DOC may dump Whakapapa water, rubbish services

Ruapehu Bulletin, Volume 13, Issue 614, 28 November 1995, Page 1

DOC may dump Whakapapa water, rubbish services

Whakapapa Village's water supply and rubbish collection services may be taken over by the Ruapehu District Council. The Council has recei ved a request from the Department of Conservation to take over the water supply servicing Whakapapa Village on Mount Ruapehu. This follows a request last year for the Council to take over the development and operation of the sewerage scheme to service the Whakapapa and Iwikau Villages. A submission has also been received to the 1 995/ 96 Annual Plan to take over the refuse disposal facilities for the Whakapapa and lwikau Villages. The department wants to "get out of the provision of services gencrally so that it can concentrate on its core activities," according to council chief engineer Bruce Dobson National Park Community Board members will discuss the issue this week at their monthly meeting. Problems In a report to the board, outlines a number of problems with the supply: • The supply is untreated and giardia cysts have been found in the supply. ♦ Much of the 6-inch asbestos cement main from the intake to the reservoir is lying on the ground and is exposed. It is very susceptible to damage from undermining, people walking on it and trees falling on it.

• The intake needs to be checked several times a week which involves a 15 - 20 minute walk. • Sections of the main are steel which is corroding badly. • Some of the galvanised reticulation is corroded. • The 40-year-old, 220m3 reservoir is showing signs of deterioration. One hole has been repaired by ramming a piece of wood into the hole. • All of the system is over 40 years old, some parts of it over 60 years old, and it is likely to need progressive replacement over the next 5 - 20 years. • The supply is liable to freezing and consequent damage. Fire hydrants and some taps are bled continuously to prevent freezing. Treatment "It is recognised by all users that the supply will have to be treated or the intake secured against contamination," states Mr Dobson. Mr Dobson estimates that upgrading work would cost more than $700,000 and maintenance and running costs after that would be $18,000 per year. He said the proposal is not in competition for funds with other submissions as the consumers would be an entirely separate group of ratepayers. DoC operates a transfer station at the Turn to Page 2

DoC may dump Whakapapa water, rubbish services

FromPagel Iwikau Village and does a Village collection at Whakapapa. The rubbish is then trucked to T aumarunui and disposed of in the council's landfill. Mr Dobson said DoC's budget for refuse disposal for the 1995/96 year is $62,600. DOC recently commissioned a report from Works Consultancy Services looking at three options: Continue the present operation;

provide a transfer station at Iwikau and Whakapapa Villages; provide a transfer station at Iwikau and bin collection at Whakapapa. The report concluded that the present method of collection by DOC was inefficient in particular because it did not provide for compaction of rubbish being collected or for any recycling. Mr Dobson said if the Council was to take over the service it would tender

the work. He said DOC could ensure the participation in the scheme by all the users as part of their concessionaire licences. He said it appeared that DOC had made no allowance for the administrative component of the service. He said including this may offset any savings that the users may gain from tendering. "However, this is a cost

which should properly accrue to the users and it is envisaged that the DOC would be likely to impose these costs in the future even if they continued to administer the collection," stated Mr Dobson. He said the Grand Chateau management are opposed to taking their rubbish to a transfer station as proposed in Option B of the Works Consultancy report

and would prefer to continue the present arrangement whereby their rubbish is collected from the back of the Hotel. While Option B has the lowest cost, it actually ignores the cost of the user having to take the refuse to the transfer station site thus the option of a transfer station at Whakapapa would probably not result in the lowest cost for most of the users.