The former milk-bottling plant is located next to Whanganui River on Anzac Parade. Photo / Bevan Conley
The former milk-bottling plant is located next to Whanganui River on Anzac Parade. Photo / Bevan Conley
The company proposing a water bottling plant next to the Whanganui River has responded to concerns raised against its proposed extraction and now awaits a decision.
A hearing on August 4 discussed concerns from the hearing panel and three submitters regarding the application by Aquifer 182 Holding Company Ltd to extract up to 312,000 litres of water a day from one of the three artesian bores on the site.
The concerns raised included the mauri of the water being affected by the extraction and the end use and packaging of the water.
The hearing was adjourned due to the panel, comprised of independent commissioners Christine Foster (chairwoman) and Vicki Morrison-Shaw, needing more information from the company in response to the concerns raised during the hearing.
Aquifer 182 had until August 26 to supply such information, which it did in a document put together on behalf of the company by Wellington lawyer Stephen Quinn, who provided counsel for the company.
It argued many of the issues raised by the three submitters were either not relevant or were minor effects, due to the lack of direct physical connection between the bore and the Whanganui River.
A key concern raised at the hearing was the potential impact the extraction and export of the water would have on the mauri of the water.
Aquifer 182 said the High Court and the Environment Court concluded there was no loss of mauri from the water as the water remained within the broad global concept of the water cycle and "returned to Papatūānuku irrespective of where it is used".
Another concern raised was surrounding the end use of the water, and whether the water was destined for plastic packaging once overseas.
Despite previously deciding there had to be a degree of connection between the extraction of the water and the end use, the High Court decided the effects of water bottles discarded overseas were too remote and outside the scope of the Resource Management Act 1991 (RMA), Aquifer 182's document said.
The hearing panel, independent commissioners chairwoman Christine Foster (left) and Vicki Morrison-Shaw, now must decide if the information provided is enough to form a decision. Photo / Bevan Conley
Another concern raised was whether there would be a cap on the volume of water extracted in the initial years of operation, which the Aquifer 182 response said planners did not consider necessary.
"There is no evidence of any pressure on the available water resource that necessitates any further constraints being imposed."
The document stated the resource consent for the take and use of water as sought should be granted subject to the updated proposed conditions as agreed by the planners.
Horizons' consents team leader Jasmine Mitchell said the next step was for the hearing panel to determine if it had enough information to make a decision on whether to close the hearing.
Then, if the hearing was closed, the panel would have 15 working days to decide whether to accept or decline the application.
"At this point, the hearing has been adjourned so it will depend a little bit in terms of timing," Mitchell said.
The company has applied to take up to 750,000 litres of water a week, at rates of up to 312,000 litres a day, from an artesian bore on Anzac Pde.
The site would operate six days a week, 12 hours a day, resulting in an annual volume of up to 37,500,000 litres extracted from the bore.
The initial application lodged in 2018 requested a duration of consent of 27 years, with an expiry date of July 1, 2045.
At the hearing, the company noted the delay in determining the consent application meant the effect consent period was reduced to 23 years.
The proposed business requires a 23-year term, due to the investment amount and capital spend of $5 million, with establishment costs of $500,000 to date.
