11 July 2012

Manawatu District CouncilC/- MWH LimitedP O Box 2033PALMERSTON NORTH 4440

Attention John Turnbull

Dear John

RECEIVED4

1 2 J U L 2012=iManawatu Di tdot 2OU001

File ref: 2/2/MDCJMM:KJH

JOINT PRE-HEARING - RESOURCE CONSENT APPLICATIONS 106137,106138, 106139, 106140 AND 106210 - AND NOTICE OF REQUIREMENTFOR DESIGNATION - FEILDING WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT, 241KAWAKAWA ROAD, FEILDING

Please find enclosed a copy of the record of the pre-hearing meeting held onMonday 2 July 2012 at The Order of St Johns Hall, Bowen Street, Feilding.

A copy of the powerpoint presentation presented by Hamish Waugh at thebeginning of the pre-hearing meeting has also be circulated to all parties.

The Pre-Hearing Facilitators report will follow in due course.

Yours sincerely

Michelle Hardy and Kathryn HuntCONSENTS ADMINISTRATORS

Encls Pre-Hearing Record of Meeting

Copy Kirsten PikeManawatu District CouncilPrivate Bag 10001FEILDING 4743

ra\councildata\Consents\R2D2Data\106137\Consent CorrespondenceWl correspondence for 106137 - 106140 & 106210\Pre-Hearing -joint NoR\Pre Hearing Record ofMeeting Applicant 20120711.doc

horizonsregional council

Private Bag 11025Manawatu Mail CentrePalmerston North 4442

P 06 952 2800

F 06 952 2929

www.horizons.govt.nz

PRE-HEARING MEET I NGManavuatu District Council - Feilding Wastewater Treatment Plant

Resource Consents 106137 -106140 and 106210 and Notice of Requirement

PRE HEARING DATE: Monday 2 July 2012

MEETING TIME: 3:00 pm - 9:00 pm

VENUE: The Order of St Johns Hall, Bowen Street, Feilding

APPLICANT: Manawatu District Council

CONSENT TYPE: Discharge Permits and Notice of Requirement

FACILITATOR: Mr Richard Munneke

ATTENDEES FOR HORIZONS REGIONAL COUNCIL:

Jasmine Mitchell - Consents Planner

Phillip Hindrup - Senior Consents Planner

Logan Brown - Environmental Scientist - Water Quality

Jeanne Ramponi - Environmental Scientist - Groundwater

Rhys Kevern - Consulting Air Quality Engineer

Hamish Lowe - Consulting Scientist - Land Discharge

ATTENDEES FOR MANAWATU DISTRICT COUNCIL (CONSENTS):

Andrea Harris - Consultant Planner

Wendy Thompson - Consents Manager

ATTENDEES FOR APPLICANT:

Hamish Waugh - Infrastructure Group Manager

Shayne Harris - Support Services and Environment Group Manager

Kirsten Pike - Business Process Analyst

Steve Langevad - Treatment Supervisor - Water and Wastewater

Stephanie Curran - Senior Associate - Brookfields Lawyers

Ian Rowden - Senior Engineer Water and Waste - MWH NZ Limited

David Cameron - Senior Environmental Scientist - MWH NZ Limited

John Turnbull - Senior Planner - MWH NZ Ltd

Simon East - Senior Hydrogeologist - MWH NZ Ltd

Paul Heveldt - Senior Environmental Scientist - MWH NZ Ltd

Tony Daveron - Irrigation Consultant - HydroServices Ltd

ATTENDEES FOR SUBMITTERS:

Kelvin and Katherine Lane - individual capacity and ManawatuEstuary Trust

George and Christina Paton - individual capacity, Water andEnvironmental Care Association Inc and Horowheuna DistrictRatepayers and Residents Association Inc

Fred De Jager - Water and Environmental Care Association Inc

Brian Tenhave - Horowheuna District Ratepayers and ResidentsAssociation Inc

Ross Campbell - Horowheuna District Ratepayers and ResidentsAssociation Inc

Chris Teo-Sherrell

William Demchick

Stephen Bray - Te Marae Komiti O Kauwhata Trust

Ani Himiona - Te Marae Komiti O Kauwhata Trust

Corina Jordan -Wellington Fish and Game Council

Russell Crawford - Manawatu Marine Boating Club

John Baty - Manawatu Marine Boating Club

Ian Cooksley - Department of Conservation

Nicci and Andrew Simpson - individual capacity and NeighbouringProperty Owners and Residents

Sean Avery

Wilfred Henson

Tom Sutherland

Milton Pedley

Trevor Ward

Denis Emery - Nga Kaitiaki O Ngati Kauwhata Inc

Dr Huhana Smith - Taiao Ruakawa Environmental Trust

Travis Mcgee - Taiao Ruakawa Environmental Trust

Bert Judd

Jim Wilson

Ernie Combie

John Barry

APOLOGIES:

Fleur Hirst - Palmerston North Environmental Trust Inc

2

RECORD OF PRE-HEARING

Meeting opened at 3 pm by Richard Munneke

On commencement of the Pre-Hearing Meeting, Richard made note that the applicant would provide apresentation of the proposal. The meeting would then be split into two main categories - the first beingwater and the second being land. Richard noted he would like the focus to be on questioning to understandthe proposal rather than pre-judging the proposal. The matters discussed within this pre-hearing are on awithout prejudice basis.

This was followed by around the table' introduction of all attendees.

Manawatu District Council - Presentation

Hamish Waugh - Infrastructure Group Manager

Hamish Waugh introduced the applicant's team including experts acting on behalf of Manawatu DistrictCouncil (MDC). This included

Shayne Harris - Support Services and Environmental Group ManagerAndrew van Bussel - Operations ManagerSteve Langevad - Treatment SupervisorKirsten Pike - Business Process AnalystStephanie Curran - Brookfields LawyersIan Rowden - Senior Engineer Water and Waste (MWH)David Cameron - Senior Environmental Scientist (MWH)Paul Heveldt - Senior Environmental Scientist (MWH)John Turnbull - Senior Planner (MWH)Tony Davoren - Irrigation Consultant- Hydroservices Ltd

Hamish Waugh outlined the current process and an improvement plan, explained what the consentapplication is for - being a dual discharge (discharge to land and water). Hamish W stated that MDC iscommitted to improving the discharge, as noted in the LTP outcomes, the Manawatu River Accord, currentland acquisition, the Ministry for Environment clean up fund.

The current issues faced at the Feilding Wastewater Treatment Plant (FWTP) include large variations involumes, the phosphorus and ammoniacal nitrogen and suspended solids removal. There are alsoproblems with infiltration and inflow problems.

The proposed improvements include a new anaerobic lagoon, lining of existing ponds, actiflo clarifier,sludge management not finalised. $250k has been confirmed in the LTP this year towards investigations forstormwater infiltration. Overall this will improve the quality of the discharge.

Ian Rowden discussed the plant. He noted that the application is for Stage 1 only.

Ian noted that the proposed stages 1 and 2 will eliminate the need to discharge wastewater to the river attimes of low flow. The experience gained under stage 1 will be used to design stage 2.

It was questioned how much information will be needed for stage 2 and Ian noted that it is unknown at thisstage.

3

Q. Bert Judd asked the applicant 'whether 5 years is consistent with the Manawatu RiverAccord'

Q. Christina Paton asked the applicant 'whether alternative technologies looked at for sludgemanagement.

A Hamish Waugh - this still needs work to improve the quality and quantity of sludgeproduced.

It was discussed whether an additional consent would be required for any changes to the sludge discharge- the existing consent application is expected to cover any alternative methods for the processing of sludgeand the discharge of sludge to land will be within the scope of this consent.

Ian then discussed the two alternative options considered as part of this consent. The first being the shift toPNCC, the second being year round disposal to land. [these are included within the presentation].

Q. Christina Paton asked whether a reduction in water usage is proposed such as watermeters to reduce the volume of wastewater produced.

A. there is no recommendation at this stage for water reduction techniques.

David Cameron then took over to discuss the Oroua River Issues.

David Cameron did an overview of the current Oroua River including the main contributors to the currentstage.

Q. a question was raised about the current use and recreational values / use of the River.

A. David Cameron noted that he was talking to people who still catch trout in the river and thetrout fishery is still fine.

Since 2007 upgrades there has been a reduction in DRP, E Coli, BOD and suspended solids.

Christina Paton commented that more wet weather = more turbidity and therefore more problems.

David Cameron noted that DRP treatment is continuous even during wet weather flows.

Q. Bert Judd questioned where the testing sites are and how is it improving.Q. Chris Teo-Sherrell questioned how meaningful annual averages area.

A. The dry weather is to reduce runoff and seepage and the nitrogen removal hasn't beenupgraded yet.

David Cameron noted that the adverse effects on the water quality as a result of the proposal is consideredto be 'no more than minor'.

Q. Christina Paton questioned the proposed 400 m mixing zone and that this is notsatisfactory.

A. David Cameron - full mixing doesn't occur until 1 km down stream under dry conditions

Dennis Emery noted that this stretch of the River is known as the 'river with no fish' being no eel and thereis nothing to catch.

David Cameron answered that the upgrades will improve the water quality but the question is how much willit improve.

4

Q. Christina Paton asked what about DRP and SIN upstream of the site and how the applicantproposes to deal with this or improve the background water quality.

A. Hamish Waugh noted that there is some money to investigate the problem. Since 2008there has been an increase in nitrogen. MDC are proposing to do monitoring for 6 monthsto see if they can work out where it's coming from.

Tony Daveron - Land discharge

Tony Daveron noted that the site has to cut and carry and that the wastewater is of a good quality.There needs to be low hydraulic loading and this is using land based treatment to treat the wastewater.The centre pivot system is to irrigate moisture deficit and uniform discharge

The concerns on spray drift was raised from various parties.

A. these centre pivots will not have end guns, they will have a height of 1.5 m -1.8 m and alarge droplet size and the spray area of 15-18 m in width.- There is a proposed buffer of 20-30 m and there will be trees planted. The trees will

need to be evergreens and densely planted. A map was proposed showing theseareas.

Q. a question was raised about the buffer zones being previously based on water quality.

A. the buffers have been based on the wastewater quality.

Q. a question was raised as to what happens when the trees need to be harvest.

A. Tony Daveron answered that the trees will be 3 or 4 rows and that they can do progressiveharvesting to maintain a buffer. Can't apply wastewater to land prior to harvesting - need athree (3) day window of no irrigation.

Q. Dr Huhana Smith raised a question around the use of native trees for a buffer.

A. Tony Daveron said pines or fast growing trees are normally planted as they grow quicklyand can be planted to provide dense coverage.

Q. Nicci Simpson raised a question that Rolleston consent is 150 m until trees are establishedrather than Taupo distances

Tony Daveron noted that the crops will be perennial rye grasses or the like.

Following the presentation Richard Munneke noted that we would move onto the next of the Main issues

Water QualityRichard Munneke noted that the discussions would then be around water - including quality and thedischarge into the Oroua River in general.

Q. Russell from Manawatu Boating Club raised the question as to whether it is safe for contactrecreation within the Manawatu River / Oroua River and the Manawatu Estuary. They arehappy to move forward if the water quality is safe for contact recreation. Also questionedwhere you can obtain this information from to show where things are safe.

A. Logan Brown of Horizons noted that it depends upon flows within the river, generally if it isclear then its ok. The Manawatu Estuary is monitored between 1 Nov-end April and is onthe Horizons website.

Logan is going to email Russell where to find this information and look at contact recreation for all.

5

Richard Munneke asked Iwi to outline their concerns.

Dennis Emery noted that they are looking for the best solution. Overall has major concerns with the state ofthe Oroua River and this reflects and restricts human well-being. Concerned with the damage on the mauriand life force of the awa. There are concerns with the effects on the downstream users and the lack ofability to use the river downstream of the discharge.

These matters were also supported by Stephen Bray.

Fred De Jager noted that the environment should come first.

Christina Paton is concerned with the 400 m mixing zone.

Ernie Combie is concerned with the wastewater and how much is used and the effects on the adjoiningland.

Brian Tenhave noted that the general consensus with the application is 'we are going to pollute it's aquestion of how much can we get away with'. The Oroua River is bad and how can the mistakes becorrected. Wants MDC to stop polluting and look at other alternatives.

Kelvin Lane noted that there needs to be something between costs and environment and the alternativeoptions should be put towards the rate payers as PNCC did

A. Hamish Waugh said that the costs are prohibitive on the rate payers.

Bert Judd noted that the timeframes and that the applicant should be looking forward to going to land ratherthan water. Bert noted that Horizons should lift its game and should be doing the 'right thing' - farmers aremade to go to land so Territorial Authorities should be given the same time as farms (2 years).

Richard Munneke stepped in and noted that dairy farming and wastewater discharges are very differentprocesses. The farming effects are well known while municipal discharges are very different and can havedifferent effects. It is not possible to compare the two nor is it productive to do so.

Kelvin Lane noted there are only two alternatives - water or land.

Christina Paton said staff knew this but Councillors didn't and considers that MDC should have been finedlike the farmers have been.

Nicci Simpson noted that this needs to be a long term solution rather than a quick fix. It should be doneproperly the first time.

Stephen Bray agreed with this and that it needs to look towards the future.

Jim Wilson noted that he agreed with the proposal and that the winter application isn't suitable due to theland.

Discussions followed around comparison of the discharge to dairy farm discharges. MDC should be madeto build a pond large enough to accommodate the wastewater.

Tony Daveron noted that this would need to be a very large area 1,000-15,000 hectares for a discharge ofaround 2 mm/day.

Q. Fred De Jager questioned the volumes and that MDC should use water metering to reducethis.

6

A. Hamish Waugh noted that water metering is a process of the annual plan and peopleshould make a submission then.

Ross Campbell noted concerns with compliance of the consent and in the future with the land / river typeconsent. He has concern that it will be easier to discharge into the river rather than land.

The discussions moved onto the industrial component of the waste and possible reduction in the tradewaste.

The discussion around the use of cropping and Dr Huhana Smith raised the possibility of using Harekekeinstead of maize. Hamish Waugh said that MDC is open to alternative options for crops and can work withIwi in the future to look at options.

Richard Munneke questioned Iwi groups on the process to date.

Dennis Emery noted that he has been talking to MDC and have been included within the cultural impactassessment.

Stephen Bray expressed concern with the consultation process and what is actually going on at the site.

Richard Munneke noted that during the break he wanted people to think about what they wanted from theprocess and that he can use the facilitators report to look at further issues. After the break would considerthe land application.

5.30 pm - Break for dinner

Land applicationRichard Munneke reconvened the meeting and that this half would focus on the land application.

Q. Jeanne Ramponi of Horizons had questions for the applicant relating to the variable depthof gravels, the application rate of irrigation, the type of irrigation and how this will effectground water? And whether there are enough bores and where they came up with theirdata.

A. Ian Rowden noted that the existing bores are aimed at characterising groundwatercharacteristics, he acknowledged that there needs to be extra bores, the information will beprovided and was used in testing the land suitability.

Hamish Lowe carried out an explanation of soil moisture deficit irrigation and how it works. It needs to beabout balancing the application rate with the output.

Q. A question was raised about what happens to the discharge if the wastewater goes deeperinto the soil?

A. Hamish Lowe noted that it can go into shallow ground water, which may go into the River orif it's a recharge system may enter deeper groundwater.

Q. Jim Wilson questioned what the effects of this are and whether there should be an effect?

A. Hamish Lowe said it depends on the application and will depend on the irrigation system,management of the site and system.

Nicci Simpson stated that other Councils have done more homework on their site selection.

Q. Nicci Simpson questioned Tony Daveron whether the current site would be suitable forirrigation

7

A. Tony Daveron stated no, based on the shape / size of the lot but not for the reason that thesoil is unsuitable.

Jim Wilson noted that the current bores are not suitable and that there should be extra bores. His currentproblem with the consent is it is based on a volume rather than a deficit based system (i.e. tied to soilmoisture).

Q. Jim Wilson questioned what the intention of the consent was for

A. Ian Rowden noted that it was essentially deficit.

Jim Wilson noted he doesn't was it going to ground water and based on the intensity and duration hasconcern with the consent.

Ian Cooksley (DoC) questioned the benefits of reducing the overall volume and Christina Paton noted thatwater metering could be used to reduce the volume.

Discussions moved onto how the wastewater treatment plant operates.

Q. A question was raised on how the plant can deal with the volumes

A. Hamish W noted that the plant can treat up to 15,000 m3 at any one time and then thesystem is bypassed.

Q. Brian Tenhave questioned how often the treatment system is bypassed?

A. Ian Rowden noted maybe 10 times a year at a guess, the system is continuallydeteriorating and this needs to be maintained and that this needs to be decided by thecommunity

Q. Christina Paton asked why this is up to the community.

A. Richard Munneke stepped in and noted that this is not part of this application and that it isnot just an RMA matter and that this time is for discussions around the land application.

Dennis Emery raised the question of alternative options and use of bio-char as a system

Hamish Lowe - the use of volcanic soils, such as bio-char is possible but need to consider this, the use ofalternatives in terms of scale.

Q. Dr Huhana Smith quested the use of Harakeke as growing cropsA. Hamish Waugh noted that MDC is currently looking at cut and carry but is happy to

suggestions.

Q. Richard Munneke questioned if you can look at different crop options in the futureA. Hamish Waugh noted that MDC is open to looking at alternatives, MDC is open to

suggestions and will want MDC to keep moving forward and looks at business options.

Hamish Lowe - can use other types of crops including maize

Fred De Jager noted concerns about repeat consents and previous consent applications.

Discussion on TermChristina Paton - shouldn't be given the term requested.

Nicci Simpson - wants to know about the certainty, there should only be a trial period approved to see if itdoes actually work.

8

Christina Paton - stated 3 years only for the term of the consents.

Phillip Hindrup - explained the use of term and use of reviews. The review can be used if the effects areover and above what was considered. There needs to be trust in Horizons and that if new technologies docome about then can review under the RMA.

Nicci Simpson expressed concern about the current runoff from the irrigation area before any irrigationoccurs and the lack of come back for neighbours.

Phillip Hindrup - need certainty of application and if the effects are more than anticipated within theapplication then can review the application.

Brian Tenhave - need to try to avoid problems before it occurs.

Hamish Lowe - will be considering the application rate, the infiltration rate into the soil, matching the soilmoisture to conditions.

Nicci Simpson noted that the 7 mm/day is above the previous application (previously 4 mm/day and wouldlike a trial period being used for a conservative approach

Richard Munneke mentioned a group to get together to consider the land based application (MDC, HamishLowe and neighbours) to consider the effects and use the knowledge of all to consider the application.

Jim Wilson - noted that the land application won't work as mentioned in the application and would like tomeet with the group above. The land shape of the land isn't conducive to a trial period and stage twoshould be at a later stage.

Hamish Waugh noted that this won't take 5 years to set up and will be a priority after the consent.

Q. Why a 30 year term, there is lots of uncertainty and everything is based on other consents,there is concern with 'shelving the consent' and nothing being done for the next 30 years.

Q. Richard Munneke - why is it a 30 year consent?

A. Hamish Waugh - its a 5 year term to get out of the river at low flow and a further 25 yearsto give certainty for MDC

Richard Munneke noted that the term will be considered in the hearing

Christina Paton commented that consideration needs to be given to ecological economics and is not happyas this is not fixing the problem.

Trevor Ward wants to know what is happening to the adjoining property.

Jim Wilson wants new information, particularly around the ground water and the flow under the river andpotential recipients.

Tom Sutherland expressed concern with any runoff entering the Makino River and the land being unusable.

Bert Judd noted that people are fearful of putting the discharge to land but shouldn't be concerned. MDCneed to approach people and need to look at going to forestry land. MDC need to go and talk to others.

Q. Jim Wilson - asked a question around the use of reviews and how they are effective.

A. Phil Hindrup - Horizons have better systems in place to gather information and initiate areview.

9

Jim Wilson opposed a blanket term but with the use of reviews can see the benefit to MDC and ratepayers.

Brian Tenhave noted that a 'temporary' consent should be used to monitor the effects and then use thisinformation to go forward.

Richard Munneke explained that a temporary consent doesn't work and isn't anticipated under the RMA.

Nicci Simpson noted that there needs to be tight conditions, and that MDC and Horizons have done somework.

Brian Tenhave wanted a short time for a review.

Hamish Waugh noted that MDC would like 30 years but are open to review conditions.

There was discussion around using the word 'must' review vs 'may'. Richard Munneke pointed out thatHorizons cannot say this, as the RMA uses the word 'may' therefore cannot be more restrictive than theRMA unless the applicant accepts a condition saying 'must review'.

Sludge DisposalHamish Waugh noted that the current application is for the current site operation but the volume producedwill be less.

Q. Christina Paton questioned what is the market for the sludge?

A. Hamish Waugh is open to suggestions and would like contact details of people who mightbe interested.

Nicci Simpson expressed concern with the Notice of Requirement (NoR) and the ability to discharge sludgeanywhere under the current application. This should be restricted to the current area and that there shouldbe no extra land available for this.

Hamish Waugh noted that this system has been in placed for approximately 10 years and this may be left inthe current area.

Steve Langevad noted that Rob Rose (Horizons Compliance Officer) suggested getting the sludge testedfor potential use.

Hamish Waugh noted the concerns within sludge being discharged over all the property.

Nicci Simpson raised the New Zealand Guidelines on bio-solids. Hamish Lowe explained that there arestandards and that the sludge can be split into three classifications 'Aa' 'Ab' and 'Bb'. The first letter relatesto the contaminant and the second relates to how likely it is to be spread around by things such as rodents.

Richard Munneke suggested to Hamish Waugh that sampling should be undertaken.

Bert Judd expressed concern with the sludge being located close to the Oroua River and it leaching into theRiver.

Hamish Waugh noted that with the anerobic system in place this volume will be reduced.

Trees / BuffersQ. Fred De Jager asked when these are going to planted

A. depends on the tree species, Ian Rowden noted the buffers need to relate to the treeheight.

10

Travis Mcgee asked about the types of trees, the potential use of native tress to act as a buffer and reducerunoff during high rainfall.

Tony Daveron noted that the trees wouldn't reduce runoff as the buffers are intended to reduce aerosolsrather than water runoff. Initially a greater buffer would be reduced as plants grow - similar to the Taupodisinfection rules.

Dr Huhana Smith would like the maps to be clarified and would want native trees along the Oroua River asa form of mitigation. This could be done in conjunction with community groups to improve the riparianmargin.

Hamish Waugh noted that this is possible and MDC is open to the idea of community groups.

Christina Paton supported Dr Huhana Smith's comments.

Brian Tenhave noted that a possible species could be Layton green as it is fast growing.

NoiseNicci Simpson expressed concern with the potential noise of the irrigators and that the Rolleston consenthas conditions limiting the noise of the irrigators.

Tony Daveron noted that a large portion of the noise produced by the irrigators are from the spray gun atthe end of the line and in this case it shouldn't be an issue as these will be removed. Don't want to restrictirrigation to day only - night time is best time to irrigate given uptake. Noise would be intermittent.

OtherissuesKelvin Lane questioned what the percentage of the flow of the Oroua River is wastewater and what happensto the Manawatu River during times of low flow as a result of the wastewater and overall cumulative effectson the Manawatu River. This was answered with approximately 25 % of the flow is wastewater.

Dennis Emery raised the question about the volume of ovation and MDC's ability to accept this wastewater.Hamish Waugh said that it is already being treated by MDC and therefore forms part of the application.

Richard Munneke questioned whether there is any further matters that need to be discussed.

Q. Christina Paton questioned why TAs (District Councils etc) are given so much time toprocess their consents and they have already had 3 years since the previous consentexpired while farmers have to comply within 2 years.

A. Richard Munneke noted that these are two very different processes and this is much morecomplex.

Ernie Combie noted that there are chemicals such as hormones that effect water quality.

Bert De Jager noted that Horizons need to do more as the spotlight is on Horizons.

Q. Ross Campbell questioned whether there has been capacity built into the consent for furthergrowth.

A. Hamish Waugh noted that there is significant capacity to allow for growth areas.

SummaryRichard Munneke provided a summary of directions including:

- A meeting between MDC and neighbours about monitoring bores;

11

Hamish Lowe, Jim Wilson and MDC expert to get together and discuss land irrigation and soil moisturedeficit system;

Hamish Waugh and Ian Rowden to talk to residents group about land irrigation;

MDC to provide groundwater information to Jim Wilson;

MDC to undertake testing on sludge and provide classification - this is to be provided to all; and

MDC and Iwi to get together and talk about planting along the Oroua River.

Phillip Hindrup provided a `where to from here'- further information will be requested and it is expected thatit will take 4-6 weeks for MDC to get this information back (maybe longer). This information will be sent toall parties.

Q. Christina Paton questioned why MDC have undertaken a recreational value study.

A. John Turnbull noted the reason for the survey is to better information for the consentprocess

Q. Christina Paton questioned why this was done and who authorised it.

A. Hamish Waugh authorised the funding of this.

Bert Judd noted that there needs to be an audio system available at the hearing.

Nicci Simpson raised concern of the Health and Safety risk of the discharge to staff working on theneighbouring farms given their own Health and Safety requirements. She also noted that form 18 isincorrect as m2 have been used rather than ha to describe the lots within the proposed designation area.

9:00 pm Richard Munneke closed the pre-hearing.

12