per map
Date:
June 2006
Author:
Checked:
Figure No:
2
David Broderick
Drawn by:
David Broderick
SON
Reference:
590601
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:10
No Window
7 South Main Street,
Naas, Co. Kildare, Ireland
Ph:+353 45 895668 Fax:+353 45 881705 Mob:+353 87 2300933
info@groundwatereng.ie
Client:
Project:
Title:
Exel Meats
Request For Further Information Regarding An
Application For An IPPC Licence (Reg No. 781)
By Exel Meats, Kilbeggan, Co. Westmeath.
Bedrock Geology Map
Co
ns
en
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
Key:
Site Boundary
LU - Lucan Formation
VIS - Visean limestones (Undiff)
AW - Allenwood Formation
WA - Waulsortain Limestones
BA - Ballysteen Formation
5
/
Synclinal Axis
Geology of Galway & Offaly, Sheet 15
Geological Survey of Ireland 2003
Scale:
Datum:
N/A
Date:
June 2006
Author:
Malin
Checked:
Figure No:
3
David Broderick
Drawn by:
David Broderick
SON
Reference:
590601
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:10
No Window
7 South Main Street,
Naas, Co. Kildare, Ireland
Ph:+353 45 895668 Fax:+353 45 881705 Mob:+353 87 2300933
info@groundwatereng.ie
Client:
Exel Meats
Project:
Title:
Request For Further Information Regarding An
Application For An IPPC licence (Reg No. 781) By
Exel Meats, Kilbeggan, Co. Westmeath
Location of Discharge Point
he
ru
se
.
Key:
<
Discharge Point
Discharge Stream
ns
en
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
Site Boundary
9.1m
Co
River Brosna
Tributary of River Brosna
<
0
0.25
kilometres
GSI Depth to Bedrock
0.5
Scale:
Datum:
As per map
Date:
June 2006
Author:
N/A
Checked:
SON
Figure No:
David Broderick
Edited by:
David Broderick
4
Reference:
590601
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:11
Co
ns
en
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
Map No. ?? 1:50000 Discovery Series
Ordnance Survey Ireland Licence No. EN 0006105
Ordnance Survey of Ireland and
Government of Ireland
Copyright GSI, Government of Ireland 2003
Client:
Key:
Exel Meats
No Window
7 South Main St,
Naas, Co. Kildare, Ireland
Ph:+353 45 895668
Fax:+353 45 881705
Mob:+353 87 2300933
info@groundwatereng.ie
Regionally Important Aquifer (karstified)
Locally Important Aquifer
Project: Request for Further Information
Regarding An Application for an IPPC
Licence (Reg No. 781) by Exel Meats,
Kilbeggan, Co. Westmeath
Title:
Bedrock Aquifer Map
Site Location
Scale: N/A
Datum:
Date: June 2006
Checked: SON
Author: David Broderick
Figure no: 5
Edited by:David Broderick
Reference: 590601
N/A
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:11
No Window
7 South Main Street,
Naas, Co. Kildare, Ireland
Ph:+353 45 895668 Fax:+353 45 881705 Mob:+353 87 2300933
info@groundwatereng.ie
,
Client:
Exel Meats
Project: Request For Further Information Regarding An
Application For An IPPC Licence (Reg No. 781) By
Exel Meats, Kilbeggan, Co. Westmeath
Title:
Layout of Integrated Constructed Wetlands
Key:
,
6
#
Pond Number
L
#
,
Lysimeter Location
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
Borewell 1
(64.67m AOD)
Proposed Ground Water Monitoring Points
Existing Borewell with ground water level
Co
ns
en
Borewell 3
(67.47m AOD)
,
Borewell 2
(67.19m AOD)
,
,
,
Attachment E2.3 - Excel 1 Drainage Map (Area C)
,
Scale:
Datum:
N/A
Date:
June 2006
Author:
N/A
Checked:
Figure No:
6
David Broderick
Drawn by:
David Broderick
SON
Reference:
590601
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:11
No
No Window
Window
7 South Main Street,
Naas, Co. Kildare, Ireland
Ph:+353 45 895668 Fax:+353 45 881705 Mob:+353 87 2300933
info@groundwatereng.ie
64.0
Client: Exel Meats
Project: Request for Information Regarding an
Application for an IPPC Licence (Reg No. 781)
by Exel Meats, Kilbeggan, Co. Westmeath
65.00
,
66.0
Title: Estimation of Ground Water Contours
and Flow Direction
67.0
Key:
BOREWELL 1
ru
se
.
+ 64.67m AD
Site Boundary of ICW
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
,
67.30
,
BOREWELL 3
67.47m AD
,
Borewell
Estimated Ground Water
Contour
Ground water Flow
Direction
ns
en
+
Co
68.0
+
,
BOREWELL 2
+ 67.19m AD
Proposed Location
of Monitoring Wells
,
,
,
Scale:
Schematic
Datum: Arbitary
Date: June 2006
Checked: SON
Author:
David Broderick
Drawn by:
David Broderick
Figure no:
7
Reference: 590601
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:11
No
No Window
Window
Winter (Oct - Mar)
7 South Main Street,
Naas, Co. Kildare, Ireland
Ph:+353 45 895668 Fax:+353 45 881705 Mob:+353 87 2300933
info@groundwatereng.ie
Precipitation (36,400m3)
Evapotranspiration
(3,135m3)
Effluent In
(25,000m3)
Exel Meats
Project: Request for Further Information
Regarding an Application for an IPPC Licence
(Reg No. 781) by Exel Meats, Kilbeggan,
Co. Westmeath.
Title:
Conceptual Model of Fluid Movement
through ICW System
Key:
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
Discharge Out
(18,200m3)
Client:
Known Losses from system
Integrated Wetland System
ns
en
Known Gains to system
Co
Infiltration to Ground (5,274m3)
Scale: N/A
Datum: N/A
Date: June 2005
Checked: SON
Author:
David Broderick
Drawn by:
David Broderick
Figure no: 8(a)
Reference: 590601
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:11
No
No Window
Window
Summer (Apr - Sep)
7 South Main Street,
Naas, Co. Kildare, Ireland
Ph:+353 45 895668 Fax:+353 45 881705 Mob:+353 87 2300933
info@groundwatereng.ie
Precipitation (20,950m3)
Evapotranspiration
(17,950m3)
Effluent In
(25,000m3)
Exel Meats
Project: Request for Further Information
Regarding an Application for an IPPC Licence
(Reg No. 781) by Exel Meats, Kilbeggan,
Co. Westmeath.
Title:
Conceptual Model of Fluid Movement
through ICW System
Key:
to
f c Fo
op r i
yr ns
ig pe
ht ct
ow ion
ne pu
r r rp
eq os
ui es
re o
d nl
fo y.
ra
ny
ot
he
ru
se
.
Discharge Out
(18,300m3)
Client:
Known Losses from system
Integrated Wetland System
ns
en
Known Gains to system
Co
Infiltration to Ground (5,274m3)
Scale: N/A
Datum: N/A
Date: June 2005
Checked: SON
Author:
David Broderick
Drawn by:
David Broderick
Figure no: 8(b)
Reference: 590601
EPA Export 25-07-2013:19:28:11