Private water supplies: Is the current regulatory framework overly and unnecessarily burdensome on stretched council resources?

‘Local authorities are still not fully delivering their statutory duties which aim to protect public health’ – reports the Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI) in their 13th annual report (DWI England report, published 2024).

In the latest report from the inspectorate, only 37.9% of such water supplies have an up-to-date risk assessment. The report also states that 340 supplies had faecal contamination – but no council served any type of enforcement notice.

Looking back, in 2018, it was a similar theme, with 14 local authorities (LAs) in England failing to provide any reports in the required format. Across England and Wales about 75% of relevant supplies had been risk assessed, and notably councils in England failed to complete 36% of the required supply risk assessments. Also, 88 councils (eight of which were Wales) had not fulfilled their risk assessment duties.

Einstein once said, if you keep doing the same thing repeatedly, expecting differing results, this is a definition of insanity. However, the expectations placed on local council Environmental Health (EH) teams are in fact increasing, with that in mind, its likely things will not improve, at least from a DWI perspective. They will probably get worse.

More recently, councils have seen the regulatory burden further increase, not least:

• Having to ensure those taking water samples to complete a two-day training course at a cost of £495. The training should then be re-certified every 18 months at a further ongoing cost of £369. Compounding this, there is only one business offering this training.
• The day job! Undoubtedly pressures on councils and EH departments are increasing with less resource and challenges relating to expertise. There is currently very limited affordable and accessible training. LAs first became responsible for risk assessment in 2010. As a result, competency of LA risk assessors is questioned, in the main this specialist function is contracted out. Councils are having to do more with less.

So, what is the problem?

Councils differ significantly regarding their water supply demographics. Some don’t have any private water supplies at all. Others like Cornwall have a team dealing with thousands of supplies. In South Kesteven (rural Lincolnshire) we have about 80 supplies, not significant enough to dedicate full time resource but nevertheless a substantial administrative, planning, and financial burden.

The regulatory framework is unusual. EH officers are used to self-regulation, principally where the responsibility for risk assessment and verification sampling lies with the responsible person, employer, landlord etc. The administrative burden of councils doing this work is immense, with protracted logistical issues including laboratory transport and financial aspects such as costing, invoicing, recovering debts and the authority writing them off if not paid. Sampling and analysis costs can be reduced, but only after the council has methodically considered the complexities of scrutinising previous results and understanding overly complex regulations.

Will Hatchett (ex-Environmental Health News editor) wrote a couple of months ago on his LinkedIn profile about ‘the hidden dangers of private water supplies’. He reminded us that private water supplies only serve about 1% of the English population, 2% if you are in Scotland. Will goes on to reaffirm how councils are falling behind with risk assessments and highlights ‘privately distributed system’ regulation (Reg 8), such as caravan parks and shopping centres. This area is causing much confusion, the result being that most LAs are ignoring this area of work.

What is needed to ensure effective enforcement?

According to the DWI councils need to up their game, they directly compare the work they do within the water industry to that of LAs. In April the DWI issued two Water Research Centre (WRc) Reports ‘Impact and Future of the Regulatory Model and Legislative Framework Surrounding Private Water Supplies in England and Wales’. In summary, the reports criticise LAs, suggesting further and stricter regulation including mandatory registration of all private water supplies, mandating single supply risk assessments and new ‘sufficiency’ and regulation around metering of water. Proposed, is generally much more rigour relating to competency, a new governing body with audit function, KPIs etc. One would think the DWI are trying to somewhat mirror the Food Standards Agency?

In my view, if someone wants to benefit financially by using free water direct from the ground, they need to take responsibility and employ a competent person to risk assess, sample and ensure preventative measures are in place to ensure the water is safe to drink. It should not be the council’s job to do this proactive work. Like other proven and effective regulatory frameworks, the council could oversee this duty and step in when non-compliance is evident, as a regulator. EH officers do not carry out health and safety risk assessments for workplaces, nor do we contract gas engineers to ensure appliances are safe for use. And whilst we take food samples when we choose, it is the businesses responsibility to ensure food sold is safe.

In conclusion, if things do not change radically regarding the private water supply regulatory framework, we are likely to see further DWI reporting how councils are failing to do what they expect. Considering the very few numbers of people who become poorly from drinking water from boreholes and other similar sources, I would ask that the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health seeks other council’s views and considers working with the DWI to share professional experience of working with effective frameworks. I am sure we all wish for the same, a proportionate approach, clear and implementable, importantly protecting the public in a pragmatic and deliverable way.