Ms Laura Burke:

There is a wide range of questions. I will deal with some and my colleagues will deal with enforcement.

On climate change, it is envisaged in the current draft climate change Bill that the EPA will be secretariat to an expert advisory body that will be established and consist of numerous representatives, including from the EPA, Teagasc, the ESRI and SEAI. Other members are to include those nominated by the Minister. The responsibility of the body, with input from the EPA, will be to review the sectoral plans, including sectoral plans for mitigation and adaptation. I agree absolutely that there needs to be a systematic plan for how to get to 2030. As I said at the outset, we are not on track for our 2020 target. It is estimated that we will be from 5% to 12% below 2005 levels, as compared to the 20% target that we have signed up to. The EPA has estimated that emissions are projected to increase between 2020 and 2030, so they will be approximately 1% to 7% above the levels of 2005 in 2030. They are definitely going the wrong way.

Our role involves the provision of national greenhouse gas inventories, which we do annually, and greenhouse gas projections, which can feed into a systemic approach to meeting targets, rather than a last-minute one. We also have a role in the implementation of the EU emissions trading scheme. We have a role in research to assist Ireland in compliance in respect of both mitigation and adaptation.

With regard to plans for 2030, all sectors should play their part. Some, such as the energy sector, have more opportunities than others, but all have an opportunity to play their part. Teagasc, for example, had prepared marginal abatement cost curves for the agriculture sector. They identified carbon emission reductions of 1 million tonnes through efficiencies, etc. Therefore, there is a role although we need to recognise that Ireland's emissions profile is different from that in other countries. There are still steps the agriculture sector could take, and a sectoral plan would be needed in that area in addition to every other area.

The national targets with regard to 2030 have not been set so, although there is a commitment to achieve a 40% reduction EU-wide, its impact on Ireland or other countries has not yet been agreed.

With regard to water, the cleaner the water going into a plant, the less intervention that is needed. My colleague, Dr. Gerard O'Leary, might talk about water safety plans and having safe and secure water sources. If one protects the water source, it ultimately protects the consumer.

On fluoride, the EPA has no role in applying the current legislation on the requirement to fluoridate public water supplies, and we have no policy remit in this area. It is a health issue. We do have a role in monitoring drinking water quality parameters. That includes fluoride levels, which must be less that 0.8 mg per litre. The Irish standard is more stringent than the EU drinking water standard, which is 0.5 mg per litre. We have seen that out of approximately 932 supplies, approximately 24 failed to meet the fluoride parameter value in 2012. However, no supplies exceeded the EU drinking water directive standard of 0.5 mg per litre. I speak with regard to our monitoring role.

On the licensing of industrial processes - Mr. Dara Lynott might elaborate on this - we take our licensing role very seriously. This is effectively why the agency was set up 20 years ago. It is being reviewed by numerous bodies, and the reviews include the independent review of the EPA. The National Economic & Social Council, among other bodies, is also carrying out a review. Independent research has highlighted the benefit and strict requirements that the EPA imposes on all licensees to ensure they do not cause damage to the environment or harm human health. As part of our licensing process, it is open to anybody to make a submission with regard to the licence and potential licensee. All submissions are available on the EPA website, as is all documentation. We hold oral hearings as and when necessary also. We certainly do not work with the offender in any shape or form. We have had circumstances - Kerdiffstown is an example - in which facilities were up and running prior to the establishment of the EPA or its becoming the licensing authority.

Even before the EPA existed and was given responsibility for licensing landfills, the site in Kerdiffstown, to which Deputy Catherine Murphy referred, had almost 2 million tonnes of waste that had been illegally deposited there. It was a legacy facility that already existed and needed to be addressed. The Waste Management Act 1996 assigned responsibility to the EPA for introducing a licensing regime for the approximately 100 landfills in operation across the country. We did license the facility to bring it into a regulatory regime because it was not in one at that stage. From the commencement of licensing, the EPA pursued the licensee with all its powers to make it compliant with its environmental responsibilities, including through civil and criminal legal action. There is currently a criminal prosecution in the courts with regard to the facility, as the Deputy may be aware. The company went into liquidation and abandoned the site and the EPA is now ensuring a resolution to the matter and that the site does not represent a health and safety or environmental risk. We have been working actively with the local community with regard to it. A site investigation was completed to identify the appropriate remediation option. We are working with the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government and the Department of Public Expenditure and Reform to make progress with remediation for the site. It was a legacy site in existence long before the EPA.

Mr. Gerard O'Leary will talk about water and Aughinish Alumina.