PRIVATE WATER SUPPLIES REGULATIONS 2009

WATER CONTAMINATION - If houses are built on the hill that supplies the last surviving well in Herstmonceux, all of those who presently enjoy a sustainable water supply are likely to be poisoned by pesticides from a number of the gardens of the proposed housing - at the moment that looks like being 28 units positioned directly above and in the groundwater soakage line of fire. In addition, where the hard standings of the proposed 70 houses are to be gully drained to a point lower than the twin wells, rainwater soakage that supplies the wells will be diverted away potentially starving the wells of water, save that from the garden areas and grass verges that are impossible to gully. The amusing cartoon above portrays the situation that perhaps the present developers (Clarion, Latimer, Thakeham) were not aware of, when they bought into a situation that they should have been able to rely on.

Unfortunately, the council concerned and the advisers to the original applicants (Gleeson Developments) appear to have been less diligent than they might have been in the rush to profit from a windfall situation, only carrying out a desk based study. The question that is probably on your lips is: "Was that an oversight, or was it deliberate"? Desk based studies are a cop out. When an objection is lodged it should trigger a field study.

When considering pesticide pollution and the unknown effects on humans, let us not forget the thalidomide babies. Thalidomide became an over-the-counter drug in West Germany on October 1, 1957. Shortly after the drug was sold in West Germany, between 5,000 and 7,000 infants were born with phocomelia (malformation of the limbs). Only 40% of these children survived. Gruenenthal patented Thalidomide in the mid-1950s. But investigations in the past two years have confirmed that the German brand-name - Contergan - was owned by the French pharma-company, Rhone-Poulenc, during the early 1940s, when it was effectively under Nazi control. Pesticides are known to affect humans, but the effects may not be apparent immediately. Should anyone take that chance?

Another problem that is rearing it's head with many developments is that corporations are building what they want to build without constructing the affordable unit quotient or making improvement to drainage and access roads that some council's have been kind enough to overlook at the grant stage with a promise from developers to overcome, when in fact those developers simply vanish without trace, leaving nobody to pick up the tab. In other words development is never completed to a stage where flooding and other contamination measures are safe.

PUBLIC WATER SUPPLY - What a shock to visitors to Herstmonceux when they come to drink from this fountain that is fed from the old wells, and find themselves with DNA problems or other contamination issues that will only become apparent when it is too late. You may not find out about your illness for quite a while, meantime the culprits have spent their ill gotten gains and long since covered their trail. Does this qualify as Corporate Manslaughter? In causing death, does it have to be near instant as in the fire in a tall building or can it be over a prolonged period of time. We believe that anything that shortens a life is causing death and those responsible for shortening anyone's life should be prosecuted.

DOWNHILL ALL THE WAY - This is view 2 on the plan below. As you may know water is the subject of gravity and so travels downhill. The steeper the gradient, the faster it goes and the angle determines where it goes. Around 28 gardens will ensure that the old wells in Lime Park are drenched in herbicides from the proposed houses in a 100 meter radius. Without this slope a 50 meter radius could provide some protections according to the Environment Agency.

Popular gardening chemicals like glyphosate and the harm they do, being toxic to Human DNA at concentrations 450 times lower than used in agricultural applications. Ethoxylated adjuvants in glyphosate-based herbicides have been found to be “active principles of human cell toxicity.” Cell damage and even cell death can occur at the residual levels found on Roundup-treated food crops, as well as lawns and gardens where Roundup is applied for weed control. Liver, embryonic and placental cell lines are adversely affected by glyphosate at doses as low as 1 ppm.

RADIUS IMPACT - This proposal could not have been better planned to impact on the old wells at Herstmonceux. The developers claim that they did not know about the well being a public water supply. Does that mean that Wealden's councillors were not told about this being a problem when they passed the outline application in 2015? We suspect that is the case but have yet to hear the presentation by Kelvin Williams, that apparently, Wealden did not keep, according to recent correspondence. We are sure they will find a copy if they really want to, would you agree?

In addition, the Pevensey and Cuckmere Water Level Management Board concluded that the developer's water management ‘strategy’ was certain to result in flooding on site and off site (in Lime Park) because the pipes into the ponds are far too small/not designed for heavy duty runoff, and there are legal obstacles to changing them. Building in yet more water pollution issues, but this time at the other end of the field, where the developer has proposed dealing with surface water through a pond not under the control of the developer, so leaving the developer unable to provide what is required in law if such application if granted.

DOWNHILL ALL THE WAY - Yup. As if you need more proof, this photograph that was available online for the members and officers of Wealden District Council appears to have been ignored. Clearly, this hill slopes down to the well, where the buildings behind are dug into the bank, so causing a build up of water pressure - and pollution concentrations - in the well.

What is more remarkable than that is that Clarion, Thakeham and Latimer property developers are advertising that this 70 home development is set for 2021, even though the grant has yet to be given as at 27 September 2018. How can anyone say that when there is supposed to be a democratic vote with 12 members of the Area Plans South Committee each to have a say, as they represent the public. The only way anyone can say something like that for sure is if the vote is a rubber stamping exercise and the deal has already been done. If that is the case we'd like to hear from anyone who can let us in on the secret (in confidence), or indeed the Council who may care to issue a denial and provide clarification.

Agricultural pesticides - This means that much of the perceived benefits of the proposed new Agriculture Bill that Michael Gove and DEFRA are advocating simply will not materialise.

The widespread use of pesticides and other toxic chemicals in our existing farming system appears to be the Government’s ‘elephant in the room’ because of DEFRA's reluctance to mention it - let alone focus on it.

Agriculture accounts for more than 70% of land use in the UK, and has a major influence on our environment. Considering that currently only around 3% of farmland in the UK is organic, then the vast majority of the 70% of land that is used in the UK for agriculture will be land that is regularly sprayed under the existing chemical intensive conventional farming system.

Latest Government statistics show that regarding just pesticides alone (ie. not including chemical fertilisers and all the other agro chemicals used in conventional farming), in 2014 the total area treated with pesticides on agricultural and horticultural crops was 80,107,993 hectares, with the total weight applied 17,757,242 kg.

The reality of crop spraying in the countryside is that it involves cocktails of pesticides, as agricultural pesticides are rarely used individually but commonly sprayed in mixtures - quite often a mixture will consist of 4 or 5 different products.

Rural citizens - There are approx. 2,000 pesticide products currently approved for UK agricultural use and each product formulation in itself can contain a number of active ingredients, as well as other hazardous chemicals, such as solvents, surfactants, co-formulants (and many of which can have adverse effects on human health in their own right, even before considering any potential synergistic effects in a chemical mixture).

Therefore if the Government continues to permit the release of innumerable cocktails of pesticides and other harmful chemicals over the majority of UK land then how will farming change in a post Brexit landscape? The answer is simple. It won’t.

The pollution and contamination of our health and the environment must be stopped at the highest level, which means if such harmful farming practices are no longer permitted by the Government then farmers would have to adapt and find alternative methods that do not put public health and the environment at the risk of harm.

It is concrete and definitive action that is needed to clean up UK agriculture. This is very long overdue, especially regarding the protection of human health and lives.

For over 7 decades rural residents and communities have not been protected from the risks that pesticides pose to us and our families, and there have been no mandatory measures in the UK specifically for the protection of rural citizens.

Chemical-intensive - While operators generally have protection when using agricultural pesticides – such as use of personal protective equipment, respirators, and will be in filtered cabs – rural residents and communities have absolutely no protection at all. In any event residents would obviously not be expected to wear such equipment on their own property and land!

There are many thousands of known cases of adverse health impacts reported by rural residents across the UK, but which the Government has continued to blatantly ignore. Obviously with millions of rural residents exposed in crop sprayed areas there will undoubtedly be many more unreported cases.

A few examples of the truly harrowing experiences from other affected rural residents can be seen within my ongoing petition which calls on the Prime Minister Theresa May, and DEFRA Secretary Michael Gove, to urgently secure the protection of rural residents and communities by banning all crop spraying and use of any pesticides near residents’ homes, schools, and children’s playgrounds.

The campaign petition has also been signed by a number of prominent figures including Hillsborough QC Michael Mansfield, Stanley Johnson, Jonathon Porritt, Gordon Roddick, Ben Goldsmith, Caroline Lucas MP, among others.

A number of recent major international reports have detailed the damage to human health from existing industrial and chemical-intensive conventional food and farming systems.

For example: The United Nations report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food in March 2017 that found that chronic exposure to agricultural pesticides has been associated with several diseases and conditions including cancer, developmental disorders, and sterility, and that those living near crop fields are particularly vulnerable to exposure from these chemicals;

The IPES-FOOD report that outlines the unacceptable harm caused by the current chemical farming systems; exposes just some of the astronomical health costs externalized by the current system; and finds an urgent and “overwhelming case for action.” The report found that many of the severest health conditions afflicting populations around the world – from respiratory diseases to a range of cancers – are linked to industrial food and farming practices, including chemical-intensive agriculture;

The Lancet Commission on pollution and health report on the global deaths and chronic diseases from outdoor air pollution, and which included from the use of pesticides. In fact the lead author was reported as saying that his biggest concern is the impact of the hundreds of industrial chemicals and pesticides already widely dispersed around the world.

Wiped out - The 2017 UN Report of the Special Rapporteur on the right to food concluded that moving away from pesticide-reliant industrial agriculture to non-chemical farming methods should now be a political priority in all countries globally.

The new post Brexit UK Agriculture Bill and policy provides a real opportunity for the UK to adopt such a non-chemical farming policy in order to no longer use toxic chemicals in the production of our food.

This would then protect not only the health of rural residents and communities, as well as other members of the public, but also the environment, wildlife, pollinators, other species, and biodiversity.

So here's hoping that Parliamentarians will amend the Agriculture Bill to reflect the health and environmental protections that are so urgently needed.

The origins of traditional farming methods did not include dependence on chemical inputs for mass production. Such poisons should never have had any place in the air we breathe, food we eat, and environment we live in.

Therefore it is a complete paradigm shift that is needed to move away from the use of pesticides in farming/agriculture altogether. Such a move is absolutely integral to the health and existence of all those living in the British countryside, as well as other species that are being wiped out from the continued use of such toxic chemicals.

The Author: Georgina Downs is a journalist and campaigner. She runs the UK Pesticides Campaign, which specifically represents rural residents affected by pesticides sprayed in the locality of residents’ homes, as well as schools, playgrounds, among other areas.

PART 1

Water standards

Citation, application and commencement

1. These Regulations may be cited as the Private Water Supplies Regulations 2009; they apply in England and come into force on 1st January 2010.

Scope

2. These Regulations apply in relation to private supplies of water intended for human consumption; and for these purposes “water intended for human consumption” means —

(a) all water either in its original state or after treatment, intended for drinking, cooking, food preparation or other domestic purposes, regardless of its origin and whether it is supplied from a distribution network, from a tanker, or in bottles or containers;
(b) all water used in any food-production undertaking for the manufacture, processing, preservation or marketing of products or substances intended for human consumption.

Exemptions

3. These Regulations do not apply in relation to —

(a) water controlled by the Natural Mineral Water, Spring Water and Bottled Drinking Water (England) Regulations 2007(a);

(b) water that is an authorised medicinal product; or

(c) water used solely for washing a crop after it has been harvested and that does not affect the fitness for human consumption of the crop or of any food or drink derived from the crop.

Wholesomeness

4. Water is wholesome if all the following conditions are met —

(a) it does not contain any micro-organism, parasite or substance, alone or in conjunction with any other substance, at a concentration or value that would constitute a potential danger to human health;

(b) it complies with the concentrations or values specified in Part 1 of Schedule 1; and

nitrite (mg/l)		nitrate (mg/l)
__________	+	__________	≤
50		3

.
Use of products or substances in private supplies

5. Any product or substance used in a private supply after the coming into force of these Regulations must be a product or substance that would be permitted to be used in a water supply under regulation 31 of the Water Supply (Water Quality) Regulations 2000(b).

Requirement to carry out a risk assessment

6. — (1) A local authority must carry out a risk assessment within five years of the coming into force of these Regulations, and subsequently every five years (or earlier if it considers that the existing risk assessment is inadequate) of each private supply that supplies water to any premises (other than a supply to a single dwelling not used for any commercial activity).

(2) The risk assessment is to establish whether there is a significant risk of supplying water that would constitute a potential danger to human health.

(3) It must also carry out a risk assessment of a private supply to a single dwelling not used for any commercial activity if requested to do so by the owner or occupier of that dwelling.

PART 2

Monitoring

7. The local authority must monitor all private supplies in accordance with this Part when carrying out its duties under section 77(1) of the Water Industry Act 1991.

Further distribution of supplies from water undertakers or licensed water suppliers

8. Where water is supplied by a water undertaker or licensed water supplier and is then further distributed by a person other than a water undertaker or licensed water supplier the monitoring must be carried out on the basis of the risk assessment.

Large supplies and supplies to commercial or public premises

9. In the case of a private supply (other than that specified in regulation 8) that —

(a) supplies an average daily volume of water of 10m3 or more, or

(b) supplies water to premises where the water is used for a commercial activity or to public premises, the local authority must monitor in accordance with Schedule 2 and carry out any additional monitoring that the risk assessment shows to be necessary.

Other private supplies

10.—(1) In any other case other than a private supply to a single dwelling not used for a commercial activity, the local authority must monitor for —

(a) conductivity;
(b) enterococci;
(c) Escherichia coli (E. coli);
(d) hydrogen ion concentration;
(e) turbidity;
(f) any parameter in Schedule 1 identified in the risk assessment as being at risk of not complying with the concentrations or values in that Schedule; and

(g) anything else identified in the risk assessment as a potential danger to human health.

(2) It must monitor at least every five years and more frequently if the risk assessment shows that this is necessary.

(3) In the case of a private supply to a single dwelling not used for a commercial activity a local authority may monitor the supply in accordance with this regulation, and must do so if requested to do so by the owner or occupier.

Sampling and analysis

11.—(1) When a local authority monitors a private supply it must take a sample —

(a) if the water is supplied for domestic purposes, from a tap normally used to supply water for human consumption, and which, if there is more than one tap, is representative of the water supplied to the premises;

(b) if the water is used in a food-production undertaking, at the point at which it is used in the undertaking;

(d) in any other case at a suitable point.

(2) It must then ensure that the sample is analysed.

(3) Schedule 3 makes further provision for sampling and analysis.

Maintenance of records

12. A local authority must make and keep records in respect of every private supply in its area in
accordance with Schedule 4.

Notification of information

13. By 30th June 2010, and by 31st January each following year, every local authority must send
the Secretary of State a copy of the records in Schedule 4.

PART 3

Action in the event of failure

Provision of information

14. If the local authority considers that a private supply in its area is a potential danger to human health it must take appropriate steps to ensure that people likely to consume water from it —

(a) are informed that the supply constitutes a potential danger to human health;
(b) where possible, are informed of the degree of the potential danger; and
(c) are given advice to allow them to minimise any such potential danger.

Investigation

15. A local authority must carry out an investigation to establish the cause if it suspects that the supply is unwholesome or that an indicator parameter does not comply with the concentrations or values in Part 2 of Schedule 1.

Procedure following investigation

16. (1) Once a local authority has carried out an investigation and established the cause of the water being unwholesome, it must act in accordance with this regulation.

(2) If the cause of the unwholesome water is in the pipework within a single dwelling, it must promptly inform the people concerned and offer them advice on measures necessary for the protection of human health.

(3) Otherwise, if it cannot solve the problem informally the local authority —

(a) may on application grant an authorisation in accordance with regulation 17(2) if the conditions in that regulation are fulfilled; and
(b) if it does not grant such an authorisation, must (or, in the case of a supply to a single dwelling, may) serve a notice, either in accordance with section 80 of the Water Industry Act 1991 or under regulation 18 if the conditions in that regulation are fulfilled.

Authorisations of different standards

17. (1) Any person may apply to a local authority for the grant of an authorisation under this regulation.

(2) A local authority may grant an authorisation of different standards under this regulation if —

(a) the only cause of the unwholesome water is that a parameter in Table B of Part 1 of Schedule 1 (chemical parameters) is not complied with;
(b) the local authority has consulted all water users who will be affected by the authorisation and the Health Protection Agency for the area and has taken their views into account;
(c) granting the authorisation does not cause a potential danger to human health;
(d) the supply of water cannot be maintained by any other reasonable means.

(3) An authorisation must require the applicant to take action over a period of time to ensure that the necessary parameters are complied with, and must specify—
(a) the person to whom the authorisation is granted;
(b) the supply concerned;
(c) the grounds for granting the authorisation;
(d) the parameters concerned, previous relevant monitoring results, and the maximum permissible values under the authorisation;
(e) the geographical area, the estimated quantity of water supplied each day, the number of persons concerned and whether or not any food-production undertaking is affected;
(f) an appropriate monitoring scheme, with an increased monitoring frequency where necessary;
(g) a summary of the plan for the necessary remedial action, including a timetable for the work and an estimate of the cost and provisions for reviewing progress;
(h) the duration of the authorisation.

(4) If a local authority grants an authorisation, and the person to whom it is granted takes action in accordance with the timetable specified in the authorisation, the local authority may not serve a notice under section 80 of the Water Industry Act 1991 concerning the matters specified in the authorisation without first amending or revoking the authorisation.

(5) The duration of the authorisation must be as short as possible and in any event may not
exceed three years.

(6) The local authority must ensure that people concerned are promptly informed of the authorisation and its conditions and, where necessary, ensure that advice is given to particular groups for which the authorisation could present a special risk.

(7) If the supply exceeds 1,000 m³ a day as an average or serves more than 5,000 persons the local authority must send a copy of the authorisation to the Secretary of State within one month.

(8) The local authority must keep the progress of the remedial action under review.

(9) If necessary, it may grant a second authorisation for up to a further three years with the prior consent of the Secretary of State, but if it does so it must, as soon as is reasonably practicable, send a copy of the authorisation together with the grounds for its decision to the Secretary of State.

(10) It may revoke or amend the authorisation at any time, and in particular may revoke or amend it if the timetable for remedial action has not been adhered to.

PART 4

Notice procedure

Notices

18.—(1) If any private supply of water intended for human consumption constitutes a potential danger to human health, a local authority acting under these Regulations must serve a notice under that section.

(2) The notice must —

(a) identify the private supply to which it relates;
(b) state the grounds for serving the notice;
(c) prohibit or restrict the use of that supply;
(d) specify what other action is necessary to protect human health.

(3) The local authority must promptly inform consumers of the supply of the notice and provide any necessary advice.

(4) The notice may be subject to conditions and may be amended by further notice at any time.

(5) The local authority must revoke the notice as soon as there is no longer a potential danger to human health.

(6) It is an offence to breach a notice served under this regulation or fail to comply with it.

Appeals

19.—(1) Any person who is aggrieved by a notice served under regulation 18 may appeal to a magistrates’ court within 28 days of service of the notice.

(2) The procedure on an appeal to a magistrates’ court under paragraph (1) is by way of complaint, and the Magistrates’ Courts Act 1980(a) applies to the proceedings.

(3) A notice remains in force unless suspended by the court.

(4) On an appeal, the court may either cancel the notice or confirm it, with or without modification.

Penalties

20.—(1) A person failing to comply with a notice served under regulation 18 is liable —

(a) on summary conviction, to a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or to a term of imprisonment not exceeding three months or both, or
(b) on conviction on indictment, to a fine or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years or both.

(2) Where a body corporate is guilty of an offence under these Regulations, and that offence is proved to have been committed with the consent or connivance of, or to have been attributable to any neglect on the part of—
(a) any director, manager, secretary or other similar person of the body corporate; or
(b) any person who was purporting to act in any such capacity,
that person is guilty of the offence as well as the body corporate.

(3) For the purposes of paragraph (2) above, “director”, in relation to a body corporate whose affairs are managed by its members, means a member of the body corporate.

PART 5

Miscellaneous

Fees

21. Schedule 5 makes provision for fees.

Revocation

22. The Private Water Supply Regulations 1991(a) are revoked in England.

SCHEDULE 1 Regulations 4, 10, 15 and 17

Concentrations or Values

PART 1
Wholesomeness

TABLE A: MICROBIOLOGICAL PARAMETERS

Prescribed concentrations or values
Parameters Maximum concentration or value Units of Measurement
Escherichia coli (E. coli) 0 Number/100ml
Enterococci 0 Number/100ml
In the case of water in bottles or containers:
Escherichia coli (E. coli) 0 Number/250ml
Enterococci 0 Number/250ml
Pseudomonas aeruginosa 0 Number/250ml
Colony count 22°C 100 Number/ml
Colony count 37°C 20 Number/ml

TABLE B: CHEMICAL PARAMETERS

Prescribed concentrations or values
Parameters Maximum concentration or value Units of Measurement
(i) The parametric value refers to the residual monomer concentration in the water as calculated according to specifications of the maximum release from the corresponding polymer in contact with the water. This is controlled by product specification.

(ii) See also the nitrate-nitrite formula in regulation 4(c).
(iii) For these purposes “Pesticides” means —
organic insecticides
organic herbicides
organic fungicides
organic nematocides
organic acaricides
organic algicides
organic rodenticides
organic slimicides
related products (inter alia, growth regulators)
and their relevant metabolites, degradation and reaction products.

Only those pesticides likely to be present in a given supply need be monitored.

(iv) “Pesticides total” means the sum of the concentrations of the individual pesticides detected and quantified in the monitoring process.
(v) The specified compounds are:
benzo(b)fluoranthene
benzo(k)fluoranthene
benzo(ghi)perylene
indeno(1,2,3-cd)pyrene.
The parametric value applies to the sum of the concentrations of the individual compounds detected and quantified in the monitoring process.
(vi) The parametric value applies to the sum of the concentrations of the individual compounds detected and quantified in the monitoring process.

(vii) The specified compounds are:
chloroform
bromoform
dibromochloromethane
bromodichloromethane.

The parametric value applies to the sum of the concentrations of the individual compounds detected and quantified in the monitoring process.

Acrylamide (i) 0.10 μg/l
Antimony 5.0 μg/l
Arsenic 10 μg/l
Benzene 1.0 μg/l
Benzo(a)pyrene 0.010 μg/l
Boron 1.0 mg/l
Bromate 10 μg/l
Cadmium 5.0 μg/l
Chromium 50 μg/l
Copper 2.0 mg/l
Cyanide 50 μg/l
1, 2 dichloroethane 3.0 μg/l
Epichlorohydrin (i) 0.10 μg/l
Fluoride 1.5 mg/l
Lead 25 (until 25th December 2013) μg/l
10 (from 25th December 2013) μg/l
Mercury 1.0 μg/l
Nickel 20 μg/l
Nitrate (ii) 50 mg/l
Nitrite(ii) 0.5 (or 0.1 in the case of treatment works) mg/l
Pesticides (iii)—
Aldrin 0.030 μg/l
Dieldrin 0.030 μg/l
Heptachlor 0.030 μg/l
Heptachlor epoxide 0.030 μg/l
other pesticides 0.10 μg/l
Pesticides total (iv) 0.50 μg/l
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (v) 0.10 μg/l
Selenium 10 μg/l
Tetrachloroethene and Trichloroethene (vi) 10 μg/l
Trihalomethanes: Total (vii) 100 μg/l
Vinyl chloride (i) 0.50 μg/l

National requirements – Prescribed concentrations or values
Aluminium 200 μg/l
Colour 20 mg/l Pt/Co
Iron 200 μg/l
Manganese 50 μg/l

Odour Acceptable to consumers and no abnormal change
Sodium 200 mg/l

Taste Acceptable to consumers and no abnormal change

Tetrachloromethane 3 μg/l
Turbidity 4 NTU
PART 2Indicator Parameters

TABLE C

Prescribed concentrations, values or states
Parameters Maximum concentration or value or state (unless otherwise stated) Units of measurement

(i) The water should not be aggressive.
(ii) Excluding tritium, potassium-40, radon and radon decay products.
(iii) Only in the case of surface water or groundwater that has been influenced by surface water.

Ammonium 0.50 mg/l
Chloride (i) 250 mg/l
Clostridium perfringens
(including spores)

0

Number/100ml
Coliform bacteria 0 Number/100ml (Number/250 ml in the case of water put into bottles or containers)
Colony counts
No abnormal change

No abnormal change

Number/ml at 22°C

Number/ml at 37°C
Conductivity (i) 2500 μS/cm at 20°C
Hydrogen ion 9.5 (maximum) pH value

6.5 (minimum) (in the case of still water put into bottles or containers the minimum is 4.5)
pH value
Sulphate (i) 250 mg/l

Total indicative dose (for radioactivity) (ii)
0.10 mSv/year
Total organic carbon (TOC) No abnormal change mgC/l

Tritium

(for radioactivity)
100 Bq/l
Turbidity(iii) 1 NTU

SCHEDULE 2 Regulation 9
Monitoring

PART 1
Check monitoring

Sampling

1. (1) A local authority must undertake check monitoring in accordance with this Part.

(2) Check monitoring means sampling for each parameter listed in Table 1 in the circumstances listed in that table in order —

(a) to determine whether or not water complies with the concentrations or values in Schedule 1;
(b) to provide information on the organoleptic and microbiological quality of the water; and
(c) to establish the effectiveness of the treatment of the water, including disinfection.

Table 1

Check monitoring

Parameter Circumstances
Aluminium When used as flocculant or where the water originates from, or is influenced by, surface waters
Ammonium In all supplies
Clostridium perfringens (including spores) Where the water originates from, or is influenced by, surface waters
Coliform bacteria In all supplies
Colony counts In all supplies
Colour In all supplies
Conductivity In all supplies
Escherichia coli (E. coli) In all supplies
Hydrogen ion concentration In all supplies
Iron When used as flocculant or where the water originates from, or is influenced by, surface waters
Manganese Where the water originates from, or is influenced by, surface waters
Nitrate When chloramination is practised
Nitrite When chloramination is practised
Odour In all supplies
Pseudomonas aeruginosa Only in the case of water in bottles or containers
Taste In all supplies
Turbidity In all supplies
Frequency of sampling

2.—(1) Sampling must be carried out at frequencies specified in Table 2.

Table 2
Sampling frequency for check monitoring

Volume m3/day Sampling frequency per year
≤ 10 1
> 10 ≤ 100 2
> 100 ≤ 1,000 4
> 1,000 ≤ 2,000 10
> 2,000 ≤ 3,000 13
> 3,000 ≤ 4,000 16
> 4,000 ≤ 5,000 19
> 5,000 ≤ 6,000 22
> 6,000 ≤ 7,000 25
> 7,000 ≤ 8,000 28
> 8,000 ≤ 9,000 31
> 9,000 ≤ 10,000 34

> 10,000
4 + 3 for each 1,000 m3/day of the total volume (rounding up to the nearest multiple of 1,000 m3/day)

(2) The local authority may reduce the frequency of sampling for a parameter to a frequency not
less than half if —

(a) the local authority is of the opinion that the quality of water in the supply is unlikely to
deteriorate;
(b) in the case of hydrogen ion the parameter has had a pH value that is not less than 6.5 and
not more than 9.5; and
(c) in all other cases, in each of two successive years the results of samples taken for the
purposes of monitoring the parameter in question are constant and significantly lower
than the concentrations or values laid down in Schedule 1.
(3) The local authority may set a higher frequency for any parameter if it considers it
appropriate taking into account the findings of any risk assessment, and in addition may monitor
anything else identified in the risk assessment.

PART 2
Audit monitoring

Sampling

3. (1) A local authority must undertake audit monitoring in accordance with this Part.

(2) Audit monitoring means sampling for each parameter listed in Schedule 1 (other than
parameters already being sampled under check monitoring) in order to provide information
necessary to determine whether or not the private supply satisfies each concentration, value or
state specified in that Schedule and, if disinfection is used, to check that disinfection by-products
are kept as low as possible without compromising the disinfection.

(3) The local authority may, for such time as it may decide, exclude a parameter from the audit
monitoring of a private supply—
(a) if it considers that the parameter in question is unlikely to be present in the supply or
system at a concentration or value that poses a risk of the private supply failing to meet
the concentration, value or state specified in Schedule 1 in respect of that parameter;
(b) taking into account the findings of any risk assessment; and
(c) taking into account any guidance issued by the Secretary of State.

(4) It may monitor anything else identified in the risk assessment.

Frequency of sampling

4. (1) Sampling must be carried out at the frequencies specified in Table 3.

Table 3

Sampling frequency for audit monitoring Volume m3/day Sampling frequency per year
≤ 10 1
> 10 ≤ 3,300 2
> 3,300 ≤ 6,600 3
> 6,600 ≤ 10,000 4
> 10,000 ≤ 100,000 3 + 1 for each 10,000 m3/day of the total volume (rounding up to the nearest multiple of 10,000 m3/day)
> 100,000 10 + 1 for each 25,000 m3/day of the total volume (rounding up to the nearest multiple of 25,000 m3/day)

(2) The local authority may set a higher frequency for any parameter if it considers it appropriate taking into account the findings of any risk assessment.

PART 3

Minimum frequency for both check monitoring and audit monitoring for water put into bottles or containers
Volume(1) of water produced in bottles or containers each day (m3) Check monitoring number of samples per year Audit monitoring number of samples per year
(1)

The volumes are calculated as averages taken over a calendar year.
≤10 1 1
>10≤ 60 12 1
>60 1 for each 5 m3/day of the total volume (rounding up to the nearest multiple of 5 m3/day) 1 for each 100 m3/day of the total volume (rounding up to the nearest multiple of 100 m3/day)

SCHEDULE 3 Regulation 11

Sampling and analysis

PART 1
General

Samples: general

1. (1) The local authority must ensure that each sample is —
(a) taken by a competent person using suitable equipment;
(b) representative of the water at the sampling point at the time of sampling;
(c) not contaminated in the course of being taken;
(d) kept at such temperature and in such conditions as will secure that there is no material change in what is to be measured; and
(e) analysed without delay by a competent person using suitable equipment.

(2) It must ensure that the sample is analysed using a system of analytical quality control.

(3) The system must be subjected to checking by a person who is—
(a) not under the control of either the analyst or the local authority; and
(b) approved by the Secretary of State for that purpose.

Analysing samples

2. (1) The local authority must ensure that each sample is analysed in accordance with this paragraph.

(2) For each parameter specified in the first column of Table 1 in Part 2 of this Schedule the method of analysis is specified in the second column of that table.

(3) For each parameter specified in the first column of Table 2 in Part 2 of this Schedule the method is one that is capable of —

(a) measuring concentrations and values with the trueness and precision specified in the second and third columns of that table, and
(b) detecting the parameter at the limit of detection specified in the fourth column of that table.

(4) For hydrogen ion, the method of analysis must be capable of measuring a value with a
trueness of 0.2 pH unit and a precision of 0.2 pH unit.

(5) The method of analysis used for odour and taste parameters must be capable of measuring
values equal to the parametric value with a precision of 1 dilution number at 25°C.

(6) For these purposes — “limit of detection” is —

(a) three times the relative within-batch standard deviation of a natural sample containing a low concentration of the parameter; or
(b) five times the relative within-batch standard deviation of a blank sample; “precision” (the random error) is twice the standard deviation (within a batch and between batches) of the spread of results about the mean;
“trueness” (the systematic error) is the difference between the mean value of the large number of repeated measurements and the true value.

Authorisation of alternative methods of analysis

3. (1) The Secretary of State may authorise a method different from that set out in paragraph 2(2) if satisfied that it is at least as reliable.

(2) An authorisation may be time-limited and may be revoked at any time.

Sampling and analysis by persons other than local authorities

4. (1) A local authority may enter into an arrangement for any person to take and analyse samples on its behalf.

(2) A local authority must not enter into an arrangement under paragraph (1) unless —
(a) it is satisfied that the task will be carried out promptly by a person competent to perform it, and
(b) it has made arrangements that ensure that any breach of these Regulations is communicated to it immediately, and any other result is communicated to it within 28 days.

SCHEDULE 4 Regulation 12 and 13
Records

Initial records

1. (1) A local authority must, before 30th June 2010, record the number of private supplies in
its area, and for each supply must record —
(a) the name of the supply, together with a unique identifier;
(b) the type of source;
(c) the geographical location using a grid reference;
(d) an estimate of the number of people supplied;
(e) an estimate of the average daily volume of water supplied in cubic metres;
(f) the type of premises supplied;
(g) detail of any treatment process, together with its location;
(h) the name of the Health Protection Agency in whose area the supply is located.

(2) It must review and update the record at least once a year.

(3) It must keep the record for at least 30 years.

Additional records

2. (1) For each supply it must record each of the following within 28 days of the event —
(a) a plan and description of the supply;
(b) the monitoring programme for the supply;
(c) the risk assessment;
(d) the date, results and location of any sampling and analysis relating to that supply, and the
reason for taking the sample;
(e) the results of any investigation undertaken in accordance with these Regulations;
(f) any authorisation;
(g) any notices served under section 80 of the Water Industry Act 1991 or regulation 18;
(h) any action agreed to be taken by any person under these Regulations;
(i) any request for the local authority to carry out sampling and analysis, undertake a risk assessment or give advice;
(j) a summary of any advice given in relation to the supply.
(2) It must keep the risk assessment and records of sampling and analysis for at least thirty years, and all other records under this paragraph for at least five years.

SCHEDULE 5 Regulation 21
Fees

Fee

1. The local authority may charge a fee, payable on invoice, for the activities in the following
table, and the fee is the reasonable cost of providing the service subject to the following maximum amounts.

Risk assessment (each assessment): 500
Sampling (each visit)(i): 100
Investigation (each investigation): 100
Granting an authorisation (each authorisation): 100
Analysing a sample—
taken under regulation 10: 25
taken during check monitoring: 100
taken during audit monitoring: 500

Persons liable to pay

2.—(1) Any person requesting anything under these Regulations is liable for the cost.

(2) Otherwise fees are payable, as specified in the invoice, by the relevant person as defined in
section 80(7) of the Water Industry Act 1991.

(3) Where more than one person is liable, in determining who is required to make payment the
local authority —

(a) may apportion the charge between them; and
(b) must have regard to any agreement or other document produced to the local authority relating to the terms on which water is supplied.

EXPLANATORY NOTE
(This note is not part of the Regulations)

These Regulations, which apply in England, implement Council Directive 98/83/EC (on the
quality of water intended for human consumption, OJ No L 330, 5.12.1998, p 32) in relation to
private water supplies. They revoke and replace the Private Water Supply Regulations 1991 in
England.

The principal changes are that the Regulations impose on local authorities a duty to carry out a
risk assessment of the private water supplies and they make it an offence to breach a notice served
by the local authority under regulation 18. The Regulations establish an appeal process for any
person aggrieved by such notice.

They apply to private water supplies other than those provided by a water undertaker or a licensed
water supplier. They define “wholesomeness” in regulation 4 and Schedule 1, and impose a duty
on the local authority to carry out a risk assessment of the private water supply (regulation 6) and
to monitor the supply (regulations 7 to 10 and Schedule 2).

Once monitored, the local authority must ensure that the sample is analysed in the ways set out in
the Schedule 3.

The local authority must make and maintain records (regulation 12 and Schedule 4), and must
send a copy of the records to the Secretary of State in accordance with regulation 13.

Part 3 of the Regulations sets out procedures if the private water supply is not wholesome.
Schedule 5 sets out the fees payable under the Regulations.

A full impact assessment has been prepared for these Regulations, and laid in the library of each
House of Parliament. It is available on the Defra website at www.defra.gov.uk.

Water Pollution Offences

For England and Wales, the principal water pollution offences are contained in the Environmental Permitting (England and Wales) Regulations 2010: regulations 38(1) and 12(1). The offences are similar to ones that used to be set out in section 85 of the Water Resources Act 1991.

It is an offence to cause or knowingly permit a water discharge activity unless you are complying with an environmental permit or exemption. Things that count as water discharge activities are listed in Schedule 21. They include:

* discharging poisonous, noxious or polluting matter or solid waste matter into inland freshwater, coastal waters and relevant territorial waters. The legislation does not define poisonous, noxious or polluting. These words are normally given their ordinary meanings.

* discharging trade or sewage effluent into inland freshwater, coastal waters and relevant territorial waters

* cutting or uprooting substantial amounts of vegetation in any inland freshwaters, without taking reasonable steps to remove it.

It is also an offence to cause or knowingly permit a groundwater activity unless you are complying with an environmental permit or exemption. Broadly speaking, groundwater activities cover discharges of pollutants directly into groundwater, or indirectly. An example of an indirect discharge would be where some polluting liquid like paint is poured onto the ground and gets into the groundwater by percolating down through the soil. Details of exactly what counts as a groundwater activity are given in Schedule 22 to the Regulations. This part of the legislation is quite complicated, because it is giving effect to three pieces of European legislation - the Groundwater Directive, the Groundwater Daughter Directive and the Water Framework Directive.

Causing or knowingly permitting

The courts take a broad approach when deciding whether a person (or a company) caused a water discharge or groundwater activity. There is no need to show that a person knew about the activity or intended it. If pollution is due to a chain of events, a person may be regarded as having caused it even if someone else's actions immediately triggered the pollution. Take the example of a river that is polluted because an unknown person turns on the tap of a diesel tank stored by the river bank. Depending on the exact circumstances, the company that owns the tank as part of their operations might be charged with causing the pollution. This strict approach is why this is know as a strict liability offence.

Knowingly permitting includes cases where a person (or company) is aware of a polluting incident but refuses to take steps to stop the pollution.

Penalties

If a person is tried and convicted in a Magistrates Court, they could be fined any amount and/or sentenced to up to twelve months imprisonment. If they are tried and convicted in a Crown Court they could face an unlimited fine and/or be sentenced to up to five years imprisonment.

Defences

It is a defence to a water pollution offence if the activity was done in an emergency in order to avoid danger to human health, provided that reasonable steps were taken to minimise pollution and notify the regulator promptly. It is also a defence if the discharge is from a mine that was abandoned before 2000.