Septic tank charges

Sponge Bob wrote: »

No I am not. I am, however, saying that inspecting every septic tank in Ireland in 2013 will not make us compliant with the WFD by 2015. Not when much of the pollution is caused by public systems that will seemingly not be fixed by 2015. I also know that our new Irish Water quango will be blamed for this of course.....just like our ministers and civil servants hide behind the HSE for example.

Well done Bob, you have succeeded in merging two separate water quality issues into one. And I'm not entirely clear on what you are proposing as a solution. Less inspections? More capacity? Please do tell.

So lets be clear. Do you support a 100% septic tank inspection regime? Or are you arguing for a targeted inspection regime based on your "fictional" (I call it fictional because it does not exist in the primary directive from 1975 that Ireland is still trying to meet) classification scheme of poorly performing areas? Now stop and think about that for a minute.

1. How do you explain to Mr Murphy why his tank and not Mr Boyle's tank is being inspected?
2. How do avoid corruption in the selection process
3. How do you eliminate the fact that a surface water area can be tested as good, yet some gob****e has a Ford Cortina as a septic tank.
4. How do we demonstrate to Europe that we have fulfilled the requirements of the Directive 75/442 by not inspecting some tanks in some areas because we feel we will be able to meet the WFD requirements in say, 2020. We just end up costing more in fines.

Seeing as septic tanks are not specfically mentioned at all in the 1975 directive, much less their registration, I simply won't bother commenting on it any further and will focus on the current applicable law...... as indeed I have been doing all along.

If we are going to discuss Ireland introducing an inspection regime I think the primary legislation under which Ireland was fined for not introducing an inspection regime is relevant, wouldn't you say?

I trust thats OK with you. Now withdraw your assertion that I deliberately invented a "fictional" classification scheme and lets move on.

Bob, it is a fiction applied to septic tanks. No such classification applies to them. Do you deny that?

Sponge Bob wrote: »

If you read the original post I said the classification system applied to AREAS not to the TANKS IN THEM.

I am getting sick of your misrepresentation as I am sure other are.

WITHDRAW YOUR ALLEGATION that I invented a "Fictional" classification system.

What you said was:

Sponge Bob wrote: »

The target for 2013 should be to inspect tanks in areas designated as Poor or Bad only

There is NO provision to do this under the original directive that Ireland is trying to meet. What you are arguing for is a system based on a fictional classification system when applied to tank inspections. It simply won't allow Ireland to meet its obligations under the waste directive. Or do you disagree. If you can show me how this will allow Ireland to be compliant then lets talk, but at the moment it strikes me that you are inventing a system that cannot be applied under the legislation.

If you could also answer the questions I asked previously that would also be great, ta.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

How is it fictional, you must inspect every tank in those areas BECAUSE the areas are classified as Poor or Bad and then remediate the non complaint tanks. You are tying yourself up in knots with this nonsense. The sewage processing capacity simply does not exist to inspect and remediate all tanks in moderate areas as well.

Have you some fundamental problem with the very simple illustrative example I gave above for Cavan alone. If so tell me what it is and I will do the sums again for you.

So you are saying we cannot have a 100% inspection regime even if that costs more in fines? So what you are proposing as a solution. Less inspections? More capacity? Please do tell. Doing nothing perhaps?

You might remember these questions.

MadsL wrote: »

1. How do you explain to Mr Murphy why his tank and not Mr Boyle's tank is being inspected?
2. How do avoid corruption in the selection process
3. How do you eliminate the fact that a surface water area can be tested as good, yet some gob****e has a Ford Cortina as a septic tank.
4. How do we demonstrate to Europe that we have fulfilled the requirements of the Directive 75/442 by not inspecting some tanks in some areas because we feel we will be able to meet the WFD requirements in say, 2020. We just end up costing more in fines.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

You go back to nice simple stuff you understand ......like your Incinerator that does not exist and has no finance or planning permission and in a country that can dispose of its processed sludge anyway Madsl. ( But not all the fresh stuff)

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=83050260&postcount=975



And do tell us how much fresh unprocessed shíte you propose to burn it it ...no rush mind, I'll happily wait till 2015 for the answer.

I see. My questions above too difficult to answer.

I see you want to bring Ringsend into the debate again, even though you admitted it was irrelevant.

Be as smartarse as you want to be Bob, but you don't have a solution to the problem that 100% inspections have to happen. Nor are you stupid enough to side with the "we won't register" brigade. Which leaves you a bit stuck, frankly.

Sponge Bob wrote: »

You introduced an Incinerator that does not exist as a 'solution' to a Problem that does not exist.

Meanwhile you ignore or misrepresent the problems that do exist. Have you added up the total treatment capcity in Cavan since I posted it some hours ago???

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=83050260&postcount=975



Genius. :cool:

What is the point in asking you questions when all you do is this.

Is Ringsend at capacity. Is it? Agree that NOW!!!! Agree that NOW!!!! I'm not saying anymore until you agree it.

When shown that Ringsend is not in fact at full capacity and will be supported by future expansion and a planned contracted incinerator you then do this

Ringsend is irrelevant and incinerator doesn't exist yet. It's NOOW!!! NOW!!

Then we talk about capacity and you show figures that show 280k P/E headroom which you represent as being somehow 130k P/E headroom.

Then you ignore my questions and pretend that the fact Ireland was in front of the European court doesn't really matter and that Ireland can just make up an inspection regime that suits it.

Really Bob, what is the point in continuing?

Want to answer my questions, or just rant about Ringsend?

I thought this was a once off inspection but I got a letter out today telling me that I will have to renew the registration in 2017.

Have the inspections started yet I wonder, haven't heard much about this in the last few months.