Dáil Éireann Debate, Wednesday - 29 June 2016
39. Deputy Clare Daly asked the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government to carry out a review of the number of properties that have pyrite but are not displaying damage that would register a damage condition rating of 2 in a building condition assessment; and his plans to devise a strategy regarding how these properties can be remediated. [18303/16]
View answerThe independent Pyrite Panel, which was established in September 2011, undertook a desktop study, in conjunction with stakeholder consultation, to establish certain facts in relation to the potential exposure of pyrite in dwellings. The information was gathered from a number of sources including local authorities, structural guarantee providers, representatives of homeowners, private builders, construction professionals and public representatives and was cross referenced to verify, as far as practicable, its validity.
Seventy four estates were identified to the Pyrite Panel as possibly having pyrite. At the time of the Report of the Pyrite Panel (June 2012), all of these estates were located in the five local authority areas of Dublin City, Fingal, Kildare, Meath and Offaly, although two estates were subsequently identified in 2014 as having pyrite problems, one each in the administrative areas of Dun Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council and South Dublin County Council.
The Pyrite Panel recommended a categorisation system as a means of prioritising pyrite remediation works in recognition of the expensive and intrusive nature of pyrite remediation and the unpredictability of pyritic heave. The Panel was clear in its view that only dwellings with significant damage due to pyritic heave should be remediated and that it would be unreasonable to expect dwellings not exhibiting such damage to be remediated. Dwellings which have no significant damage but have reactive pyrite in the hardcore should be monitored and only remediated if they display significant damage due to pyritic heave.
The Panel’s report provided the overarching framework for the development of the Pyrite Resolution Act 2013 and the ensuing pyrite remediation scheme. The scheme’s eligibility criteria are reflective of the conclusions and recommendations of that report. I am satisfied that the Panel developed a reasonable and pragmatic approach to facilitate the remediation of dwellings exhibiting significant pyritic damage and that the conditions for entry into the pyrite remediation scheme are appropriate and proportionate. In this regard, I have no proposals to carry out a review along the lines suggested.
