mdr1387rp0005f01 sea statement nap · the nap is a national programme to prevent pollution of...

Strategic Environmental Assessment Statement

For Ireland's Nitrates Action Programme

March 2018

rpsgroup.com/ireland

Ireland’s Nitrates Action Programme – SEA Statement

MDE1387Rp0005F01 i

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1 INTRODUCTION ................................................................................................................ 1

2 SUMMARY OF KEY FACTS ................................................................................................. 2

3 SUMMARY OF SEA PROCESS ............................................................................................. 3

3.1 SCREENING .................................................................................................................................... 3

3.2 SCOPING AND STATUTORY CONSULTATION ......................................................................................... 3

3.3 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT .............................................................. 3

3.3.1 Summary of SEA Assessment ............................................................................................ 4

3.4 STATUTORY CONSULTATION ON DRAFT NAP ....................................................................................... 7

3.5 APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT AND NATURA IMPACT REPORT .................................................................... 7

3.6 SEA STATEMENT ............................................................................................................................ 8

3.7 EFFECTIVE DATE OF NITRATES ACTION PROGRAMME ............................................................................ 8

4 INFLUENCE OF THE SEA PROCESS ON THE NAP .................................................................. 9

4.1 INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................................................. 9

4.2 SUPPORTING COMMITMENTS ......................................................................................................... 10

4.3 MITIGATION MEASURES / RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE SEA / AA ................................................... 12

5 HOW CONSULTATION FEEDBACK HAS INFLUENCED THE NAP ........................................... 21

6 PREFERRED SCENARIO AND REASON FOR CHOOSING THE FINAL NAP .............................. 50

6.1 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED FOR THE NAP ....................................................................................... 50

6.2 ASSESSMENT OF ALTERNATIVES ....................................................................................................... 52

6.2.1 Option 1 ........................................................................................................................... 52

6.2.2 Option 2 ........................................................................................................................... 52

6.2.3 Option 3 ........................................................................................................................... 53

6.3 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE ............................................................................................................... 53

7 MEASURES TO MONITOR SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS OF THE

IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ADOPTED NAP ...................................................................... 54

7.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 54

7.2 RESPONSIBILITY FOR MONITORING .................................................................................................. 54

7.3 SOURCES OF INFORMATION FOR MONITORING .................................................................................. 54

8 SCREENING OF CHANGES TO THE FINAL NITRATES ACTION PROGRAMME ........................ 59

9 ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT .................................................................... 64

9.1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 64

9.2 AMENDMENTS TO THE SEA ............................................................................................................ 64


MDE1387Rp0005F01 ii

9.2.1 Non-Technical Summary ................................................................................................. 64

9.2.2 Chapter 3 Strategic Environmental Assessment Methodology ...................................... 69

9.2.3 Chapter 4 Review of Relevant Plans, Policies and Programmes ..................................... 69

9.2.4 Chapter 5 Relevant Aspects of the Current State of the Environment (Baseline) .......... 69

9.2.5 Chapter 6 Environmental Protection Objectives and SEA Framework ........................... 71

9.2.6 Chapter 8 Assessment of Preferred Alternative.............................................................. 71

9.2.7 Appendix B ...................................................................................................................... 72

10 NEXT STEPS .................................................................................................................... 74

LIST OF TABLES

Table 3-1 - Strategic Environmental Objectives ...................................................................................... 4 Table 3-2 - Summary Assessment ........................................................................................................... 5 Table 4-1 - How Environmental Considerations have been taken into account in the NAP .................. 9 Table 4-2 - Integration of Mitigation Measures /Recommendation Proposed in SEA /AA .................. 13 Table 5-1 - Main Issues raised by DCHG ............................................................................................... 22 Table 5-2 - Main Issues raised by IFI ..................................................................................................... 23 Table 5-3 - Main Issues raised by DAERA .............................................................................................. 24 Table 5-4 - Main Issues raised by EPA ................................................................................................... 25 Table 5-5 - Main Issues raised by SWAN ............................................................................................... 33 Table 5-6 - Main Issues raised by An Taisce .......................................................................................... 35 Table 5-7 - Main Issues raised by HSE ................................................................................................... 41 Table 5-8 - Main Issues raised by IFA .................................................................................................... 43 Table 5-9 - Main Issues raised by Public stakeholder ........................................................................... 46 Table 5-10 - Main Issues raised by IW .................................................................................................. 46 Table 5-11 - Main Issues raised by DCCAE ............................................................................................ 47 Table 5-12 - Main Issues raised by ICMSA ............................................................................................ 48 Table 6-1 - Summary Assessment of Alternatives ................................................................................ 52 Table 7-1 - Environmental Monitoring Programme ............................................................................. 55 Table 8-1 - Screening of Changes Made to NAP ................................................................................... 59


MDE1387Rp0005F01 1

1 INTRODUCTION

This Strategic Environmental Assessment (SEA) Statement has been prepared as part of the SEA of Ireland’s Nitrate Action Programme (herein after referred to as NAP) in accordance with national and EU legislation. This document provides information on the decision-making process. It records how environmental considerations have been integrated into the NAP. Furthermore it summarises how the SEA environmental report, submissions and observations made to the competent authority from the public and designated statutory consultees; and any transboundary consultations have been taken into account during the preparation of the NAP.

The NAP and the associated environmental documents have been prepared by the Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government. This SEA Statement has been prepared in accordance with Section 15 Decision Making, and Section 16 Information on the Decision, of the European Communities (Environmental Assessment of Certain Plans and Programmes) Regulations (S.I. No. 435 of 2004) as amended.

The structure of the SEA Statement is as follows:

1. Introduction;

2. Summary of key facts;

3. Summary of the SEA process;

4. Influence of the SEA process on the NAP;

5. How consultation feedback has influenced the NAP;

6. Preferred scenario and reasons for choosing the final programme;

7. Measures to monitor significant environmental effects of the implementation of the adopted NAP;

8. Screening of changes to the draft NAP prior to adoption;

9. Addendum to the Environmental Report; and

10. Next steps.


MDE1387Rp0005F01 2

2 SUMMARY OF KEY FACTS

Title of Plan/Programme: Ireland’s Nitrates Action Programme

Purpose of Plan /

Programme:

Ireland’s first Nitrates Action Programme (NAP) came into operation in 2006. Giving effect to the Nitrates Directive [91/676/EEC] and supported by successive national regulations, the NAP was designed to prevent pollution of surface waters and groundwater from agricultural sources and to protect and improve water quality. In accordance with the Nitrates Directive and Article 28 of the Good Agricultural Practice Regulations (also known as the ‘GAP Regulations’ and the ‘Nitrates Regulations’ S.I. 31 of 2014), the NAP has been reviewed twice since 2006 - the first time in 2010 and for the second time in 2013. This resulted in revised Nitrates Action Programmes (NAP2 and NAP3). This latest version which is the subject of this SEA Statement will be NAP4.

Competent Authority: Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government (DHPLG)

Period Covered: The NAP will be in place for a period of 4 years from 1st January 2018 to 31st December 2021.

Area of Plan/Programme: The programme covers the Republic of Ireland.

Nature/Content of

Plan/Programme:

The NAP is a national programme to prevent pollution of surface waters and groundwater from agricultural sources and to protect and improve water quality.

Date NAP Came into Effect: The current reviewed NAP4 came into effect on 1st January 2018.

Main Contact(s): Water Division,

Dept. of Housing, Planning & Local Government,

Newtown Road,

Wexford.


MDE1387Rp0005F01 3

3 SUMMARY OF SEA PROCESS

The NAP has been subject to a process of SEA, as required under the European Communities (Environmental Assessment of Certain Plans and Programmes) Regulations S.I. No. 435 of 2004, as amended by S.I. No. 200 of 2011. This has included the key steps described in the following sections.

3.1 SCREENING

Screening was carried out to establish if an SEA was required for the NAP review. Screening of the NAP review was undertaken by DHPLG in Q1 2017. In the context of the S.I. 435 of 2004 (as amended), it was determined that the NAP would require SEA.

3.2 SCOPING AND STATUTORY CONSULTATION

Scoping was carried out to establish the level of detail appropriate for the Environmental Report. A Scoping Report was prepared and published in September 2017 and this was used as the basis for statutory consultations. The relevant statutory consultees that were consulted as part of the SEA Scoping phase for the draft NAP were:

1. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA);

2. Department of Housing, Planning and Local Government (DHPLG);

3. Department of Communications, Climate Action and Environment (DCCAE);

4. Department of Agriculture, Food and Marine (DAFM);

5. Department of Culture, Heritage and the Gaeltacht (DCHG);

6. Department of Rural and Community Development (DRCD); and

7. Department of Agriculture, Environment and Rural Affairs (DAERA) Northern Ireland.

Consultation responses were requested before the 4th October 2017. SEA scoping consultation responses from a number of the statutory consultees (EPA, DAFM, DAERA, DCHG and IFI), were received and the content of the responses were reviewed to inform the subsequent stages of the assessment. All submissions received from the statutory consultation were considered in preparation of the Environmental Report. All of the environmental topics listed in the SEA Directive were considered and all were scoped in for the purposes of the assessment.

3.3 ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT

The preparation of an Environmental Report on the likely significant effects on the environment of implementation of the NAP included consideration of:

� The contents and main objectives of the NAP;

� The current state of the environment and evolution of the environment in the absence of the NAP;

� Links between the NAP and other relevant strategies, policies, plans, programmes and environmental protection objectives;


MDE1387Rp0005F01 4

� Environmental characteristics of the area to be effected by the NAP and key environmental problems;

� The likely significant effects on the environment of implementing the NAP (both positive and negative);

� Measures envisaged for the prevention, reduction and as fully as possible offset any significant adverse effects;

� An outline of the reasons for selecting the alternatives chosen; and

� Measures envisaged concerning monitoring of the significant environmental effects of implementation of the NAP.

3.3.1 Summary of SEA Assessment

The approach used for the assessment in the SEA is termed an “objectives led assessment”. In this case, each of the draft NAP measures was tested against defined SEA Strategic Environmental Objectives, as outlined in Table 3-1, which covered all SEA environmental topics under the relevant SEA legislation, e.g. population, biodiversity, material assets, etc. A matrix format was used for the assessment, which permitted a systematic approach and comparison of alternatives.

Table 3-1 - Strategic Environmental Objectives

Obj. 1 Biodiversity and Flora and Fauna: Preserve, protect, maintain and where appropriate restore the terrestrial, aquatic and soil biodiversity, particularly EU designated sites and protected species

Obj. 2 Population and Human Health: Provide a safe and reliable water supply and provide for the sustainable production of safe food

Obj. 3 Soils: Protect soils against pollution, and prevent degradation of the soil resource.

Obj. 4 Water: Ensure that the status of water bodies is protected, maintained and improved in line with the requirements of the WFD and MSFD.

Obj. 5 Air Quality: Avoid, prevent or reduce harmful effects on human health and the environmental as a whole resulting from emissions to air.

Obj. 6 Climatic Factors: Minimise emissions of greenhouse gases and ensure measures take account of the implications of climate change.

Obj. 7 Material Assets: Support economic activities without conflicting with the objectives of other EU Directives

Obj. 9 Archaeology, Architecture and Cultural Heritage: Protect places, features, buildings and landscapes of cultural, archaeological or architectural heritage.

Obj. 10 Landscape: Protect and maintain the national landscape character.

At a broad level, implementation of the NAP is expected to protect surface and ground water quality and, as such, outlines measures to provide better control and management of agricultural practices. These measures, when implemented correctly, will have significant positive effects on water quality, biodiversity and public health. However, the SEA ER identified a number of measures that, as prescribed in the draft NAP were not considered adequate to provide protection to the environment. In these instances further measures were proposed to strengthen or provide


MDE1387Rp0005F01 5

additional support to measures outlined in the draft NAP. Table 3-2 presents a summary of the assessment for the measures included in the draft NAP.

Table 3-2 - Summary Assessment

Measure PHH BFF SL W AQ CF MA CH L Mitigation Measures

Part 2 Farmyard Management

5(1) + + + + 0 + 0 0 0 -

5(2) + + + + 0 + 0 0 0 -

6(1) + + 0 + 0 -/+ + -/+ 0/+ -

6(2) + + + + 0 0 0 0 0 -

7(1) + + + + 0 0 + 0 -/+ -

7(2) + + + + 0 0 + 0 -/+ -

7(3) + + + + 0 0 + 0 -/+ -

7(4) + + + + 0 0 + 0 -/+ -

8(1) + + + + 0 0 0 0 0 -

8(2) -/+ -/+ -/+ -/+ 0/- 0/- 0/- 0/- 0/- �

8(3) + + + + 0 0 0 0 0 -

8(4) + + + + 0 0 0 0 0 -

8(5) + + + + 0 0 0 0 0 -

9 + + + + 0 0 + 0 0 -

10(1) + + + + 0 0 + 0 0 -

10(2) + + + + 0 0 + 0 0 -

11(1) + + + + 0 0 + 0 0 -

11(2) + + + + 0 0 + 0 0 -

12 + + + + 0 0 + 0 0 -

13 + + + + 0 0 + 0 0 -

14(1) + -/+ -/+ -/+ 0 0 -/+ 0 0 -

14(2) + -/+ -/+ -/+ 0 0 -/+ 0 0 �

14(3) + -/+ -/+ -/+ 0 0 -/+ 0 0 �

14(4) + -/+ -/+ -/+ 0 0 -/+ 0 0 �

Part 3 Nutrient Management

15. (1) + + + + - - + 0 0 -

15. (2) + + + + - - + 0 0 -

15. (3) + + + + - - + 0 0 -

15. (4) +/- + + + - - +/- 0 0 -

15. (5) 0 0 0 0 - - + 0 0 �

16. (1) +/-- +/- +/- +/- 0 +/- +/- 0 0 �

16. (2) +/-- +/- +/- +/- 0 +/- +/- 0 0 �

16. (3) +/-/- +/- +/-/- +/- 0 0 +/- 0 0 �

16. (4) + + + + + + + 0 0 -

16. (5) +/- +/- + +/0/- +/- +/- 0 0 0 �

16. (6) + + + + + + + 0 0 -

16. (7) 0 0 0 0/- 0 0 0 0 0 -


MDE1387Rp0005F01 6


17. (1) +/- +/- 0 +/- - - 0/- 0/- 0 �

17. (2) - (11) +/- + + + 0 0 +/- 0/- 0 �

17. (12) +/- +/- +/- +/- 0 0 +/- 0/- 0 -

17. (13) +/- +/- +/- +/- 0/- 0/- +/- 0/- 0 -

17. (14) +/- + + + 0/- 0/- +/- 0/- 0 -

17. (15) +/- 0/+ 0/+ 0/+ 0 0 +/- 0 0 -

17. (16) +/- + + + 0 0 +/- 0 0 -

17. (17) +/- +/- +/- +/- 0 0 +/- +/- 0 �

17. (18) +/- +/- +/- +/- 0 0 +/- 0 0 �

17. (19) +/- + + + 0 0 0 0/- 0 �

17. (20) +/- + + + 0 0 0 0/- 0 -

17. (21) +/- + + + 0 0 0 0/- 0 -

Part 4 Prevention of Water Pollution From Fertilisers and Certain Activities

18. (1) + + + - - + + 0 �

18. (2) – (7) + + + + 0 0 0 0 0 �

19. (1) + + + + + + 0 0 0 -

19. (2) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -

20. (1) +/- +/- +/- +/- - - 0 0 0 -

20. (2) + + + + 0 0 + 0 0 -

20. (3) +/- +/- +/- +/- 0 0 +/- 0 0 -

21. (1) – (5) + + + + 0 0 + 0 0 -

21. (6) 0/- 0/- 0/- 0/- 0 0 0/- 0 0 �

Part 5 General

22. (1) +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 �

22. (2) +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 �

23. (1) +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 -

23. (2) +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 -

23. (3) +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 -

23. (4) +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 -

24. + + + + + + + + + -

25. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -

26. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -

Part 6 Functions of Public Authorities

27. + + + + 0 0 0 0 0 -

28 + + + + 0 0 0 0 0 -

29 + + + + 0 0 0 0 0 -

30. (1) + + + + 0 0 0 0 0 -

30. (2) +/0 +/0 +/0 +/0 0 0 0 0 0 �

30. (3) + + + + 0 0 0 0 0 -

30. (4) + + + + 0 0 0 0 0 -

30. (5) + + + + 0 0 0 0 0 -

30. (6) + + + + 0 0 0 0 0 -

31. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -


MDE1387Rp0005F01 7


32 + + + + 0 0 0 0 0 -

33 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -

34. - - - - 0 0 0 0 0 -

Part 7 – Implementation of Commission Decision

35 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 -

36(1) +/- +/- +/- +/- - - +/- 0 0 -

36(2) + + + + 0 0 + 0 0 -

37 + + + + 0 0 + 0 0 -

38 + + + + 0 0 + 0 0 -

39 + + + + 0 0 + 0 0 -

3.4 STATUTORY CONSULTATION ON DRAFT NAP

On 31st October 2017 the draft Nitrates Action Programme was published for public consultation alongside the SEA Environmental Report and the Natura Impact Statement (NIS) for a period of four weeks running from 31st October 2017 to 28th November 2017. The draft NAP, Environmental Report and NIS were made available for inspection at the DHPLG Offices from Monday to Friday, 9:30am to 5pm. PDF versions of these documents were also made available for inspection online at [email protected]. The deadline for receipt of submissions was the 28th November 2017.

Fourteen submissions were received during the consultation from various stakeholders including members of the public, environmental groups, industry representatives and the statutory SEA consultees. The full submissions received have been reviewed by the wider project team.

Further details of the key issues raised are presented in Chapter 5 of this SEA Statement.

3.5 APPROPRIATE ASSESSMENT AND NATURA IMPACT REPORT

In addition to the SEA, there is a requirement under the EU Habitats Directive (92/43/EEC) (as transcribed into Irish law) to assess whether the NAP, individually or in combination with other plans or projects, is likely to have significant effect on a European Site, which includes Special Protection Areas (SPAs) and Special Areas of Conservation (SACs), in view of the site’s conservation objectives. The requirement for an assessment derives from Article 6 of the Directive, and in particular Article 6(3) which requires that:

“Any plan or project not directly connected with or necessary to the conservation of a

site but likely to have a significant effect thereon, either individually or in combination

with other plans or projects, shall be subject to appropriate assessment of its

implications for the site in view of the site’s conservation objectives.”

In recognition of this, an Appropriate Assessment (AA) Screening was carried out, in parallel with the SEA scoping process. From this it was determined that AA was required and a Natura Impact Statement was prepared to inform an AA. The assessment of the NAP has been carried out in the context of the scope and content presented in the NAP.


MDE1387Rp0005F01 8

The NIS took a precautionary approach and assessed the impacts that would be anticipated from the NAP providing the necessary inclusion of mitigation measures and guiding principles at the strategic level of the plan. All actions arising out of the NAP shall be required to conform to the mitigation measures contained within the NIS and to the relevant regulatory provisions aimed at preventing pollution or other environmental effects likely to adversely affect the integrity of European Sites. In addition, all lower level plans and projects arising from the implementation of the NAP will themselves be subject to the requirements of the Habitats Directive, as transposed into Irish law when details become known.

3.6 SEA STATEMENT

In accordance with article 16 of S.I. 435 of 2004 as amended, the Competent Authority is required to prepare a statement summarising:

a) How environmental considerations have been integrated into the plan or programmes, or

modification to a plan or programme;

b) How (i) the environmental report, prepared pursuant to article 12, (ii) submissions and

observations made to the planning authority in response to a notice under article 13 and (iii)

any consultations under article 14 have been taken into account during the preparation of

the plan or programme;

c) The reasons for choosing the plan or programme, in light of other reasonable alternatives

dealt with, and

d) The measures decided upon to monitor, in accordance with article 17, the significant

environmental effects of implementation of the plan or programme.

The main purpose of this SEA Statement is to provide information on the decision-making process for the NAP in order to illustrate how decisions were taken, making the process more transparent. In so doing, the SEA Statement records how the recommendations of the Environmental Report (and the NIS), as well as the views of the statutory consultees and other submissions received during public consultation have influenced the preparation of the final plan. The SEA Statement also provides information on the arrangements put in place for monitoring and mitigation. This SEA Statement is available to the public along with the NIS and the final Nitrates Action Programme.

3.7 EFFECTIVE DATE OF NITRATES ACTION PROGRAMME

The NAP came into effect on 1st January 2018.


MDE1387Rp0005F01 9

4 INFLUENCE OF THE SEA PROCESS ON THE NAP

4.1 INTRODUCTION

The SEA and the AA processes have been undertaken in parallel to the preparation of the NAP. Thus, from the outset, considerations of the environmental consequences of the alternatives have been taken into account. A considerable effort has been made through the SEA and AA processes to integrate environmental considerations into the development of the evolving NAP. To assist this, the SEA and AA teams have worked with the NAP team to provide advice and guidance in relation to the wording of certain measures, the inclusion of new measures and supporting text and modification of other measures to strengthen environmental outcomes. Specifically both the SEA and AA teams:

� Provided feedback on language to address issues in particular in relation to European Sites and AA;

� Presented suggestions and recommendations on how best to address key issues within the confines if the legal framework in place for the NAP; and

� Developed additional mitigation measures for inclusion in the NAP.

Table 4-1 shows how environmental considerations and the input of the SEA and AA have been taken into account in the final NAP.

Table 4-1 - How Environmental Considerations have been taken into account in the NAP

Environmental

Consideration How has this been accounted for in the Programme?

Identification of environmental

constraints

The SEA team undertook an audit of baseline environmental conditions for the programme with reference to human health, water quality, biodiversity, flora and fauna, population, soils and geology, air quality, climatic factors, material assets, cultural heritage and landscape. This information was used to focus the SEA objectives, develop alternatives and assess positive and negative impacts associated with the implementation of the proposed NAP.

Assessment of alternatives

The SEA team liaised with the NAP team on possible alternatives during preparation of the SEA scoping document and subsequently as the NAP evolved, taking into account the limitations of the existing NAP framework. The alternatives considered are presented in Chapter 6 of this statement.

Iterative assessment and

discussion

As part of the iterative discussions throughout the SEA and AA processes a series of supporting commitments to underpin the NAP has been given by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine to better complement and support the implementation of the NAP within the confines of the legal framework already in pace. These commitments are summarised in Section 4.2.

Recommendation of mitigation measures /

recommendations

Mitigation measures were proposed to address any negative environmental impacts identified during the assessment process. These included amendments to the wording of proposed measures in the programme and inclusion of a set of environmental mitigation measures to reflect protection of the environment. The measures which were proposed by the SEA team are summarised in Section 4.3.

Required Environmental

Monitoring Programme

An environmental monitoring programme to track progress towards achieving Strategic Environmental Objectives (SEOs) and reaching targets was presented in the SEA Environmental Report. This programme will facilitate the ongoing monitoring of the implementation of the NAP, Section 7.


MDE1387Rp0005F01 10

Environmental

Consideration How has this been accounted for in the Programme?

Consultation

Statutory consultation was undertaken with the environmental consultees for SEA in Ireland and Northern Ireland in relation to scoping of the environmental report. Issues raised were used to inform the overall scope and context of the environmental assessment. Public consultation was undertaken at the scoping stage and this stakeholder feedback also helped to shape the environmental assessment.

Subsequently, the SEA Environmental Report, the Natura Impact Statement (from the Appropriate Assessment process) and the draft NAP were published. Submissions received have been reviewed by the SEA and plan teams and amendments have been made where appropriate. All changes to the NAP have been screened by the SEA and AA teams to determine if these would result in significant effects.

4.2 SUPPORTING COMMITMENTS

As part of the iterative discussions throughout the SEA and AA processes a series of supporting commitments to underpin the NAP has been given by the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine to better complement and support the implementation of the NAP within the confines of the legal framework already in pace. These commitments are as follows;

� Risk assessment capability for Teagasc’s online NMP system: Teagasc’s online NMP system is the most widely used system for producing NMPs in Ireland. The use of this system is now a prerequisite for all derogation applications in 2017 and is currently evolving to also allow for the identification of areas where there is increased risk of nutrient loss to water bodies. This ability will be largely based on work undertaken by the EPA’s Catchment Management Unit and will entail mapping layers identifying areas where agriculture represents a higher risk to water pollution based on a combination of physical factors including soil types and stocking rates. With this capability, it will be possible to overlay high risk areas with areas associated with derogation and other applications. If an application is received where part or all of the lands associated have been identified as high risk, then a further detailed assessment of the application can be made and appropriate mitigation introduced.

The DAFM has committed to ensuring that the Teagasc online NMP system will be updated to link with the EPA’s WFD web application, which will facilitate the process. Furthermore, this detailed assessment will be undertaken on a case by case basis by appropriately trained agri-environmental specialists that have obtained a suitable level of training to address environmental concerns.

• Production of explanatory booklet: An explanatory guidance document booklet is produced with each revision of the Regulations. These booklets are designed to provide a greater understanding of the Regulations. However, as with the Regulations, the booklet is focussed towards agronomic performance and does not always link the agronomic requirement with the environmental need. DAFM will update their Nitrates Explanatory Handbook to provide greater environmental focus. The booklet will provide explanation and management techniques to increase awareness of potential environmental issues. The booklet will also provide greater understanding of the environmental and economic benefits of good nutrient management and promote the value of soil testing and NMPs. Where new guidance on these environmental issues is required in addition to the existing provisions in the Nitrates Handbook, additional guidance documentation will be developed to supplement the


MDE1387Rp0005F01 11

provisions of the Nitrates Handbook. The documents will be found on the DAFM Nitrates Web Site1.

� Knowledge Exchange: This process brings together academics, farmers and wider groups and communities to exchange ideas, evidence and expertise in the promotion of environmentally sustainable agriculture.

DAFM are committed to the promotion and uptake of best practice in water quality protection on farms by co-designing suitable training modules with farmers and piloting them across a range of discussion groups involved in different farming enterprises during 2018. During the pilot phase the modules will be revised using feedback from the discussion group meetings to facilitate comprehension by the audience and delivery to various discussion groups. Information and training will be provided as required to advisers/consultants on the delivery of the training module to facilitate wider dissemination of water quality protection messages.

DAFM have taken a proactive and direct approach to disseminate information on the value of pig slurries when utilised in an environmentally sustainable manner and are committed to continue this approach during this term of the NAP.

Water quality protection issues will be promoted at appropriate public event activities and national advisory campaigns.

Key to this will be the dissemination of information from the following types of projects;

� COSAINT, (Teagasc, DKIT, EPA, ongoing) – This project is investigating exclusion of cattle from streams and rivers. Preventing cattle access is one of the measures now being proposed under the Green Low Carbon Agri-environmental Scheme (GLAS) to control nutrient loss. Studies which introduced similar measures in other jurisdictions have been shown to reduce deterioration in water quality but to date there has not been any intensive study under Irish conditions.

The project will run for four years. It will assess the impacts of measures to exclude cattle from stream on water quality using a range of chemical and biological water quality metrics.

� Harmony (Teagasc, University of Ulster, NUI Galway and AFBI ongoing) – This project is considering strategies for nutrient management in sensitive catchments. The project is working within a number of case-study catchments to assess current nutrient management and farm practice in these areas. A review of measures for sensitive catchments will also be carried out and a preliminary list of measures will be drafted. The project aims to propose management options and measures for agriculture that are locally relevant. It will engage with farmers through survey and discussion groups to evaluate the likelihood of adoption of new measures among the farming community.

� Agricultural Catchment Programme (Teagasc, ongoing) - The Agricultural Catchments Programme (ACP) is a science-farmer-advice action research initiative to assess the Nitrates Directive National Action Programme (NAP) regulations in Ireland. The ACP will consider, amongst other things, the uptake and social acceptance of changed nutrient management, and the economic and biophysical consequences from agricultural sources to water body receptors in six intensive agricultural catchments. The project also covers a legislative spectrum from the Nitrates Directive regulations at one end to more specific regulations concerned with water body status; each

1 https://www.agriculture.gov.ie/ruralenvironment/environmentalobligations/nitrates/


MDE1387Rp0005F01 12

having a place under the overarching Water Framework Directive. Paramount to the evaluation experiment is an advice network that will enable farmers to engage with the scientific programme and to avail of the best agricultural advice on production within the constraints of the draft NAP.

4.3 MITIGATION MEASURES / RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE SEA / AA

Table 4-2 outlines the mitigation measures and recommendations from the SEA and AA processes and how they have influenced the final NAP. Where no change has been made, a response has been provided from the relevant departments of DHPLG and the DAFM.


MDE1387Rp0005F01 13

Table 4-2 - Integration of Mitigation Measures /Recommendation Proposed in SEA /AA

Measure(s) Proposed Mitigation/Recommendation Responses from DHPLG and DAFM Changes made to NAP

Article 8 (2)

Article 8(2) requires that storage facilities shall be adequate to cope with adverse weather conditions. However, as winters are predicted to become wetter, with increases of up to 14 per cent precipitation under the high emission scenarios by mid-century

2, it is recommended that freeboard

requirements as prescribed in Tables 1 to 3 in Schedule 2 of the draft NAP are increased in all future developments of uncovered storage facilities to provide greater resilience to climate change

DAFM considers agricultural activities in the context of climate change and indications are that the current storage requirements are adequate for the next four years to address concerns in relation to climate change and as such, freeboard requirements have been retained as per the previous NAP. Further consideration of the matter will be taken at the next NAP review.

Furthermore, DAFM will produce supporting Nitrates Explanatory Handbook that will be available on the DAFM Nitrates web site. This Nitrates Explanatory Handbook will provide information to landowners and others that will address many of the issues raised in the public consultation

No change made in final NAP. See supporting commitments

Article 14 (2) and (4)

Article 14 discusses various situations where reduced storage may be acceptable. Sub-Articles (2) to (4) consider situations that allow reduced storage where animals are out-wintered. The acceptability of these situations are dependent on ensuring that “(d) severe damage to the surface of the land

by poaching does not occur. .”. This is achieved by, inter alia, stock type and stocking rates.

The following is recommended to strengthen measures in Article 14;

Current and future DAFM Nitrates Explanatory Handbook will provide further information on these matters and it is therefore not considered necessary to include these aspects in the S.I. Regulations


2 DAFM, 2017. Adaptation Planning - Developing Resilience to Climate Change in the Irish Agriculture and Forest Sector.


MDE1387Rp0005F01 14


� Define “poaching” in Part 1 to provide clarity and limit misinterpretation;

� Remove the word “severe” from sub-article (3)(d) to limit misinterpretation of acceptable practices; and

� Include a requirement for in-field supplementary feeding points to be moved on a regular basis to minimise soil damage.

Article 15(5)

To ensure that the use of N and P indices prescribed in Article 15(5) is an environmentally robust approach it is recommended that further consideration of the environmental suitability of Morgan’s extractable P is undertaken

Considerable research has been, and is still being undertaken in this matter. The findings of this research will be considered in the next review of the NAP.

No change made in final NAP

Article 16 (1) It is recommended that the use of the words “reasonable” and “minimise” in Article 16(1) be removed as they are open to misinterpretation.

The use of these words in Art. 16(1) are key to allowing the flexibility of DAFM to work with farmers. Furthermore, it is not guaranteed that the removal of these words will reduce the potential for Art. 16(1) to be misinterpreted. Furthermore, the guidance booklet supporting the NAP will provide information to landowners and others on this matter


Article 16 (2)

Determining fertiliser use based on previous years stocking rates, as stated in Article 16(2) allows an occupier to forward plan fertiliser (organic and inorganic) use. This is advantageous but is reliant on stocking rates for the year of application and the previous year being the same. This may or may not be the case. If this is not the case then over or under application of fertiliser may occur. It is recommended that a mid-season determination of fertiliser requirements is included in the Programme to re-calibrate requirements and usage.

It is not practical to require farmers to carry out a mid-season update and any change in stocking rate would be reflected in the subsequent year’s plan.

However, DAFM will provide information to landowners and others on this matter in the Nitrates Explanatory Handbook



MDE1387Rp0005F01 15


Article 16 (3)

In Article 16(3)(a) to minimise the risk of over application of P on P4 soils, and to encourage soil testing, it is recommended that 50% of prescribed P limits for P3 soils be used on soils where no testing has occurred.

The number of P4 soils are declining rapidly and it is agreed amongst the EPA and Teagasc that the main area of risk is on peat soils, which is addressed in Art. 16(3)(d) and advice from Teagasc indicates that the potential risk to water from over application of P on P4 soils is extremely low.

Furthermore, the scientific evidence indicates that the risk from P losses relates to pollution pathways and the new water protection measures in the Regulations provide additional protection from potential impacts of P application on water.

Finally, the number of farmers testing their soils is increasing, which is reducing the potential number of P4 soils being assumed as P3, thereby minimising the risk of over application on P on P4 soils.

However, it is proposed to amend the NAP as outlined in the adjacent column.

16(3)(d) An occupier of a

holding located in an area

where soils have an

organic matter content of

20% and above, as defined

on Teagasc-EPA Indicative

Soils map, shall ensure that

the soil test undertaken

includes organic matter

determination, subject to

the provisions of

paragraph (e). The

phosphorus fertilisation

rate for soils with more

than 20% organic matter

shall not exceed the

amounts permitted for

Index 3 soils.

16(3)(e) Soil organic matter

determination, in

accordance with paragraph

(d), shall not be required

where it is certified by a

Farm Advisory System

Advisor that soils on a

holding/field in such areas

are either mineral soils or

organic soils.

Article 16 (5) For Article 16(5) it is recommended that the Teagasc online NMP system is updated to link with the EPA’s WFD web Application, which will facilitate this further detailed

DAFM and Teagasc have agreed to the inclusion of appropriate EPA/ Teagasc maps in Teagasc’s online

See supporting commitments.


MDE1387Rp0005F01 16


assessment. It is further recommended that this detailed assessment is undertaken on a case by case basis by an appropriately trained agri-environmental specialist.

All advisors developing NMPs for these farms will be required to have a suitable level of training in Integrated Catchment Management based on the modules developed in conjunction with the EPA.

NMP system to facilitate this assessment.

Teagasc has agreed to provide suitable levels of training to advisors, and to promote water-protection related issues through their public event activities and national advisory campaigns and DAFM will provide information to landowners and others on this matter in their Nitrates Explanatory Handbook.

16(5)(a) Soil analysis is

carried out for soil

phosphorus and soil

organic matter contents;

soil organic matter testing

shall not be required where

it is certified by a Farm

Advisory System Advisor

that the sample area is a

mineral soil

Article 17 (1)

For Article 17(1), the 2m buffer zone in the legislation is not considered to be sufficient to prevent negative impacts on water quality as has been demonstrated in a number of scientific publications. It is recommended that buffers are based on site characteristics (slope, soil conditions, runoff pathways, sensitivity of the receiving water course etc.) and proximity of connection (via land drains) to a watercourse in order to protect water quality. Consideration should be taken of mapping produced by the EPA’s Catchment Management Unit which has identified areas At Risk from agriculture and which includes assessment of surface flow pathways for nutrients and sediment to rivers and lakes such as poorly draining soils and subsoils, and for underground pathways based on aquifer and groundwater vulnerability maps. Critical source areas for nutrient loss to water have been identified, and investigative assessments which will be undertaken as part of the implementation phase of the River Basin Management Plan for Ireland 2018 – 2021, will provide further evidence for where greater buffer sizes may be required. This should also take into account where the environmental objective and/or site specific conservation objective specifies for high status. The incorporation of this evidence base will also be of benefit in the context of Article

DAFM and Teagasc have agreed to the inclusion of appropriate EPA/ Teagasc maps in Teagasc’s online NMP system which will help assess the need of greater buffer strips on these farms, if required. Furthermore, DAFM and Teagasc will consider the outcomes of the investigative assessments which will be undertaken as part of the implementation phase of the River Basin Management Plan for Ireland 2018 – 2021 as the information becomes available.



MDE1387Rp0005F01 17


17(2) through to 17(16);

Article 17(2) to (11)

The distances of buffer zones prescribed in Article 17(2) to (11) are dependent on the size of population or volumes associated with the abstraction. It is recommended that a distance based on research is used regardless of numbers.

The research to inform the size of these buffer zones is not available at present. A large-scale EPA research project on riparian buffer zones, led by Teagasc, is scheduled to commence in March 2018. The outcomes of this project will inform the next review of the NAP.

No change made in final NAP See supporting commitments

Article 17(2) to (11

It is recommended that the location of supplementary feed points is consistent with the requirements of Articles 17(2) to (11) to minimise the risk of ground water pollution from these facilities. Furthermore, and for the avoidance of any doubt, it is recommended that this Article is linked to Article 14(3)(d).

The risk associated with properly-wrapped baled silage is not considered significant.

However, DAFM guidance will provide additional information to landowners and others on this matter


Article 17 (12)

It is recommended that greater buffer zones are considered for areas where the slope, soil type and/or receiving water’s sensitivities are such that there is a potential risk of pollution. Consideration should be taken of mapping produced by the EPA’s Catchment Management Unit which has identified areas at risk from agriculture.

A large-scale EPA research project on riparian buffer zones, led by Teagasc, is scheduled to commence in March 2018. The outcomes of this project will inform the next review of the NAP.

No change made in final NAP. See supporting commitments.

Article 17 (14)

It is recommend that the use of the words “farmyard manure” are replaced with “organic materials” in Article 17(14) to minimise potential risk to PHH, BFF, and W associated with in-field storage of all organic materials.

Agreed

Article 17(14) Organic

fertiliser shall not be held

in a field at any time during

the periods specified in

Schedule 4 as applicable to

that substance.

Article 17 (15) It is recommended that the storage of bales is consistent with the requirements of Articles 17(2) to (11) to minimise the risk of ground water pollution from silage bale effluent.

The risk associated with properly-wrapped baled silage is not considered significant.

However, DAFM will provide information to landowners and



MDE1387Rp0005F01 18


others on the best way to store bales of silage in their Nitrates Explanatory Handbook.

Article 17 (17)

It is recommended that the following words are included in Article 17(17) to minimise risk to PHH “Supplementary

feeding points shall not be located within 20m of waters or

abstraction points and shall not be located on bare rock”

The risks to abstractions are not considered as significant as to open surface waters. Additional work on protecting drinking water sources is being undertaken by Irish Water.


Article 17 (18)

The impact of bovine livestock accessing water courses is currently being considered in the COSAINT project

3 which is

led by Teagasc and is investigating the exclusion of cattle from streams and rivers. It is recommended that results from this project are considered to re-evaluate measure 17(18) in the next review.

The findings of the COSAINT project will form part of the next review of the NAP.


Article 17 (19)

To provide greater protection to PHH, and consistency, it is recommended that Article 17(19) is expanded as follows to exclude the locating of drinking troughs within 20m of any abstraction point; “In the case of holdings identified in sub-

article 18, supplementary drinking points may not be located

within 20m of surface waters or abstraction points from 1

January 2021.”

The risks to abstractions are not considered as significant as to open surface waters. Additional work on protecting drinking water sources is being undertaken by Irish Water.


Article 18 (1)

The use of the words “…as is practically possible.” are included in Article 18(1) as there are circumstances, that are outside of the control of the occupier, such as strong winds, that make accurate applications challenging. However, the inclusion of this wording weakens this Article and is open to misinterpretation. It is therefore recommended that the words “…as is practically possible.” are removed from Article 18(1).

In reality it is in the farmer’s interest to apply fertiliser in an accurate and uniform manner from a cost perspective and for uniform grass growth. However, an explanation of these terms will be provided in Nitrates Explanatory Handbook


Article 18 (2)(b and d)

The terms ‘likely to flood’ and ‘heavy rain’ in Article 18 should be defined to avoid subjective judgement. For the former, in

These requirements would present a considerable level of complexity for

No change made in final NAP. See supporting

3 https://www.teagasc.ie/environment/cosaint/


MDE1387Rp0005F01 19


their scoping submission SWAN suggested areas referenced as ‘Liable to Floods’ on OS 1:1560 maps. It is suggested the latter be defined as greater than 8mm in a 3 hour period;

landowner and regulator alike.

An explanation of these terms is provided in the Nitrates Explanatory Handbook

commitments.

Article 18 (2)(e)

In Article 18(2)(e) there is reference to “…..having regard to factors such as surface runoff pathways, the presence of land drains, the absence of hedgerows to mitigate surface flow, soil condition and ground cover.” It is recommended that discussions are undertaken with EPA Catchment Management Unit and Teagasc to capture these features for inclusion in their online NMP system.

This cannot be included in this review of the NAP, but as the knowledge base is improved through the work of local authority and Teagasc staff on the ground, localised risks from agriculture will be incorporated into decision-making tools.


Article 21 (6)

It is recommended that with respect to the exemptions provided for the National Ploughing Association in Article 21.(6), the siting of events should be carefully considered from an environmental perspective, directing areas of heaviest footfall away from any sensitive receptors. In addition, the use of measures for silt attenuation should be employed to protect watercourses.

These environmental considerations shall be addressed under the appropriate planning procedures.


Article 22

The current drivers for ensuring compliance with the requirements of the Programme are legislative (various Regulations) and economic (Basic Farm Payments etc.). Blackstock

4 et al. in 2010 argues that behavioural change

leading to voluntary action will persist longest over time as it is more likely to become embedded in social norms. Therefore it is recommended that greater implementation of “Knowledge Exchange” platforms are initiated during this Programme period to promote behavioural change and voluntary action.

DAFM and Teagasc are committed to promoting behavioural change among farmers.


Article 23(1) Article 23(1) should be expanded to include records of all water bodies and drainage networks within the holding;

Landowners are already required to consider drainage under Article 18

No change made in final NAP. See supporting

4 Blackstock K. L., Ingram J., Burton R., Brown K. M., Slee B., 2010, Understanding and influencing behaviour change by farmers to improve water quality.


MDE1387Rp0005F01 20


(2). However, a further explanation of the risks associated with land drains will be provided in the Nitrates Explanatory Handbook

commitments.

Article 27 In relation to Article 27, any relevant report or information should be made available to Irish Water to increase transparency and prevent duplication of work

This information will be made available to Irish Water through the Agency and Local Authorities.

No change made in final NAP.

Article 30 (2)

It is recommended that resources are made available to local authorities either directly or indirectly to undertake inspections as per the requirements of Article 30(2) of the Programme.

Adequate resources are in place within local authorities to maintain existing inspection rates.


General

It is recommended that the Teagasc online NMP system is updated to link with the EPA’s WFD web Application, which will facilitate this further detailed assessment. It is further recommended that this detailed assessment is undertaken on a case by case basis by an appropriately trained agri-environmental specialist.

All advisors developing NMPs for these farms will be agri-environmental specialists that have obtained a suitable level of training to address environmental concerns

As addressed previously No change made in final NAP. See supporting commitments.

General

Increased availability and implementation of “Knowledge Exchange” platforms should be initiated during this Programme period to promote behavioural change and voluntary action, in line with River Basin Management Plan measures.

DAFM and Teagasc are committed to promoting Knowledge Exchange

See supporting commitments


MDE1387Rp0005F01 21

5 HOW CONSULTATION FEEDBACK HAS INFLUENCED THE NAP

In finalising the NAP, a comprehensive review of all submissions received has been undertaken and the issues raised and proposed changes are summarised in following tables.

It should be noted that the NAP is a statutory instrument and not a policy document therefore many of the ways in which the NAP has been influenced have been implemented through supporting documents and structures rather than through changes to the text of the GAP Regulations.

Significant changes have in all cases been screened, for potential significant environmental effects in accordance with both the SEA Directive and the Habitats Directive and this screening is presented in Section 8 of this report.


MDE1387Rp0005F01 22

Table 5-1 - Main Issues raised by DCHG

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP

Response Changes made

Further consideration should be given to the interrelationship between Cultural Heritage and Biodiversity, Flora, Fauna and Air Quality in particular.

SEA Table 5-11 in the SEA ER has been updated to reflect this. Changes made to Table 5-11 of SEA and shown in Chapter 9, Addendum to Environmental Report.

Protection of built heritage inadequately considered in comparison to the other objectives

SEA

The effect of the NAP on cultural heritage has been fully considered in appropriate detail in the SEA relative to the potential for impact arising from the measures included in the NAP.

No change to SEA ER

Appendix B – Review of relevant Plans, programmes and policies, Cultural Heritage, Heritage Plan, Transport and landscape should be grouped together

SEA Suggestion noted, however, these groupings have been made from a national and regional perspective.

No change to SEA ER

SI and Nitrates Action Programme are one and the same, should be referred to as such in the SI

NAP Comment noted. No change to final NAP

The issue of atmospheric nitrogen deposition, and the impact it can have in changing the vegetation types of certain sensitive habitats, could be of relevance and as such should be considered.

SEA

Consideration was given to this matter. There are a number of measures proposed under the programme that ensure that efficient nitrogen usage and that volatilisation of nitrogenous components is minimised.

No change to SEA ER

Reference should be made to interconnected issues and legislation and whether any legislation linked to the Water Framework Directive deals with the issue of air quality and atmospheric nitrogen deposition.

SEA Other plans, programmes and legislation of relevance are included in the SEA ER, Chapter 4.

No change to SEA ER

It is unclear what exactly is being proposed in Section 7 of the NIS by way of mitigation in place of a 2 m buffer for 17 (1);

NAP

A 2m buffer may not be sufficient in certain cases and is dependent on certain factors that influence the importance of the ‘pathway’. DHPLG has committed to developing a number of research projects in 2018 in this matter to build the evidence

No change to final NAP or NIS


MDE1387Rp0005F01 23

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


base for the next NAP review. Further, local authorities are already using catchment management tools for targeting protection measures, which may include increased buffers in certain situations. Derogation and GLAS farms, which represent over 1/3 of all Irish farms are required to use Teagasc’s online NMP which will be updated to include risk assessment capability.

The Department welcomes the fact that Strategic Objective 1, for Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna, includes biodiversity, designated sites and protected species. However, the targets, indicators and data source relate only to water quality and EU designed sites with their qualifying interest habitats and species. Protected species should be added to the first target and the indicator and data source amended as necessary.

SEA Noted. Water quality was considered the most relevant targets and indicators in terms of monitoring, given the nature of the NAP.

Changes made to Tables 6-1, 9-3 and 9 (Non-Technical Summary) and shown in Chapter 9, Addendum to Environmental Report

Table 5-2 - Main Issues raised by IFI

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


Further consideration should be given to the potentially significant impacts;

� Fish spawning and nursery areas;

� Passage of migratory fish;

� Areas of natural heritage importance including geological heritage sites;

� -Sport and commercial fishing and angling;

NAP Comments noted. The NAP encompasses measures that will provide additional protection to fisheries.

No change to final NAP


MDE1387Rp0005F01 24

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


and

� Amenity and recreation areas.

2021 date referred to in Art. 17(18) should be brought forward if COSAINT or similar research projects prove deleterious effect prior to that (with particular ref to precautionary principle).

NAP DHPLG will consider changing the date if COSAINT or similar research projects prove deleterious effect prior to 2021

No change of final NAP, but DHPLG state that an amendment can be considered should research prove effect prior to 2021

Table 5-3 - Main Issues raised by DAERA

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


Consideration should be given to both Ireland’s land and marine boundaries

SEA Additional text added in relation to marine boundaries.

Changes made to paragraph 2 of Relevant Aspects of the Current State

of the Environment and shown in Chapter 9, Addendum to Environmental Report.

It should be noted that the EU Maritime Spatial Planning Directive establishes the framework for maritime spatial planning across the EU, not MSFD

SEA Noted

Changes made to paragraph 2 of section 4.3.11 Maritime Planning and

Protection and shown in Chapter 9, Addendum to Environmental Report.

The UK Marine Policy Statement should also be noted (Regional Table in Annex B under the water topic)

SEA Noted. Changes made to Appendix B and

shown in Chapter 9, Addendum to Environmental Report

The assessment on alternatives all list effects on air quality as neutral. Are there no impacts from ammonia emissions from the alternatives that could give to positive or negative effects on ammonia emissions?

SEA

The assessment of alternatives considers that all alternatives will have a negative effect on air quality as the application of nitrogenous fertilisers and the storage of organic fertilisers will impact on air quality and climatic factors.

No change to SEA ER


MDE1387Rp0005F01 25

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


Gothenburg Protocol has been updated and now has 2020 emission targets.

SEA Noted Changes made to Table 5-2 and shown in Chapter 9, Addendum to Environmental Report

Table 5-4 - Main Issues raised by EPA

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP

Response from SEA / NAP team Changes made

NAP should seek to increase climate resilience in relation to run-off of nutrients relating to livestock;

NAP

The final NAP has introduced a number of new measures such as the exclusion of stock, associated with intensive farms, from water courses and the requirement for water troughs to be provided on these same farms that will help build resilience for climate change and further measures will be considered and introduced, if appropriate, at the next review.


Supplementary action by the agri sector at local and regional level will be required to improve and protect WQ

NAP

DHPLG and DAFM have committed to a number of supporting mechanisms that will underpin the NAP and will provide action at a local and regional level to improve and protect WQ. This includes the commitment of additional resources under the River Basin Management Plan through the Agricultural Sustainability Support and Advisory Programme.


Use of catchment management tools for targeting protection measures and identifying areas suitable for intensification

NAP

The local authorities are already using catchment management tools for targeting protection measures. Derogation farms are required to use Teagasc’s online NMP which will be updated to include risk assessment capability.


Knowledge Transfer is key (e.g. through Dairy Sustainability Forum etc.

NAP

It is acknowledged that Knowledge Transfer is key to delivering change in the agricultural sector and DHPLG and DAFM have committed to a number of supporting mechanisms that will underpin the NAP and will provide action at a local and regional level to improve and protect WQ



MDE1387Rp0005F01 26

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


Recommend the preparation of a separate free standing document, in effect the NAP document, to accompany the final GAP Regs

NAP DHPLG will consider the preparation of a separate NAP document during the next review.


EPA called for early action to prevent any further deterioration in our waters and to make the improvements needed under the WFD. As such, they urge that measures in relation to Article 17 come into effect on 1st Jan 2020, rather than 1st Jan 2021

NAP

2021 has been selected to allow farmers to budget and prepare for the expected additional costs associated with compliance with Article 17. Farmers will be encouraged to implement relevant measures well in advance to the deadlines.


Additional information and specific details of the KT measure should be set out in the recommended NAP document (KT required for farmers wishing to avail of build-up rates of P application)

NAP

Information in relation to KT is developed and held by Teagasc on their various platforms and are subject to continuous change. There may be limited value in capturing these measures in a snapshot document.


All info relating to the NAP and GAP Regs be made available on a single centralised platform

NAP This will be considered by the DHPLG in 2018. No change to final NAP

Spatial mapping of the findings of GAP inspections should be provided

NAP

Many local authorities are already using GIS platforms for the storage of farm inspection data. However, issues in relation to data protection may need to be overcome to bring this to fruition.


Standardised risk based methodology for the GAP Regs farm inspection programme be reviewed in the context of the WFD characterisation work led by the EPA

NAP Consideration will be given to a standardised risk based methodology for the GAP Regs farm inspection programme in the context of the WFD characterisation work led by the EPA


Consideration to broadening the scope of local authority inspections in 'at risk' catchments to cover nutrient management and diffuse nutrients from landspreading in addition to farmyard

NAP

There is an acknowledgement among local authority personnel that their expertise does not extend beyond the farmyard. The more collaborative approach being taken with the new agricultural sustainability advisers should help to address some of these issues where they are identified.


EPA recommend that the mitigation measures and other recommendations in the SEA

NAP Noted. Table 4-2 clarifies the integration of measures. . No change to final NAP


MDE1387Rp0005F01 27

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


Environmental Report and Natura Impact Statement should be reviewed and integrated into the GAP Regulations/NAP as appropriate.

EPA recommend that consideration should be given to applying the proposed new water protection measure to all farms regardless of stocking rates and particularly the need to apply in farms within high status catchments

NAP

The new measures will be applied on a risk basis rather than as a blanket national measure. Furthermore, high status catchments have yet to be fully delineated and mapped, and high status objectives will not be assigned until the RBMP is published in 2018. The Blue Dot Catchment Programme in the RBMP will help to develop and implement agricultural measures in high status catchments.


Set back distances

Art 17 (2) and (3)c clarification of ‘a turlough likely to flood’ and where exactly the 20 m setback distance starts from

NAP Art 17 (2) and (3)c: These were considered by the Nitrates Expert Review Group and it was determined that clarification was not needed in the Regulations.


Art 17(4) clarify who is responsible for the technical assessment, is it IW on public sources and LA on private ones

NAP Art 17(4): Irish water are responsible the technical assessments. No change to final NAP

Art 17(5) consider whether this should provide for a scenario whereby IW requests the LA to apply these distances

NAP Art 17(5): This was considered unnecessary. No change to final NAP

Art 17(17) should be amended to also make reference to swallow holes and collapse features

NAP Art 17(17): These were considered by the Nitrates Expert Review Group and it was determined that reference was not needed in the Regulations.


Art 17(7)(a) the reference to the 2007 Drinking Water Regulations should refer to the 2014 Drinking Water Regulations.

NAP Art 17(7)(a) : This was corrected in the final regulations. No change to final NAP

Art 17(18) should also make reference to swallow holes and collapse feature

NAP Art 17(18): These were considered by the Nitrates Expert Review Group and it was determined that reference was not needed in the Regulations.


Art 17(19) should also make reference to NAP Art 17(19) These were considered by the Nitrates Expert Review No change to final NAP


MDE1387Rp0005F01 28

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


swallow holes and collapse feature Group and it was determined that reference was not needed in the Regulations.

Storage capacity

Have slurry storage capacity requirements been reviewed and are they still fit for purpose

NAP Slurry storage requirements have been reviewed by the Nitrates Expert Group and are currently considered fit for purpose.


Are rainfall values in Table 4 sufficient to cover weather extremes such as those that have occurred in the last number of years.

NAP The Nitrates Expert Review Group are satisfied as to the contents of these tables.


Recommend that table should clarify that the values presented are crop available nutrient (so for nitrogen this is total nitrogen excreted minus gaseous losses).

NAP This is not the case and additional research would be needed to present the data as crop available nutrients.


Have tables 7 and 8 been reviewed since the last NAP review

NAP The Nitrates Expert Review Group have reviewed these tables and are satisfied as to the contents of these tables.


Non-Technical Summary - Relevant Aspects of

the Current State of the Environment

(Baseline)

Page 7, 2nd paragraph: it should be clarified here (and elsewhere in the report as relevant) that eutrophication is caused by urban waste water and diffuse agricultural pollution.

SEA Change made to SEA ER Changes made and shown in Chapter 9, Addendum to Environmental Report

Transitional and Coastal Waters (p. 7): the statement that “downward trends in the marine environment were noted” is incorrect. There were, however, downward trends in various nutrients entering the marine environment. These decreases mainly occurred before 2010 and since then there has been no change.


Table 5 – under water, groundwater directive SEA Change made to SEA ER Changes made and shown in Chapter


MDE1387Rp0005F01 29

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


(either previous or new) should be mentioned. 9, Addendum to Environmental Report

Table 9 refers to the 2007-09 EPA WQ assessment as the WQ baseline. This is incorrect however, as the WFD environmental objectives are the actual baseline (the 07-09 assessment was merely the condition of waters at that time).


Section 2. Contents and Main Objectives of

the Framework

Page 23: in relation to the proposed new water protection measures where stocking rates exceed 170 kg N/ha, the merits of applying these measures to all farms, or at least to farms within all high status catchments, could have been considered and assessed.

NAP

As outlined earlier, waterbodies with high status objectives have not yet been confirmed. Additional work through the Blue Dot Catchments programme under the RBMP will assist in reducing the potential risk from agriculture to high status waterbodies.


Risk assessment capability for Teagasc’s Online NMP system (p. 24): it is recommended that the results of the EPA-led characterisation work should be taken into consideration when application rates are being determined.

NAP Teagasc has committed to incorporating the EPA’s work into the online NMP


Section 3 SEA Methodology

In Table 3.1 SEA Environmental Assessment,

under climatic factors the reference to “carbon emissions” should instead refer to “greenhouse gas emissions”. Also, under air quality, air pollutants should be referred to.


Section 4. Review of Relevant Plans, Policies

and Programmes

In Section 4.3 (and Appendix B), it should be clarified that the requirements to prepare maritime spatial plans stem from the Maritime

SEA Noted Changes made and shown in Chapter 9, Addendum to Environmental Report


MDE1387Rp0005F01 30

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


Spatial Planning Directive and not the Marine Strategy Framework Directive.

Section 4.3 should also refer to the proposed Land Use, Land Use Change and Forestry (LULUCF) Regulations


Section 5. Relevant Aspects of the Current

State of the Environment (Baseline)

Table 5.2 Summary of Current State of the Environment in Ireland (2016) reference should be made to NH3.


Section 5.2.3.3 Geology and Hydrogeology: in relation to hydrogeology, the report states “The GSI borehole database indicates that

there are over 33,283 groundwater wells and

springs at a national level (those with the

highest positional accuracy). Of these,

approximately 860 are at the appropriate

abstraction yield to provide for potable water

supply”. This is somewhat misleading and under represents the reality, as it does not define potable water supply, i.e. a single household well provides enough for a potable water supply, and there are many more than 860 with this potential.

SEA Noted. This information was acquired from the GSI and further discussed in section 5.2.6.1. However to avoid confusion an additional wording has been considered

Changes made and shown in Chapter 9, Addendum to Environmental Report

Section 5.2.5.3 Transboundary Gases should use the most up-to-date information (Informative Inventory Report, link above) and reference it accordingly.

SEA Changes made to reflect comments Changes made and shown in Chapter 9, Addendum to Environmental Report

Section 7. Alternatives

It should be clearly outlined how the alternatives considered would impact on WFD

SEA/NAP Three alternatives were considered in the SEA ER. The first option was a ‘Business-as-usual’ scenario. The second considered basic

No change to SEA or to final NAP


MDE1387Rp0005F01 31

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


status and progress towards meeting WFD objectives. For example, would the do-nothing approach cause a significant decrease in Good water bodies? The impact of the preferred alternative, the NAP, on WFD status should then be clearly outlined. For example, will the proposed measures reduce the number of moderate estuaries, or maintain the status quo?

changes to the draft NAP as proposed in the Nitrates Action Programme Expert Group Report. These changes included strengthened water protection measures, a simplification of the regulations, and adjustments to nutrient allowances and application. The third option considered, in addition to the continued implementation of the existing measures from the current NAP to new strengthened water protection measures, is enhanced Knowledge Transfer, simplification of the measures for improved implementation and optimization of soil fertility.

None of the alternatives considered would cause a significant decrease in ‘Good’ water bodies, if implemented fully. However the alternative chosen, Option 3, introduces additional measures that further enhance the programme and provide greater protection to water quality. This greater protection will help promote Ireland’s ability to achieve the requirements of the WFD

Section 8. Assessment of Preferred

Alternative

Page 134: Article 16(3): labelling all soils at P index 3, where no soil testing has been undertaken, increases the risk of P loss and water pollution. We recommend a move away from assumptions about soil P index to a more informed evidenced based approach, particularly in the catchments of waterbodies with water quality problems.

NAP For this review, the evidence provided by Teagasc in relation to soil P was followed by the Nitrates Expert Review Group.


Page 135: There is an error in the second table, which should read “Determining fertilizer use based on previous stocking rates”.

SEA/NAP Change made to SEA ER Changes made and shown in Chapter 9, Addendum to Environmental Report

Page 140: Point referring to article 17(18) and the potential impact on water quality of cattle

SEA/NAP Noted No change to SEA or to final NAP


MDE1387Rp0005F01 32

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


entering water courses on farms with <170 kg N-1; we note that this is of particularly relevant to high status sites

Section 9. Mitigation and Monitoring

In relation to the monitoring proposed for Objective 5 Air Quality in Table 9.3

Environmental Monitoring Programme, the EPA’s Informative Inventory Report should be used as a data source For Objective 6 Climatic Factors, the EPA’s National Inventory Report should be used as a data source:


Table 6-1 should refer to the Informative Inventory Report as an indicator for air quality/air pollutants and should refer to the National Inventory Report for greenhouse gases/climatic factors.


On page 153 there appears to be a misunderstanding in relation to the use of different radii for setback distances in Article 17(2) to (11) and the recommendation that a standardised distance be used. It should be noted that larger supplies draw water from larger areas underground and therefore the set-back distances need to be larger to provide the same protection.

SEA The wording of this measure has been changed to reflect comment



MDE1387Rp0005F01 33

Table 5-5 - Main Issues raised by SWAN

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


Concern over meeting with EU Commission at which Irish government intends signing off on the NAP taking place less than a week after closing date of consultation

NAP The Minister will sign off on the NAP on 15 December, nearly three weeks after the closing date for submissions.


Mandatory NMPs for ALL farmers, which should include a nutrient transfer risk assessment

NAP

Approximately 60,000 farmers are now subject to nutrient management planning. The majority of these plans are completed on Teagasc’s online NMP system, which will be updated to include ‘risk assessment’ within the next 18 months.


Removal of the provision in the GAP regulations which allows spreading organic fertiliser on Index 4 soils (as a minimum in farm holdings in catchments of ‘at risk’ waterbodies

NAP

Comment considered. However, this situation rarely arises and only occurs where soil testing has been undertaken. Allowing for the fact that the occupier has an awareness of the soil P status throughout the lands farmed, and can make nutrient decisions based on this knowledge, it is felt that the potential risk associated with the inclusion of this provision is not significant.

Furthermore, it should also be noted that agriculture may not be the pressure in all ‘at risk’ waterbodies.


Removal of the provision which allows the spreading of fertiliser on previously unfertilised and unimproved soils (as a minimum in the catchments of High Status waterbodies, SACs and ‘at risk’ waterbodies)

NAP Comment noted. While this may occur there is no direct provision within the regulations that accommodates the use of fertilisers on unimproved soils.


Soil testing every 3 years (as recommended by Teagasc’s Code of Practise) (we welcome the reduction to 4 years in the proposed NAP);

NAP Comment noted No change to final NAP

The requirement for the inclusion of a nutrient transfer metric when calculating permitted nutrient loading

NAP

A risk assessment element is proposed for Teagasc’s online NMP system, which will provide greater awareness of factors that may promote nutrient transfer. This will allow the introduction of measures over and above the requirements of NAP.


Prohibition on the addition of P to peatlands NAP Art. 16(3)(d) and (e) provides for adequate controls on the Change made to Article 16 with the


MDE1387Rp0005F01 34

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


soils (as a minimum on holdings in the catchment of at risk and High Status waterbodies);

addition of P to peat soils. inclusion of the following additional sub-articles

16(3)(d) An occupier of a holding

located in an area where soils have

an organic matter content of 20%

and above, as defined on Teagasc-

EPA Indicative Soils map, shall ensure

that the soil test undertaken includes

organic matter determination,

subject to the provisions of

paragraph (e). The phosphorus

fertilisation rate for soils with more

than 20% organic matter shall not

exceed the amounts permitted for

Index 3 soils.

16(3)(e) Soil organic matter

determination, in accordance with

paragraph (d), shall not be required

where it is certified by a Farm

Advisory System Advisor that soils on

a holding/field in such areas are

either mineral soils or organic soils.

A requirement of a buffer zone of a minimum of 10m along surface watercourse, within which inorganic fertiliser should not be spread

NAP A large-scale EPA research project on riparian buffer zones, led by Teagasc, is scheduled to commence in March 2018. The outcomes of this project will inform the next review of the NAP.


Plots with a slope less than 10% should have a minimum distance of 10m and those with a slope of greater than 10%, a minimum distance of 20m between a watercourse and spreadlands should be imposed

NAP

Evidence of the effectiveness of the proposal is needed before it can be applied as a national measure. DHPLG has committed to developing a number of research projects in 2018 to build the evidence base for the next NAP review.



MDE1387Rp0005F01 35

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


Land that is ‘likely to flood’ should be defined and in such areas, no land-spreading should be allowed from October to March, inclusive

NAP

These requirements would present a considerable level of complexity for landowner and regulator alike. Further discussion on this matter will be outlined in the Nitrates Explanatory Handbook accompanying the NAP


See supporting documentation

‘Heavy rain’ should to be defined as a specific number of mm during a set time period, forecast by Met Éireann. (Recommend over 8mm in a 3 hour period, or over 24mm in 24hrs).

NAP

Defining ‘heavy rain’ was considered but it was decided not to change the current format.

Further discussion on this matter will be outlined in the Nitrates Explanatory Handbook


See supporting documentation

Prohibition on the spreading of organic fertilisers in areas identified by the EPA and/or Teagasc as Critical Source Areas

NAP The work of local authorities’ and the proposed new agricultural sustainability advisers will assist in the management of agricultural practices in higher-risk areas.


Table 5-6 - Main Issues raised by An Taisce

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


The legal status of “Food Wise 2025” is not identified or addressed

SEA This SEA relates to the NAP. A separate SEA was undertaken on Food Wise 2025.

No change to SEA

No information on monitoring and mitigation of adverse effects of Food Wise 2025 is provided

SEA

This SEA relates to the NAP. A separate SEA was undertaken on Food Wise 2025.

However, Article 2 of the Regulations, specifically refers to the expansion of agricultural sector where it states “……….The set of

measures in these regulations provide a basic level of protection

against possible adverse impacts to waters arising from the

agricultural expansion targets set under Food Harvest 2020.”

No change to SEA

Under “relationship with other relevant plans

and programmes” no consideration is SEA The SEA ER has considered the objectives of the NAP, WFD and

Food Wise 2025. Mitigation measures and recommendations have No change to SEA


MDE1387Rp0005F01 36

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


provided as to how potential contradictions with main objectives of NAP on WFD water quality targets with Food Wise 2025, are to be resolved

been provided in the SEA and NIS to improve the NAP in the context of mitigating the effects of agriculture on water quality.

The baseline data is seriously deficient. It does not address the progressive increase in Nitrates Derogation which occurred from the first second and third NAPs from 4,500 for the first to 5,100 for the second to 7,000 for the current

SEA The baseline data reflects the current state of the environment which includes the progressive increase in derogation farms.

No change to SEA

Chapter 5 is deficient in reconciling the accommodation of increase bovine agricultural impact with climate targets under the National Mitigation Plan under the Climate Action and Low carbon Development Act 2015, and groundwater protection and River Basin Management under the Water Framework Directive

SEA Chapter 5 considers changes in agriculture and the effects these changes may have on climate and receiving waters

No change to SEA

Section 5.2.3.1 on soils does not give any consideration or explanation as to why Ireland has not followed the practice of other European countries in designating nitrate sensitive zones

SEA

Options for both a whole country approach and discrete Nitrate Vulnerable Zones were available to Member States. Ireland, along with a number of other Member States opted for the whole country approach.

Ireland chose this approach as it ensured that the same standards were applied across the board.

No change to SEA

The considerations set out do not reflect up to date international research on nitrate impact on hydro geology. In a paper published in November 2017 in Nature Communications, scientists from British Geological Survey and Lancaster University estimate that up to 180 million tonnes of nitrate are stored in rocks worldwide - perhaps twice the amount stored

SEA

The most up to date and relevant information was considered in the SEA ER which was published in early November 2017. The paper referenced has been reviewed and the information included in the Environmental Report.

SEA ER updated to reflect this latest information.


MDE1387Rp0005F01 37

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


in soils

The capacity of the NPWS to engage with the agricultural sector on biodiversity protection is not sufficiently resourced

SEA Noted No change to SEA

The Environmental report has not addressed the level or Irelands failure in Climate Action. Ireland has not adopted a National Mitigation Plan (NMP) for Climate Action to achieve the level of action require under the Paris Agreement, or the lower targets to 2020 required under the current EU Effort Sharing Decision. The same apples to Ireland’s compliance with the UN Biodiversity Convention and the natural 2000 targets for habits and species under EU law.

SEA The SEA ER has considered these related plans and programmes. No change to SEA

The three alternatives assessed are all based on continuing bovine expansion. No consideration has been given to alternative options and scenarios reducing the scale of bovine agriculture and promoting better food security and lower environmental impact with plant based nutrient crops

SEA

The three alternatives are not based on the continued expansion of the Irish bovine herd but on the continued sustainable production of Irish agricultural produce.

It is noted that a number of these issues are addressed under Food Harvest 2025 which has been published and was subject to a separate SEA and AA process.

No change to SEA

There is a systemic failure to assess the likely significant impacts of continued bovine agricultural expansion under Food Wise 2025.

SEA

Food Harvest 2025 was subject to a separate SEA and AA process. Furthermore, Article 2 of the Regulations, specifically refers to the expansion of agricultural sector where it states “……….The set of




No change to SEA


MDE1387Rp0005F01 38

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


The proposed mitigation measure /recommendation for Article 8(2) is inadequate as to what level of increase in Tables 1 to 3 of the Draft NAP is required

NAP

The contingency already in place in the NAP is considered adequate to meet the climatic needs of this NAP term.

However, as stated in the recommendations in the SEA ER, consideration should be given to increasing this contingency for future uncovered facilities.


Proposed mitigation measure /recommendation for Article 14 on moving in field supplementary feeding points is not sufficient to demonstrate mitigation of poaching

SEA/NAP The recommendation is there to strengthen the existing measure. No change to SEA or to final NAP

“Further consideration” and “discussions with

the EPA” are not considered meaningful mitigation measure /recommendations.


With regards to the proposed mitigation measure /recommendation for Article 16(2), a mid-season determination of fertilizer does not address the capacity by which stock may be increased

SEA The recommendation is not there to mitigate stock capacity rather to ensure accurate fertiliser usage.

No change to SEA

Under Part 6, Functions of Public Authorities, no provision is provided in the proposed mitigation measure /recommendation for any new resources being put in place


No scenario has been provided as to what measures are proposed if the derogation is not granted

SEA/NAP If the derogation is not granted then no measures pertaining to it will be required.

No change to SEA or to the final NAP

No information is provided as to what derogation is being sought, and whether as with the 3

rd. programme a larger number of

qualifying farms are being sought in comparison to the previous.

SEA/NAP

A derogation for increased livestock manure on land is sought separately to the NAP. However, for the purpose of completion, the SEA ER considered that a derogation was granted and, as such, assessed it on this basis.

No change to SEA or to the final NAP


MDE1387Rp0005F01 39

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


Objective 1, Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna, no target is provided to address the habitat and species rated as having unfavourable or bad status, and where agricultural is a causal impact in Article 17 Habitats Directive reporting

SEA Noted. An additional target is now included in the addendum of the SEA ER.


Objective 2 Population and Human Health, only measures outlines are water quality standards required under EU law but without targets including for “reduction in drinking water restriction notices”. An indicator of “improved water quality status “is not adequate mitigation measure. A clearly stated target is required


Objective 3 Soils, only specific target to limit built surface cover nationally to below the EU average of 4%. No provision on soil protection including carbon storage of peat soils. No mitigation measure to stabilize carbon in the 20% of national area in peat soils, containing 75% of organic soil carbon

SEA Noted. However, these comments appear to relate to a different document as no mention is made of “built surface” in objective 3 for NAP SEA

No change to SEA

Objective 4 Water, River Basin Management Plan targets are not defined.

SEA Prevention of any deterioration in the status of surface water and groundwater in the RBD with ref. to the EPA 2007-2009 is the target.

No change to SEA

Objective 5 Air Quality, left to be resolved in future National Clean Air Strategy. Ammonia emissions not addressed

SEA

Ammonia emissions are dealt in Objective 5 and a number of key indicators are presented in the SEA ER. These are:

� Number of applications under the Low Emission Spreading Scheme

� Development of NH3 marginal abatement cost curve

No change to SEA

Objective 6 Climatic factors, no target is set to “reduce agriculture’s contribution to Ireland

SEA The SEA ER does consider agriculture and the effects this sector may have on GHG. Furthermore, a number of key indicators are

No change to SEA


MDE1387Rp0005F01 40

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


GHG emissions”. The proposed programme does not address the interrelationship of bovine agricultural expansion with nitrous oxide as well as methane emissions, having regard to the provisions of Section 15 of the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015. The impact of climatic factors on grass growth and animal feed supply is not addressed

presented. These are;

� Improved farm efficiencies through increase KT events.

� Greater uptake and use of Bord Bia’s Carbon Navigator

� Increase in NMP numbers

� Greater move to spring applications of slurry

Objectives 8 and 9, the continued and increased impact of bovine agriculture occurring on a farm by farm basis with Food Wise 2025 targets, and is not subject to EIA, so the strategic assessment of impact from increased animal housing is not occurring

SEA This comment has been noted and changes made in the SEA ER. Changes made and shown in Chapter 9, Addendum to Environmental Report

Section 5.3 of the Environmental Report covers “Interrelationship between SEA topics” and set out in Table 5-11. The provision of a box table of “Interrelationship of SEA topics” does not meet the requirement of the Directive

SEA The provision of table 5-11 informs the scope of inter-relationships identified and together with the assessment of these relationships in Chapter 8 meets the requirement of the Directive

No change to SEA

The SEA entirely fails to asses major interrelationships e.g. between climate and soil and water

SEA The SEA ER does assess these matters No change to SEA

The draft programme fails to assess the interrelationship of bovine agricultural expansion under Food Wise 2025 increase climate impact, including nitrous oxide as well as methane emissions, having regard to the provisions of Section 15 of the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015

NAP

Regard was taken of Section 15 of the Climate Action and Low Carbon Development Act 2015 in the development of the draft NAP.

Furthermore, Article 2 of the Regulations, specifically refers to the expansion of agricultural sector where it states “……….The set of



No change to NAP


MDE1387Rp0005F01 41

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP



The draft programme fails to assess climate vulnerability. In 2013 there was a major fodder crisis which cost 500 million. Future climate impact with more variable rainfall and weather patterns increases risk to fodder supply

SEA The SEA ER does assess this matter No change to SEA

No mechanism is set out as to how this monitoring is to be carried out, and definitions and what is the trigger for taking remedial action if adverse effects are not identified

SEA

The Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Martine is responsible for the monitoring of the NAP. This responsibility is prescribed in the NAP in Article 27(1) where it states that: The Minister for

Agriculture, Food and the Marine shall carry out, or cause to be

carried out, such monitoring and evaluation programmes in

relation to farm practices as may be necessary to determine the

effectiveness of measures being taken in accordance with these

Regulations.

No change to SEA

Table 5-7 - Main Issues raised by HSE

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


HSE recommend that the SEA considers the necessity for the Nitrates Action Programme to protect the health of the public and to identify and advise on Ireland’s vulnerability in this regard

SEA

The SEA considered public health during its assessment of the NAP.

While many of the measures outlined in the NAP are not directly related to the protection of drinking waters from biohazard, their implementation will provide protection indirectly by ensuring surface and ground waters are not contaminated by animal derived faecal matter.

However, there are a number of measures within the NAP that are directly related to the protection of drinking water supplies,

No change to SEA


MDE1387Rp0005F01 42

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


namely Article 17. These were all considered and assessed in the SEA ER and recommendations to further improve these NAP measures were outlined in the SEA ER.

The SEA should consider and advise on;

A very large minority of the population exposed to untreated drinking water – the requirement for prevention of contamination is therefore massive

SEA

The NAP’s primary focus is on the control and balance of nutrients within an agricultural environment. However, many of these measures have a positive effect in their protection of human health from biohazards associated with animals.

Furthermore, Ireland’s ‘whole country approach’ to the implementation of the Nitrates Directive ensures that the NAP measures have greatest effect over the greatest area, particularly those exposed to untreated drinking water.

No change to SEA

Weakness of relying on Nitrates legislation to protect against a completely different hazard e.g. Microbiological

SEA

The SEA ER did assess the NAP and the potential effects this programme may have on human health and, where practicable, outlined recommendations to further enhance the protection of human health.

Agriculture is not the only source of microbial contamination of water supplies and other legislation such as then EU (Drinking Water) Regulations 2014 and Water Services (amendments) 2012 etc. also provide protection of water supply sources from microbial pollution.

No change to SEA

Difficulties Local Authorities have in detecting / registering the small private supplies which they should be regulating


Risk of dependence on the sensitivity of “indicator” organisms. Recent evidence suggests such dependence may be misplaced

SEA Noted. Lack of alternative methodologies is also a determining factor.

No change to SEA

Climate change risks to public health from precipitation related increased infective run-off that may contaminate water supplies and that assumptions made on die-off times and

SEA

Climate change and the risk that this may have on agricultural practices and the measures in the NAP were considered and assessed in the SEA ER with enhanced recommendations outlined the ER where it was felt that the NAP measures required

No change to SEA


MDE1387Rp0005F01 43

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


distances of pathogenic organisms may be false into the future

enhancing.

Table 5-8 - Main Issues raised by IFA

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


IFA calls for the continuation of the nitrates derogation to support the sustainable development of the sector. In addition, the compliance burden should be reviewed and simplified

NAP Noted No change to final NAP

IFA proposes that a nitrates application, once accepted by the Department, would remain valid for a minimum of a five-year period

NAP The nitrates derogation is valid for a four year period. No change to final NAP

IFA proposes that the transitional arrangements currently in place for the pig and poultry sectors are extended in the overall review. Government must also immediately move to introduce measures to support the sector, including a feed in tariff to support the development of anaerobic digestion

NAP The transitional arrangements are continued into this NAP and are gradually reduced over the lifetime of the NAP. Other points are noted.


IFA proposes that the regulations are amended to allow for greater flexibility, particularly at the shoulders of the closed period. This would provide flexibility to the relevant Minister to allow spreading of nutrients based on land suitability and crop

NAP There is significant evidence to support the effectiveness of the closed periods in reducing risk to water quality.



MDE1387Rp0005F01 44

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


requirements

IFA proposes that similar to the compensation packages in place for turf cutting restrictions and other such land use restrictions, a package of measures must be put in place, which compensates farmers for losses incurred under the Nitrates Regulations

NAP This is a matter for the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine to decide and is outside the remit of the NAP.


To achieve optimum soil pH and reduce the risk of run-off and negative impact on the environment, IFA proposes the following:

� A grant scheme should be established to reduce the investment cost in lime.

� The on-line Teagasc Nutrient Management Planning tool should be made available to all farmers at no cost for a two-year period and on a minimum cost basis thereafter

NAP These are matters for the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine to decide and should not be included in the GAP Regulations.


IFA proposes that the Department of Agriculture should issue guidance to farmers each January, based on the previous year’s data, of the volume of manure that can be used. This will provide the necessary guidance and information to assist in fertiliser planning for the year ahead

NAP This is an operational matter for DAFM to consider. No change to final NAP

IFA proposes that derogation farmers should be allowed to import organic fertilisers, up to 250kg/ha, as an alternative to more expensive chemical fertilisers

NAP Noted. Provisions in relation to derogation farms are not expressly provided for in the NAP.


IFA proposes that where a roadway intersects a water trough, then the proposed 20m



MDE1387Rp0005F01 45

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


setback distance would not be required, as run-off from the roadways would be managed, to prevent runoff

IFA proposes that the cost of the compliance with the proposed requirements should be supported by the Rural Development Programme and TAMS

NAP Grant aid cannot be provided for the purposes of compliance with regulatory requirements


IFA similarly proposes that the same obligation to management run-off imposed on farmers must also apply to local authorities and Transport Infrastructure Ireland, who have responsibility for the maintenance and up-keep of the national roads network


IFA welcomes proposals in the draft regulation for a more collaborative approach between all stakeholders. These proposals must be followed up with firm actions and would require all Government agencies to refocus their actions towards advising farmers on how best to comply with regulations to deliver improved water quality, rather than exclusively enforcing water regulations



MDE1387Rp0005F01 46

Table 5-9 - Main Issues raised by Public stakeholder

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP

Response Changes to the final NAP

Where a landowner has already fenced off a water course then he should be able to leave it place, even it is closer than the requisite 1.5m

NAP

This Article (17(18)) only applies to landowners where the stocking rate on their farm exceeds 170kg N ha

-1.

If the stocking rate does exceed the requisite threshold then the lands will require to be fenced at 1.5m back from the river bank or water’s edge, as the case may be.


Will the landowner lose area based entitlements due to the reduction in UAA.

NAP Potentially, yes. No change to final NAP

Weeds will grow in the area fenced and this is in contravention of Good Farming Practice.

NAP This is expected and is, in part, the reasoning behind the measure. No change to final NAP

Will the landowner be paid to erect the waterway fence

NAP This measure has been introduced to mitigate the potential effects that intensively farmed lands may have on surface watercourses.


Table 5-10 - Main Issues raised by IW

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


Irish Water believes that Table 9 within Schedule 2 of the NAP, which outlines the nutrient availability of various fertiliser types, should include sewage sludge used in agriculture

NAP The landspreading of Sewage Sludge is dealt with in the Waste Management (Use of Sewage Sludge in Agriculture) Regulations, 1998 to 2001 and any subsequent amendments thereto.


The targets established in the Environmental Report (ER) in relation to water quality should support achievement of the objectives of the Drinking Water Regulations in the interest of the protection of human

SEA This target is already dealt with under Objective 2 relating to Population and Human Health

No change to SEA


MDE1387Rp0005F01 47

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


health

The proposed environmental monitoring programme in relation to water quality (objective 4) should consider the use of available raw water monitoring data

SEA This target is already dealt with under Objective 2 relating to Population and Human Health

No change to SEA

The Urban Waste Water Treatment report was produced in 2016, not 2015 and was published by the EPA in 2017, not 2016

SEA Noted and changes made Changes made and shown in Chapter 9, Addendum to Environmental Report

Irish Water do not agree with the assertion in the ER that ‘…the risk of nutrient

migration through soils within zone of

contribution (ZoC) is low…’. The risk of nutrient migration through soils in ZoCs will depend on local soil, subsoil, bedrock and topographical conditions

SEA Noted and changes made. Changes made and shown in Chapter 9, Addendum to Environmental Report

Irish water supports the following mitigations/recommendations in the ER and NIS, associated with 17(1), 17, (12), 17(17), 17(19), 30(2

SEA/NAP Noted No change to SEA or final NAP

Table 5-11 - Main Issues raised by DCCAE

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


DCCAE looks forward to engagement with DHPLG and DAFM with a view to developing measures that coherently address the requirements of National Emissions Ceilings

SEA/NAP Noted No change to SEA or final NAP


MDE1387Rp0005F01 48

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


Directive and National Clean Air Strategy

Table 5-12 - Main Issues raised by ICMSA

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


Article 16(5) - Adoption of appropriate phosphorus build up rates for farmed soil

This measure must not come at an extra cost to farmers who wish to avail of the increased build up rates.

NAP Farmers wishing to avail of this measure must undertake cost/benefit analysis for themselves and determine if they wish to take up the option.


Article 17(11) of S.I. 31 of 2014 has been removed in this draft NAP. The ICMSA state that it is imperative that the local authorities surrounding Lough Derg have supervisory authority.

NAP This Article was removed as it was considered redundant. No change to final NAP

Article 17(18) - Bovine exclusion from watercourses on farms with grassland stocking rates above 170kgN/ha

� There is no justification of 1.5 m setback.

� It must be ensured that the BPS is not reduced as a consequence of this measure.

The imposition of this measure without payment on farmers not in GLAS is unfair and as such these farmers should receive the equivalent payment.

NAP This measure has been included based on the risk to water bodies from livestock at those stocking rates.



MDE1387Rp0005F01 49

Issue raised

Relevant

to:

SEA/NAP


Article 17(19) - Livestock drinking points.

This requirement should apply to rivers and streams only and exclude drains.

NAP Drains offer direct pathways to streams and rivers and are therefore just as vulnerable as larger waterbodies.


Article 17(20) - Prevention of direct run-off from farm roadways to water.

This measure should only apply to farm roadways that are in constant use.

NAP The risk applies to all roadways therefore the measure to prevent direct run-off relates to the construction of the roadway and not the volume of traffic it receives.


ICMSA believe there should be provision made within the regulations to allow for Force Majeure events.



MDE1387Rp0005F01 50

6 PREFERRED SCENARIO AND REASON FOR CHOOSING THE

FINAL NAP

The consideration of alternatives is a requirement of the SEA Directive (2001/42/EC). It states under Article 5(1) that:

Where an environmental assessment is required under Article 3(1), an environmental report

shall be prepared in which the likely significant effects on the environment of implementing

the plan or programme, and reasonable alternatives taking into account the objectives and

the geographical scope of the plan or programme, are identified, described and evaluated.

The information to be given for this purpose is referred to in Annex I.

Annex 1(h) of the Directive clarifies that the information to be provided on alternatives under Article 5(1) is inter alia an outline of the reasons for selecting the alternatives dealt with, and a description

of how the assessment was undertaken including any difficulties (such as technical deficiencies or

lack of know-how) encountered in compiling the required information. Article 9 of the Directive requires that a statement shall be prepared providing information on the reasons for choosing the plan as adopted, in the light of the other reasonable alternatives considered.

Annex 1 (f) details the environmental topics to be considered in the evaluation of the alternatives, which is the same as that addressed in the assessment of the plan itself: biodiversity, population, human health, fauna, flora, soil, water, air, climatic factors, material assets, cultural heritage including architectural and archaeological heritage, landscape and the interrelationship between the above factors.

In summary, the Directive emphasises that the SEA process must consider alternatives that are “reasonable”, and take into account “the objectives” of the plan, and “the geographical scope of the plan”.

6.1 ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED FOR THE NAP

1. Business-as-usual scenario: Implement the existing measures contained in the 2014 Good Agricultural Practice Regulations through the existing structures. This requires the existing Regulations to be extended by a further four years and the implementation and inspection arrangements to be maintained. This scenario will clearly deliver a number of positive outcomes with regards to the protection of waters from certain agricultural practices but is also currently resulting in some unsatisfactory outcomes, particularly in interpretation and implementation of the requirements of the Regulations.

2. Application of only basic elements of the Expert Group recommendations: Under this scenario only the basic changes to the draft NAP as proposed in the Expert Group Report would be applied, to include:

� The strengthened water protection measures,

� Simplification of the regulations, and

� The adjustments to nutrient allowances and application.


MDE1387Rp0005F01 51

Owing to the additional resource implications, and the uncertainty around the commitment of these resources during the Review Group discussions, the Enhanced Knowledge Transfer programme would not be included in the revised draft NAP for this scenario.

An additional exclusion under this scenario relates to the recommended environmental safeguards described under “Achieving optimum soil fertility”. Many of these safeguards were not included in the original proposal in the Teagasc submission, and were developed by the Review Group. The safeguards have been excluded from this scenario on the basis of the additional responsibilities and potential costs associated for farmers wishing to avail of the P Build-up measure.

3. Full application of the Expert Group recommendations: Implement the changes to the draft

NAP as proposed in Expert Group Report. i.e. continued implementation of the existing

measures in the GAP Regulations with the addition of all of the amendments recommended

by the Expert Group in their report. The recommended amendments provide for:

i. New strengthened water protection measures;

ii. Enhanced Knowledge Transfer for the purpose of targeting measures in the

right place based on risk assessment. The approach would provide support

to farmers in complying with the regulations and managing pollutant

pathways to waters on the farm. The provision of additional resources, in

the form of farm advisory services, is a key element in securing agreement

for this measure;

iii. Simplification of the Regulations for improved implementation;

iv. Achieving optimum soil fertility and improved nutrient use efficiency

including;

a. Adoption of appropriate phosphorus build-up rates for

farmed soil to address phosphorus deficient soils. A number

of environmental safeguards would apply including;

enhanced requirements for soil testing, preparation of a

nutrient management plan, consultation with an agricultural

adviser and participation on an appropriate training

programme.

b. Phasing out of the transitional provisions whereby pig slurry

can be applied in limited quantities in excess of standard

limits5. This provision has been in place as a transitional

arrangement over the last two NAPs to allow the sector

sufficient time to find alternative spreadlands and uses for

surplus manure. The phasing out of this provision would be

5 Note: One recommendation of the review group was to allow the use of pig slurry on farms with grassland stocking rates

above 130kg/ha/year to meet phosphorus requirements. The view was that this provision would result in increased efficiency in the use of organic fertilisers nationally and reduced reliance on chemical fertilisers. The Review Group recognised at the time that while the proposals represented a progressive step towards more efficient use of livestock manure that there might be difficulties in its operation within the strict terms of the Nitrates Directive. Subsequent discussions with the EU Commission confirmed this to be the case. The alternative proposed amendment to the regulations now provides a phasing out of the transitional provisions for pig slurry over a three year period whereby reduced quantities of phosphorus in excess standard application limits would apply.


MDE1387Rp0005F01 52

over a three year period whereby reduced quantities of

phosphorus in excess of standard limits of application would

apply.

v. Limited adjustments to nutrient allowances and application.

The proposed amendments are driven by the work of the Expert Group and the content of the submissions received during the public consultation on the review of the draft NAP. They are designed with a view to improving the existing measures to continue to reduce the pressure from agriculture on water quality and allow for the sustainable development of agriculture under Food Wise 2025.

6.2 ASSESSMENT OF ALTERNATIVES

Table 6-1 summarises the assessment of the three main alternatives.

Table 6-1 - Summary Assessment of Alternatives

Options PHH BFF S W AQ CF MA CH L

1 +/-/- +/- +/- +/- - - +/-/- 0 0

2 +/- +/-/- +/-/- +/-/- - - +/- 0 0

3 + +/0 +/0 +/0 - - +/+ 0 0

PHH – Population and Human Health; BFF – Biodiversity, Flora and Fauna; S – Soils; W – Water; AQ – Air Quality; CF – Climatic Factors; MA

– Material Assets; CH – Cultural Heritage; L– Landscape.

6.2.1 Option 1

This is the do nothing option and while it means that the NAP, as it stands, will still have some positive impact on PHH, BFF, W, S and MA by ensuring that environmental risk associated with pollution is minimised, no improvement in the Programme has occurred. As there will be no change the following effects may occur;

� Potentially negative effect on PHH and MA as no account for depletion of soil P has occurred;

� Potentially negative effect on PHH, MA, BFF, and W as cattle on farms >170kgN ha-1 can enter water courses and drinking points associated with these farms may be <20m from water courses;

� The application of nitrogenous fertiliser and the storage of organic fertilisers, to a lesser extent, will have a potentially negative effect on AQ and CF due to the release of emissions, and

� The effects on CH, and L will be neutral.

6.2.2 Option 2

Option 2, similar to Option1 will have some positive effect with the existing measures still being in place. However, this option does consider limited changes to the NAP. These changes are provided without the safeguards required and outlined in Option 3 and therefore likely to have the following effects;


MDE1387Rp0005F01 53

� Potentially positive effect on PHH and MA as depletion of soil P is addressed;

� Without appropriate safeguards in place to ensure that a potential environmental risk is minimised the measure to address soil P depletion will have a potential negative impact on PHH, BFF, W, S and MA.

� Potentially negative effect on PHH, MA, BFF, and W as cattle on farms > 170kgN ha-1 can enter water courses and drinking points associated with these farms may be <20m from water courses;

� The application of nitrogenous fertiliser and the storage of organic fertilisers, to a lesser extent, will have a potentially negative effect on AQ and CF; and


6.2.3 Option 3

Many of the measures from the third NAP remain in place and provide positive effects for PHH, BFF, S, W and MA by ensuring minimising environmental risk from agricultural activities. Option 3 does provide measured and incremental improvements to the controls on agricultural nutrients while also allowing for improvements in nutrient use efficiency and a more sustainable approach to agricultural production. The enhanced knowledge transfer and simplification of the Regulations will also improve the ability of farmers and advisers to interpret the requirements correctly and will improve implementation and compliance rates.

The measures to address soil P depletion will have a positive effect for PHH and MA, while assuring minimum effect on BFF, W and S. The measures to address the potential negative effects of cattle on farms with stocking rates of >170kgN ha-1accessing water courses and drinking points <20m from water courses is positive.

� The application of nitrogenous fertiliser and the storage of organic fertilisers, to a lesser extent, will have a potentially negative effect on AQ and CF


6.3 PREFERRED ALTERNATIVE

The preferred alternative is Option 3 as it is the scenario that is likely to achieve the maximum gain in terms of improvements to waterbodies having direct and indirect improvements for biodiversity, flora and fauna, population and human health, soils and material assets.


MDE1387Rp0005F01 54

7 MEASURES TO MONITOR SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL

EFFECTS OF THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE ADOPTED NAP

7.1 INTRODUCTION

Article 10 of the SEA Directive requires that monitoring should be carried out in order to identify at an early stage any unforeseen adverse effects due to implementation of the draft NAP, with the view to taking remedial action where adverse effects are identified through monitoring. A monitoring programme is developed based on the indicators selected to track progress towards achieving strategic environmental objectives and reaching targets, enabling positive and negative impacts on the environment to be measured. The environmental indicators have been developed to show changes that would, as far as possible, be attributable to implementation of the draft NAP.

7.2 RESPONSIBILITY FOR MONITORING

The Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Martine is responsible for the monitoring of the NAP. This responsibility is prescribed in the NAP in Article 27(1) where it states that: The Minister for

Agriculture, Food and the Marine shall carry out, or cause to be carried out, such monitoring and

evaluation programmes in relation to farm practices as may be necessary to determine the

effectiveness of measures being taken in accordance with these Regulations.

7.3 SOURCES OF INFORMATION FOR MONITORING

Monitoring will focus on aspects of the environment that are likely to be significantly impacted by the NAP. Where possible indicators have been chosen based on the availability of the necessary information and the degree to which the data will allow the target to be linked directly with the implementation of the NAP. Table 7-1 presents the Environmental Monitoring Programme to track progress towards achieving strategic environmental objectives and reaching targets, and includes sources of relevant information.

From Table 7-1 it can be seen that the majority of information required is already being actively collected (e.g. under the River Basin Management Plan and other programmes), but not all of this is being gathered and reported on at a national level.


MDE1387Rp0005F01 55

Table 7-1 - Environmental Monitoring Programme

Strategic Objective Target Indicator Data Source

Objective 1 - Biodiversity Flora and Fauna

Preserve, protect, maintain and where

appropriate restore the terrestrial, aquatic

and soil biodiversity, particularly EU

designated sites and protected species.

� To achieve compliance with objectives and standards under which the individual protected areas and protected species have been established.

� To achieve at least good status for all surface and groundwater bodies which support water dependant ecosystems.

� The halting of biodiversity loss by 2020 as part of the EU (2011) Biodiversity strategy to 2050

� The Status of EU Protected Habitats and Species (Article 17 Conservation Status Assessment Reports due every 6 years, current reports published in 2013).

� Water quality status.

� The Status and trends of EU Protected Bird Species (Article 12 Conservation Status Assessment Reports due every 6 years, current reports published in 2012 – next cycle is proposed to be in line with Article 17 reports in next reporting cycle).

� 3rd

National Biodiversity Action Plan 2017-2021 focuses on seven key objectives with multiple actions required; and the bodies/agencies involved to address threats. Specific targets identified with which to address and negate threats.

� Marine Strategy Framework Directive. Initial Assessment on status of Ireland’s marine environment up to period 2012 published in 2013. Next assessment due in 2018.

� Six key targets with specific

� Article 17 Conservation Status Assessment Reports

6 - DCHG

� State of the Environment Report – EPA


� 3rd



6 The EU Directive on the Conservation of Habitats, Flora and Fauna (92/43/EEC),


MDE1387Rp0005F01 56


initiatives identified including full implementation of EU legislation pertinent to Biodiversity, and reduction of species loss, habitat (terrestrial, freshwater and marine) degradation, and spread of Invasive Alien Species

Objective 2 - Population and Human Health

Provide a safe and reliable water supply and

provide for the sustainable production of safe

food

� All drinking water areas (including groundwater), as identified on the register of protected areas, to achieve raw water quality consistent with achieving drinking water standards following water treatment.

� All bathing waters, as identified on the register of protected areas, to achieve bathing water quality standards.

� All economic shellfish waters, as identified on the register of protected areas, to achieve required water quality standards for shellfish water sites.

� Long term reduction in drinking water restriction notices.

� To achieve compliance with objectives and requirements of the Food Safety Authority.

� Improved water quality status.

� Continued food quality status. � State of the Environment Report

– EPA

� Drinking Water Reports – EPA

� Water Quality in Ireland Reports– EPA

� Bathing Water Quality Reports- EPA

� FSAI Audit reports

Objective 3 - Soils

Protect soils against pollution, and prevent

degradation of the soil resource.

� Provide additional agri-environmental advisory support for farmers to achieve greater fertiliser use efficiencies and reduce risks of losses to waters.

� Number of farmers utilising the Teagasc on-line nutrient management planning (NMP) system.

� Number of online NMPs produced - Teagasc


MDE1387Rp0005F01 57


� Increase the rate of soil testing and nutrient management planning in all catchments, particularly those where poorly drained soils may be prevalent.

Objective 4 - Water

Ensure that the status of water bodies is

protected, maintained and improved in line

with the requirements of the WFD and MSFD.

� To prevent any deterioration in the status of surface water and groundwater in the RBD with ref. to the EPA 2007-2009, Water Quality baseline.

� Status of water bodies as reported by the EPA Water Monitoring Programme for the WFD.





Objective 5 - Air Quality

Avoid, prevent or reduce harmful effects on

human health and the environmental as a

whole resulting from emissions to air.

� Reduce NH3 emissions from agriculture




� Air Quality in Ireland Report – EPA

� EPA’s Informative Inventory Report

Objective 6 - Climatic Factors

Minimise emissions of greenhouse gases and

ensure measures take account of the

implications of climate change.

� Reduce agriculture’s contribution to Ireland’s GHG emissions







� EPA’s National Inventory Report

Objective 7 - Material Assets

Support economic activities without

conflicting with the objectives of other EU

Directives.

� To prevent any deterioration in the status of surface water and groundwater in the RBD with ref. to the EPA 2007-2009, Water Quality baseline.

� To achieve good status for all

� Percentage of farms and facilities registered under GLAS, Origin Green, and the Priority Freshwater pearl mussel Catchment Sites (under the RDP) as a percentage of total in the Country.

� DAFM

� CSO


MDE1387Rp0005F01 58


water bodies targeted for the current NAP cycle.

� Achieving the objectives of Food Wise 2025 with increased sustainable food production

� The status of implementation of mitigation measures included under the key sectoral policies, plans and programmes for forestry (Forestry Programme 2014-2020 and Bioenergy Plan); Agriculture (Rural Development Programme 2014-2020 and Foodwise 2025); Water Services (Water Services Strategic Plan, Lead in Drinking Water Mitigation Plan, National Wastewater Sludge Management Plan); and the National Planning Framework (DHPCLG).

� CSO statistics on agricultural outputs

Objective 8 Archaeology, Architecture and

Cultural Heritage

Protect places, features, buildings and

landscapes of cultural, archaeological or

architectural heritage.

� More appropriately dealt within the planning system


N/A

Objective 9 Landscape

Protect and maintain the national landscape

character.



N/A


MDE1387Rp0005F01 59

8 SCREENING OF CHANGES TO THE FINAL NITRATES ACTION

PROGRAMME

An Environmental Report was prepared in October 2017 which recorded the strategic environmental assessment of the draft NAP. That report and draft plan were the subject of a statutory public consultation and on foot of this consultation, the plan has been updated7 and amended8 to reflect a number of items raised in these consultations. It is further acknowledged that the layout of the final plan (and amendment thereof) has evolved with additional material added, however, the alterations proposed are not of such an extent that changes to the content or outcome of the assessment contained within the Environmental Report will be required. This section of the report presents a review of the changes made to the NAP (and amendment thereof) and screens the proposed changes for SEA. Changes are set out in Table 8-1.

Table 8-1 - Screening of Changes Made to NAP

NAP

Reference Proposed Change SEA / AA Screening

Article 16(3)(d)

The addition of the following sub-article;

� 16(3)(d) An occupier of a holding located

in an area where soils have an organic

matter content of 20% and above, as

defined on Teagasc-EPA Indicative Soils

map, shall ensure that the soil test

undertaken includes organic matter

determination, subject to the provisions

of paragraph (e). The phosphorus

fertilisation rate for soils with more than

20% organic matter shall not exceed the

amounts permitted for Index 3 soils.

No significant negative impacts. This change will not result in any changes to the assessment included in the Environmental Report.

No significant negative impacts on European sites are anticipated as a result of this proposed amendment.

Article 16(3)(e)


� 16(3)(e) Soil organic matter

determination, in accordance with

paragraph (d), shall not be required

where it is certified by a Farm Advisory

System Advisor that soils on a

holding/field in such areas are either

mineral soils or organic soils.



Article 16(5)(a)

Amendment to sub-Article as follows;

� 16(5)(a) Soil analysis is carried out for soil

phosphorus and soil organic matter

contents; soil organic matter testing shall

not be required where it is certified by a

Farm Advisory System Advisor that all

soils on a holding are the sample area is

a mineral soil



Article 17(2)(f)


� 17(2)(f) subject to sub-article (13) (12),

No significant negative impacts. This change will not result in any changes to the

7 SI No. 605 of 2017, European Union (Good Agricultural Practice for Protection of Waters) Regulations 2017

8 SI No. 65 of 2018, European Union (Good Agricultural Practice for Protection of Waters)(Amendment)

Regulations 2018.


MDE1387Rp0005F01 60

NAP


5m of any surface waters (other than a

lake or surface waters specified at

paragraph (a) or (b)), or

assessment included in the Environmental Report.


Article 17(14)


� 17(14) Farmyard manure Organic

fertiliser shall not be held in a field at any

time during the periods specified in

Schedule 4 as applicable to that

substance.



Article 27(5)


� 27(5) The Minister for Agriculture, Food

and the Marine shall make available to a

local authority and its agents upon

written request information in relation to

any holding or holdings as the case may

be where such transfer of data is

necessary for the purposes of promoting

compliance with these Regulations.



Article 37


� 37 The Minister for Agriculture, Food and

the Marine shall carry out, or arrange for

the carrying out of, such monitoring,

controls and reporting as are necessary

for the purposes of Articles 7, 8, and 9 and

10 of the Commission Decision.



Article 38


� 38 The Agency shall prepare annually a report of the results of water quality monitoring carried out by local authorities for the purposes of Article 7 8 (3) of the Commission Decision and, where appropriate and as agreed from time to time between the Agency and the Minister for Agriculture, Food and the Marine, shall assist that Minister in compiling water quality data for reporting in accordance with the requirements of the Commission Decision.



Table 19

Amendment to heading of Table 19 as follows;

� Nitrogen Index Phosphorus Index



Schedule 5 Inclusion of the following schedule in the amendment;

� The amount of livestock manure from

No significant negative impacts. These changes will not result in any changes to the assessment included in the Environmental


MDE1387Rp0005F01 61

NAP


grazing livestock applied to the land each

year on grassland farms, including by the

animals themselves, shall not exceed the

amount of manure containing 250 kg

nitrogen per hectare, subject to the

conditions laid down in paragraphs 2 to 7.

� The total nitrogen inputs shall neither

exceed the foreseeable nutrient demand

of the considered crop, nor the maximum

fertilisation rate applicable to the

grassland farm, established in the

Nitrates Action Programme and shall take

into account the supply from the soil.

Total nitrogen application shall be

differentiated on the basis of stocking

rate and grassland productivity.

� A fertilisation plan shall be prepared and

kept for each grassland farm describing

the crop rotation of the farmland and the

planned application of manure and other

fertilisers. It shall be available at the

grassland farm for each calendar year

before 1 March of that year. The

fertilisation plan shall comprise at least

the following:

o The crop rotation plan,

which must specify the

acreage of parcels with

grass and parcels with other

crops, including a sketch

map indicating the location

of individual parcels;

o the number of livestock on

the grassland farm, a

description of the housing

and storage system,

including the volume of

manure storage available;

o a calculation of manure

nitrogen and phosphorus

produced on the grassland

farm;

o the amount, type and

characteristics of manure

delivered outside the

grassland farm or to the

grassland farm;

o the foreseeable nitrogen

and phosphorus crop

requirements for each

parcel;

o results of soil analysis

Report.



MDE1387Rp0005F01 62

NAP


related to nitrogen and

phosphorus soil status if

available;

o the nature of the fertiliser to

be used;

o a calculation of nitrogen and

phosphorus application from

manure for each parcel;

o (a calculation of nitrogen

and phosphorus application

from chemical and other

fertilisers for each parcel.

The fertilisation plan shall be revised no

later than seven days following any

change in agricultural practices at the

grassland farm.

� Fertilisation accounts, including

information related to management of

nitrogen and phosphorus inputs and

management of soiled water, shall be

prepared and kept for each grassland

farm. They shall be submitted to the

competent authority for each calendar

year by 31 March of the following

calendar year.

� Periodic nitrogen and phosphorus analysis

in soil shall be done for each grassland

farm.

Sampling and analysis shall be carried out

at least once every four years for each

homogeneous area of the grassland farm,

with regard to crop rotation and soil

characteristics.

At least one analysis per five hectares of

farmland shall be carried out.

The results of nitrogen and phosphorus

analysis in soil shall be available at the

grassland farm.

� Livestock manure shall not be spread in

the autumn before grass cultivation.

� At least 50% of slurry produced on the

holding shall be applied by 15 June. Low

emission slurry spreading equipment shall

be used for any slurry applications after

15 June.

� Temporary grassland shall be ploughed in

Spring.

� Ploughed grass on all soil types shall be

followed immediately by a crop with high

nitrogen demand.

� Crop rotation shall not include


MDE1387Rp0005F01 63

NAP


leguminous or other plants fixing

atmospheric nitrogen. This shall, however,

not apply to clover in grassland with less

than 50% clover and to other leguminous

plants that are undersown with grass.

� In this schedule, the following definitions

shall apply:

o ‘grassland farms’ means

holdings where 80 % or

more of the agricultural

area available for manure

application is grass;

o ‘grazing livestock’ means

cattle (with the exclusion of

veal calves), sheep, deer,

goats and horses;

o ‘grass’ means permanent

grassland or temporary

grassland (temporary

implying leys of less than

four years);

o ‘parcel’ means an individual

field or a group of fields,

homogeneous regarding

cropping, soil type and

fertilisation practices;

o ‘fertilisation plan’ means an

advance calculation about

the planned use and

availability of nutrients;

o ‘fertilisation account’ means

the nutrient balance based

on the real use and uptake

of nutrients.


MDE1387Rp0005F01 64

9 ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT

9.1 INTRODUCTION

This is the addendum to the Environmental Report for the NAP. This chapter serves two purposes:

� To provide clarification and/or additional information following comments in the submissions received during the consultation period on the draft NAP and Environmental Report; and

� To identify where the Environmental Report has been updated in following consideration of comments received in submissions during the public consultation period.

It should be noted that this document supplements and should be read in conjunction with the original Environmental Report prepared in October 2017.

The clarifications and additional information contained herein have been provided in order to increase the usefulness of the document for the public and decision makers. However, the amendments proposed are not of such an extent that changes to the content or outcome of the assessment contained within the Environmental Report will be required.

9.2 AMENDMENTS TO THE SEA

As noted in Section 8 of this report, the changes to the final NAP relative to the draft NAP relate to those items prescribed in Table 8-1.

The proposed measures and changes prescribed in Table 8-1 are there to provide additional support in the protection of the environment and promote greater compliance. As such, these measures will have no potential for direct or indirect negative effect on the environment and no changes to the analysis presented in the Environmental Report are required. Similarly, no significant negative impacts on European sites are anticipated as a result of these amendments.

On this basis, the only amendments to the Environmental Report are based on information supplied during the consultation feedback and these changes are outlined in the following sections.

9.2.1 Non-Technical Summary

� Relevant Aspects of the Current State of the Environment (Baseline), 2nd paragraph, 2nd sentence

� However, given that Ireland shares a land and marine boundary with

Northern Ireland, there is potential for environmental impact on water

quality, biodiversity which are transboundary.

� State of the Environment Overview – Ireland, 5th paragraph, 3rd sentence

� The main pressures including eutrophication caused by urban waste water

and diffuse agricultural sources and impacts to the marine environment (e.g.

overfishing, by-catch, pressures from aquaculture) persist

� State of the Environment Overview – Ireland, Transitional and Coastal Waters, 2nd sentence


MDE1387Rp0005F01 65

� Downward trends in various nutrients entering the marine environment were noted due to the decreased levels inputting from the rivers before 2010. Since 2010 there has been no change.

� State of the Environment Overview – Ireland, Groundwater, last paragraph

� The issue of nitrates affecting groundwaters may be further compounded by results published by the British Geological Survey and Lancaster University9 which indicate that rocks contain up to 180 million tonnes of nitrate, twice the amount believed to be stored in soil. It is further estimated that this nitrate can take around 100 years or more to reach the water table.

Table 5 – Likely evolution in the Absence of the NAP

Key Issue Likely Evolution in the Absence of the NAP

Water

The eleven existing directives outlined under Article 11 of the WFD (Annex VI Part A) would continue to be implemented and enforced, these constitute: the Bathing Water Directive, Birds Directive, Drinking Water Directive, Ground Water Directive, Seveso Directive, Environmental Impact Assessment Directive, Sewage Sludge Directive, Urban Waste-water Treatment Directive, Plant Protection Products Directive, Nitrates Directive, Habitats Directive, and Integrated Pollution Prevention Control Directive. Therefore in reality Ireland would continue to have a legal obligation to give effect to the Nitrates Directive and implement a Nitrates Action Programme.

Initiatives such as Food Wise 2025 would still be implemented with an associated intensification of agricultural activity and food production. As such in the absence of the NAP, there would likely to be a further net decline across water bodies, and a failure to meet the objectives of the WFD.

9 Global patterns of nitrate storage in the vadose zone, M. J. Ascott et. al. Nov 2017.


MDE1387Rp0005F01 66

Table 9 – SEA Monitoring Programme


Objective 1 - Biodiversity Flora and Fauna

Preserve, protect, maintain and where

appropriate restore the terrestrial, aquatic

and soil biodiversity, particularly EU

designated sites and protected species.

� To achieve compliance with objectives and standards under which the individual protected areas and protected species have been established.

� To achieve at least good status for all surface and groundwater bodies which support water dependant ecosystems.

� The halting of biodiversity loss by 2020 as part of the EU (2011) Biodiversity strategy to 2050

� The Status of EU Protected Habitats and Species (Article 17 Conservation Status Assessment Reports due every 6 years, current reports published in 2013).

� Water quality status.


� 3rd



� Six key targets with specific

� Article 17 Conservation Status Assessment Reports

10 - DCHG



� 3rd



10

The EU Directive on the Conservation of Habitats, Flora and Fauna (92/43/EEC),


MDE1387Rp0005F01 67


initiatives identified including full implementation of EU legislation pertinent to Biodiversity, and reduction of species loss, habitat (terrestrial, freshwater and marine) degradation, and spread of Invasive Alien Species

Objective 4 - Water

Ensure that the status of water bodies is

protected, maintained and improved in line

with the requirements of the WFD and MSFD.

� To prevent any deterioration in the status of surface water and groundwater in the RBD with ref. to the EPA 2007-2009, Water Quality Baseline

� Status of water bodies as reported by the EPA Water Monitoring Programme for the WFD.





Objective 5 - Air Quality

Avoid, prevent or reduce harmful effects on

human health and the environmental as a

whole resulting from emissions to air.

� Reduce NH3 emissions from agriculture



�



� Informative Inventory Report, EPA

Objective 6 - Climatic Factors

Minimise emissions of greenhouse gases and

ensure measures take account of the

implications of climate change.

� Reduce agriculture’s contribution to Ireland’s GHG emissions






� Air Quality in Ireland Report – EP

� Informative Inventory Report, EPA A

Objective 8 Archaeology, Architecture and

Cultural Heritage

Protect places, features, buildings and

landscapes of cultural, archaeological or

� More appropriately dealt within

the planning system with at

project (EIA) level



project (EIA) level

N/A


MDE1387Rp0005F01 68


architectural heritage.

Objective 9 Landscape

Protect and maintain the national landscape

character.



project (EIA) level



project (EIA) level

N/A


MDE1387Rp0005F01 69

9.2.2 Chapter 3 Strategic Environmental Assessment Methodology

Table 3-2 SEA Environmental Assessment

Environmental Assessment Is it Quantifiable?

Climatic Factors National datasets are available for carbon greenhouse gas emissions.

9.2.3 Chapter 4 Review of Relevant Plans, Policies and Programmes

� Section 4.3.6 – Insertion of additional three paragraphs at the beginning of this section as follows,

� The rate of build-up of CO2 in the atmosphere can be reduced by taking advantage of the fact that atmospheric CO2 can accumulate as carbon in vegetation and soils in terrestrial ecosystems. Under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change any process, activity or mechanism which removes a greenhouse gas from the atmosphere is referred to as a "sink". Human activities impact terrestrial sinks, through land use, land-use change and forestry (LULUCF) activities, consequently, the exchange of CO2 (carbon cycle) between the terrestrial biosphere system and the atmosphere is altered.

The role of LULUCF activities in the mitigation of climate change has long been recognized. Mitigation can be achieved through activities in the LULUCF sector that increase the removals of greenhouse gases (GHGs) from the atmosphere or decrease emissions by sources leading to an accumulation of carbon stocks. An important feature of LULUCF activities in this context is their potential reversibility hence, non-permanence of the accumulated carbon stocks.

Forests present a significant global carbon stock accumulated through growth of trees and an increase in soil carbon. Estimates made for Global Forest Resources Assessment 2010 (FRA 2015) show that the world’s forests and other wooded lands store more than 485 gigatonnes (1 Gt=1 billion tonnes) of carbon, 260 Gt in the biomass (53 percent), 37 Gt in dead wood and litter (8 percent) and 189 Gt in soil (39 percent). While sustainable management, planting and rehabilitation of forests can conserve or increase forest carbon stocks, deforestation, degradation and poor forest management do reduce carbon stocks. For the world as a whole, carbon stocks in forest biomass decreased by an estimated 0.22 Gt annually during the period 2011–2015. This was mainly because of a reduction in the global forest area

� Section 4.3.12 Maritime planning and Protection, 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence;

The Maritime Spatial Planning Directive MSFD obliges all coastal Member States to establish maritime spatial plans (MSP) as soon as possible and at the latest by 31st March 2021.

9.2.4 Chapter 5 Relevant Aspects of the Current State of the Environment (Baseline)


MDE1387Rp0005F01 70

Table 5- 2 Summary of Current State of the Environment in Ireland (2016)

Theme Key Findings

Air Quality and Transboundary Air Emissions

While air quality is of a good standard compared to other EU member states, monitoring shows that local levels of some pollutants e.g. nitrogen dioxide (NO2) are at concentrations that may impact on health. Trends of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAH) levels in Ireland are a concern. Ireland may need to adopt the stricter WHO guidelines, particularly for particulate matter and ozone, as compliance with the EU limit values is still not enough to protect health. A 2015 EEA report indicates that around 1,200 deaths in Ireland in 2012 were directly linked to air pollution. Continued effort is being made to reduce air pollution through bans on bituminous coal in large towns and cities and implementing the actions set out in the Smarter Travel Policy for Sustainable Transport. Incentives in recent years to change from petrol to diesel in the personal car fleet has had unforeseen and significant effects on air quality, increasing key pollutants in cities especially PM10 and PM2.5. Incentives to switch to electric vehicles should therefore be encouraged.

The emission ceiling for NH3 under the previous Gothenburg protocol was 116 kt. Under the revised National Emissions Ceiling Directive, Ireland’s targets for 2020 and 2030 have, following EU negotiations, been amended to a 1% reduction for 2020 and a 5% reduction for 2030 (based on a 2005 baseline). However, 98% of national NH3 emissions arise from activities in the agricultural sector and this is especially pertinent with the adoption of the planned 2030 NEC target, and Ireland’s planned implementation of Food Wise 2025, which will lead to a risk of higher NH3 emissions

Inland and Marine Waters

Most of Ireland’s water bodies are of good ecological status or better however a number of main pressures persist including eutrophication caused by urban waste water, diffuse agricultural sources and impacts to the marine environment (e.g. overfishing, by-catch, pressures from aquaculture). Measures to improve water quality are being implemented in order to achieve the targets of the WFD such as the development of River Basin Management Plans (RBMPs) and control and licensing of industrial discharges. However there has been little overall improvement since the last river basin management cycle; in the latest water quality assessment period (2013-2015) there has been a decline in the number of high status sites. The merging of the River Basin Districts into one national district as well as implementation of the three tier catchment management system are key responses to addressing these issues. The second cycle RBMPs has now been published and covers the period 2018-2021.

The implementation and enforcement of the Nitrates Action Programme is the most important measure to address diffuse agricultural pollution of freshwaters. This includes a code of Good Agricultural Practice (GAP) which is mandatory for all farms. Other measures such as the GLAS Scheme, the Agricultural Catchments Programme, the National Inspection Plan for domestic waste water systems, as well as improvements to urban waste water discharges are also key for tackling point and diffuse sources of pollution.

Table 5- 3 Summary of Current State of the Environment in Northern Ireland (2016)

Theme Key Findings

Climate

There is evidence that the climate in Northern Ireland is changing. There has been a reduction in GHGs but road transport emissions are still increasing. There are government targets towards reducing GHG emissions in the UK by at least 80% on 1990 levels by 2050 but this will prove challenging; Northern Ireland’s emissions amounted to 4.2% of the UK total in 2014. A key priority for climate change has been the implementation of Northern Ireland’s Climate Change Adaptation Programme in 2014. The Northern Ireland Environmental Statistics Report 2017 reported that GHG emissions have decreased since 1990, with a reduction of 17.84% achieved by 2014. Most sectors have shown a decrease on the levels in the base year, with the exception of transport and land use. Whilst the


MDE1387Rp0005F01 71

emissions have increased by 30% since the base year, there had been a reduction of 9% by 2014, partly due to improvements in average fuel efficiency of vehicles and a switch from petrol to diesel cars.

� Section 5.2.2.4, Reference to the EPA’s report on Urban Waste Water Treatment facilities

� EPA (20176) Urban Waste Water Treatment in 20165

� Section 5.2.3.3, Hydrogeology, 1st paragraph, 6th sentence.

� Of these, approximately 860 are at the appropriate abstraction yield to provide for potable water supply (i.e. they are classed as ‘Excellent’ or ‘High Spring’).

� Section 5.2.4.8, Reference to the EPA’s report on Urban Waste Water Treatment facilities, as previously mentioned.

� Section 5.2.4.8, Invasive Alien Species, 2nd paragraph, 1st sentence

� Species such as the zebra mussel and Asian clam can have a significant impact in rivers and lakes, causing changes within the water column and also morphological changes when they are present in large numbers.

Table 5-11 Interrelationships between SEA Topics

Population/

Human Health �

Soil/ Land Use � �

Water � � �

Air Quality � � X �

Climatic

Factors � � � � �

Material

Assets � � � � � �

Cultural

Heritage � � � � � � �

Landscape � � � � X � � �

Biodiversity

Flora, Fauna

Population/

Human Health

Soil/ Land

Use Water

Air

Quality

Climatic

Factors

Material

Assets

Cultural

Heritage

9.2.5 Chapter 6 Environmental Protection Objectives and SEA Framework

� Table 6-1 SEA Objectives, Targets and Indicators

� Same changes as made to Table 9 SEA Monitoring Programme of the Non-Technical Summary

9.2.6 Chapter 8 Assessment of Preferred Alternative

� Proposed SEA recommendation and mitigation measure relating to Article 16(2)

� Determining fertiliser use based of on previous years stocking rates, as stated in Article 16(2) allows an occupier to forward plan fertiliser (organic


MDE1387Rp0005F01 72

and inorganic) use. This is advantageous but is reliant on stocking rates for the year of application and the previous year being the same. This may or may not be the case. If this is not the case then over or under application of fertiliser may occur. It is recommended that a mid-season determination of fertiliser requirements is included in the Programme to re-calibrate requirements and usage.

� Proposed SEA recommendation and mitigation measure relating to Article 17(1))

� While the risk of nutrient migration through soils within zone of contribution (ZoC) may, depending on conditions, be is low, there is a risk from chemical fertilisers directly entering a ground water body through the well head. It is recommended that the 2m exclusion zone mentioned in Article 17(1) is extended to also include all abstraction points. Furthermore, it is recommended that buffer strips of greater than 2m are considered in areas where ground conditions dictate that a greater buffer strip is required and/or mapping produced by the EPA’s Catchment Management Unit which has identified areas at risk from agriculture.

�

� Proposed SEA recommendation and mitigation measure relating to Article 17(2) to (11)

� The distances of buffer zones prescribed in Article 17(2) to (11) are dependent on the size of population or volumes associated with the abstraction. It is recommended that a standardised distance based on research is used, providing equal weighting to the impact of a biohazard on PHH regardless of numbers.

9.2.7 Appendix B

Topic Title Summary of Objectives: International

The Gothenburg Protocol (1999)

The 1999 Gothenburg Protocol to Abate Acidification, Eutrophication and Ground-level Ozone (known as the Multi-effect Protocol or the Gothenburg Protocol) is a multi-pollutant protocol designed to reduce acidification, eutrophication and ground-level ozone by setting emissions ceilings for sulphur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds and ammonia to be met by 2010. As of August 2014, the Protocol had been ratified by 26 parties, which includes 25 states and the European Union. The Protocol has been updated and now has 2020 emissions targets.


MDE1387Rp0005F01 73

Topic Title Summary of Objectives: European

Marine Strategy Framework Directive (MSFD) (2008/56/EC)

The aims of the MSFD are to protect the marine environment across Europe through achieving and maintaining good environmental status of marine waters by 2020, and acts as complimentary legislation to the WFD. To achieve this goal the directive has set out marine regions; Ireland falls within the North-east Atlantic Ocean Region. For the purposes of the MSFD Maritime Spatial Planning Directive Ireland is required to produce a Maritime Spatial Plan (MSP), preparation of which is underway and required on or before March 2021 at the latest. The first phase of work and public consultation has been completed and involved the assessment and characterisation of Ireland’s marine waters. The draft Marine Strategy Framework Programme of Measures has been prepared and the next phase will involve the eventual implementation of environmental targets. The MSP will ensure there is a system in place for managing human activities and to achieve and maintain good environmental status of marine waters.

Floods Directive (2007/60/EC)

The Floods Directive applies to river basins and coastal areas at risk of flooding. It basically prescribes a three-step procedure for the assessment and management of flood risks: First step: Preliminary Flood Risk Assessment; Second step: Risk Assessment; and Third step: Flood Risk Management Plans.

UK Marine Policy Statement (2011)

This statement sets out marine policy for Northern Ireland, in the absence of an adopted Marine Plan for the region.


MDE1387Rp0005F01 74

10 NEXT STEPS

It is envisaged that monitoring and reporting of environmental impacts, both positive and negative, resulting from implementation of the Nitrates Action Programme will continue over the course of the lifetime of the programme in line with the monitoring programme presented. Where unforeseen impacts are identified through monitoring, remedial action will be taken by the DHPLG and DAFM, as appropriate. Any changes to the adopted NAP will be subject to SEA screening in line with EU and national SEA legislation.

mdr1387rp0005f01 sea statement nap · the nap is a national programme to prevent pollution of...

Documents