Mr. Jerry Grant:

There is a very fundamental point around need. Deputy Ó Broin referred to requiring 545 million litres a day in 2015 . That is the average demand on a given day. There is no peak in that; there is no headroom in that. Any city or country region would have a peak factor of 15% on demand for a dry period. Headroom means the risk around either demand or supply.

If an industry requires additional water supply because of demand or because of a supply-side issue such as a pollution incident at Vartry or Poulaphouca involving chemicals and so on we have no margin. In terms of forward planning, these are the factors that are missed in many of the reports that have been submitted to us. They are factors which a water utility is acutely aware of. It is possible for a customer to determine water demand and need every day but if a water utility tries to operate on that basis, it will fail. The day it fails it lets everybody down.

In regard to the methods of calculation of demographic projections, once we start to talk about a timeframe of 40 years we move beyond the realm of CSO data and normal planning but that is the reality of a project like this. In this regard we are looking to 2050. While projections might be out by a factor of a few percentage points in the long run, it does not make any difference because the scheme is necessary. To pair down a scheme on the basis of a tighter projection makes no economic sense because the marginal cost of an extra couple of inches on a pipeline diameter makes so much sense. In the context of the national planning framework, there is nothing that has been said so far in the scoping document that suggests that the broad growth projections about which we are speaking will not repeat and continue. If the numbers that we have rolled out, which are median projections, are to hold it will require balanced regional development because the possibility is that they could be higher if some of the previous patterns repeated.

I agree that there should not be pipeline-led planning. However, if the desire is to avoid that and to still allow the water supply to be a determinant, then one is inviting failure. In other words, if provision is based purely on what one would like to happen and something else happens, then the water supply fails. As a country, we cannot afford that.

As well as being involved in the business of running Irish Water, I meet industrialists and other clients. There is an amazing amount of focus on water supply and sustainable water supply by international industries because it is such a problem in so many parts of Europe, Asia and the United States. We take it for granted. I do not want to be emotional about this but simple sums will not address this issue. We must address the risks around 10 years' time, 20 years' time and 30 years' time. This is about future generations. The requirement in 2025 might only be 10 million litres on a typical day but it is 10 million litres we do not have right now. Given our leakage figures, we will be very hard pressed to achieve the targets set out, although they are more aggressive than what has been achieved in Scotland. Very few of the English and Welsh water companies reach the pace of recovery of leakage. Irish Water has been very aggressive in that regard.

On the river basin planning process and groundwater issue, a huge amount of study has been done on groundwater in the eastern region, all of which states that while it is locally useful there is no major strategic source available of the scale required. Much of the work that is currently being done by the EPA on this issue is around vulnerability to pollution and management of the water environment. For example, the Kildare aquifers are part and parcel of the groundwater recharge of the River Liffey. That is where the groundwater summer flow comes from. Interference with the groundwater causes interference with the River Liffey base-flow. We are finely balanced in terms of water resources in this region. There is no magic bullet.

In regard to Dublin Bay, Ringsend and the EU, the EU demand of us is that we reduce the nitrogen limit to ten and the phosphorous limit to one. That is what we are trying to do. The EU has not set any targets and is not questioning the growth factors. It has set those two mandatory parameters under the sensitive waters directive and we are endeavouring to comply with them over the next few years through massive investment in Ringsend.

Deputy O'Dowd spoke about Garryhinch. It is useful to have raw water storage in the midlands in a situation where a pipeline bursts but the reality is there is already tremendous water storage at the bottom of Lough Derg. It is a fantastic resource. There is 18-inch control on the lake out of which we require a tiny amount for drinking water compared with that going into hydro. There is no valid argument for putting further raw water storage half way along the route. It does not make sense. The decision-making process is the remit of An Bord Pleanála. A judicial review would be the next step and it is often availed of in the context of major controversial projects.

Senator Murnane O'Connor asked about the service level agreement, SLA. A service level agreement is in place and it has a 12-year lifespan but it-----