DEPARTMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT
ENVIRONMENT DIVISION
WATER (JERSEY) LAW 1972
ARTICLE 10 – DUTY TO MONITOR
(Public)
Purpose of the Report
The Minister for Planning and Environment (The Minister) is requested to approve the proposed monitoring programme of treated water for 2013 that was submitted by The Jersey New Waterworks Company Limited (Jersey Water).
Background
Under Article 10(4) of the Water (Jersey) Law, 1972 as Amended, Jersey Water is required to submit its monitoring programme for treated water each year for the approval by The Minister.
Discussion
The monitoring programme submitted has been reviewed by the Department of the Environment in consultation with Health Protection of Health and Social Services and is deemed fit for purpose.
A copy of the proposed monitoring schedule for 2013 is attached to this report.
The monitoring programme is based on best practice in England and Wales in accordance with The Water Supply (Water Quality) Regulations 2000 (England and Wales).
Jersey Water continues to move towards a targeted and cost-effective risk-based approach to its monitoring programme; whereby the sampling frequency, location and the determinants sampled is based on a thorough examination of use (likely occurrence within Jersey Waters) and risk to the water supply/consumer.
This approach will also allow monitoring resources to be re-directed towards areas of concern on the raw water network complementing the introduction of Water Safety Plans (a catchment, risk-based approach to resource management)
Jersey Water proposes the following changes to its 2013 monitoring schedule:
- The reduction from the standard monitoring frequency regime, as set out in the Water Supply (Water Quality) Regulations 2000 (England and Wales) to those as set out in Tables 2 and 3 of the Proposed Regulatory Monitoring Schedule;
- Ceasing to monitor for Clostridium perfringen;
- Ceasing to monitor for Chlorthal-dimethyl and 1,3-Dichloropropene (cis and trans);
- Increasing monitoring for cyanide.
Jersey Water’s advisor on Water Quality is Professor John Fawell MBE, a leading consultant who principally advises the World Health Organisation on water quality matters and standards.
With respect to the first proposed change, Professor Fawell has provided a commentary to support the amendment to the monitoring programme, which is attached as Appendix 1.
The proposal to cease the monitoring for Clostridium perfringen is due to the fact that the spores are not susceptible to chemical disinfection and are used as an indicator of the efficiency of filtration. Jersey Water continuously monitors for turbidity which is seen as the better parameter.
The cessation of monitoring for Chlorthal-dimethyl and 1,3-Dichloropropene (cis and trans) is deemed a reasonable risk based approach, given that Chlorthal-dimethyl was banned from use in the Island in 1997 and has not been detected within the water supply since 1998. Similarly, 1,3-Dichloropropene (cis and trans) has not been detected within the water supply since 1998.
The proposal to increase monitoring for cyanide is due to the fact that it can be formed in distribution from cyanogen chloride, one of the main disinfection by-products of chloramination.
Recommendation
- The Minister approves the proposed monitoring programme submitted by Jersey Water for the calendar year 2013.
ii. Notify Jersey Water confirming approval of the monitoring programme for 2013.
Written by: Head of Water Resources, Environment Department
Approved by:
Attachments:
Proposed Regulatory Monitoring Schedule for the Year 2013- Jersey Water
[File Ref]
Ministerial Decision ref:
12 November 2012
Proposed Regulatory Monitoring Schedule For The Year 2013
Water Supply Zones
The sampling frequencies previously used were based on the population size of the zone as set in the England & Wales The Water Supply (Water Quality) Regulations 2000. Please read the attached document and references explaining the reasoning for the reduction of sampling frequencies, and in some cases removal of parameters.
The proposed sampling frequency per zone is highlighted in bold.
Table 2
Check monitoring |
Parameter | Standard (previous sampling rate) | Proposed |
E.coli | 12 per 5,000 population ie 240 | 12 per 5,000 population ie 240 |
Coliform bacteria |
Residual disinfectant |
Aluminium | 76 | 76 |
Ammonium | 76 | 76 |
Clostridium perfringens | 76 | 0 1 |
Colony counts | 76 | 76 |
Colour | 76 | 76 |
Conductivity | 76 | 76 |
Cyanide 2 | Sampled as audit (8) | 76 |
Hydrogen ion | 76 | 76 |
Iron | 76 | 76 |
Manganese | 76 | 76 |
Nitrate | 76 | 76 |
Nitrite | 76 | 76 |
Odour | 76 | 76 |
Taste | 76 | 76 |
Turbidity | 76 | 76 |
Please see the appendix for all references.
Table 2 (cont’d)
Audit monitoring |
Parameter | Standard (present sampling rate) | Proposed |
Aluminium | Sample as check | Sample as check |
Antimony | 8 | 1 3 |
Arsenic | 8 | 1 4 |
Benzene | 8 | 1 5 |
Benzo(a)pyrene | 8 | 0 6 |
Boron | 8 | 1 7 |
Cadmium | 8 | 1 8 |
Chromium | 8 | 1 9 |
Copper | 8 | 8 |
Cyanide | 8 | Sample as check |
1,2 dichloroethane | 8 | 1 10 |
Enterococci | 8 | 8 |
Fluoride | 8 | 0 - TW only 11 |
Iron | Sample as check | Sample as check |
Lead | 8 | 8 |
Manganese | Sample as check | Sample as check |
Mercury | 8 | 0 12 |
Nickel | 8 | 1 13 |
Nitrate | Sample as check | Sample as check |
Nitrite | Sample as check | Sample as check |
Pesticides and related products | 8 | 8 |
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons | 8 | 0 6 |
Selenium | 8 | 1 14 |
Sodium | 8 | 1 15 |
Trichloroethene | 8 | 1 10 |
Tetrachloroethene | 8 | 1 10 |
Trihalomethanes | 8 | 8 |
Chloride | 8 | 1 16 |
Sulphate | 8 | 1 16 |
Total organic carbon | 8 | 8 |
Tritium | 8 | 0 17 |
Gross alpha | 8 | 4 18 |
Gross beta | 8 | 4 18 |
Please see the appendix for all references.
The Company uses aluminium sulphate as a flocculant in the primary treatment process, therefore the sample frequency for aluminium will be at the check monitoring frequency.
As the water the Company uses originates from, or is influenced by, surface waters, the sampling frequency for iron and manganese will be at the check monitoring frequency.
The Company uses the chloramination disinfection process, therefore the sampling frequency for nitrate and nitrite will be at the check monitoring frequency.
Treatment Works and Supply Points
The Company has two water treatment works located at Augres WTW and Handois WTW. Both treatment works use clarifiers (chemical assisted sedimentation) for primary treatment, followed by rapid gravity filtration using dual media (anthracite and sand). During 2011 Augres WTW supplied an average of 10,331 m3/d and Handois WTW 9,264 m3/d.
The Company has a treated water service reservoirs (SR) at Westmount Road, St. Helier (9Ml capacity) and Les Platons, Trinity (9Ml capacity).
For the purpose of the monitoring regulations, Augres WTW and Handois WTW will be referred to as treatment works and all of the above sites (Augres WTW, Handois WTW, Westmount SR and Les Platons SR) will count as supply points.
Table 3 in schedule 3 of the Regulations sets out the frequency of sampling the treatment works or supply points as listed below. The proposed sampling frequencies are highlighted in bold.
Table 3
Item no | Substances and parameters | Standard (present sampling rate) | Proposed |
1 | E.coli | 208 | 208 |
2 | Coliform bacteria | 208 | 208 |
3 | Colony counts | 208 | 208 |
4 | Nitrite | 208 (104) | 104 |
5 | Residual disinfectant | 208 | 208 |
6 | Turbidity | 208 | 208 |
Subject to check monitoring |
7 | Clostridium perfringens | 52 | 0 1 |
8 | Conductivity | 52 | 52 |
Subject to audit monitoring |
9 | Benzene | 8 | 1 5 |
10 | Boron | 8 | 1 7 |
11 | Bromate | 8 | 8 |
12 | Cyanide | 8 | 8 |
13 | 1,2 dichloroethane | 8 | 1 10 |
14 | Fluoride | 8 | 1 11 |
15 | Mercury | 8 | 0 12 |
16 | Nitrite | Sample as check | Sample as check |
17 | Pesticides and related products | 8 | 8 |
18 | Trichloroethene } Tetrachloroethene } | 8 | 1 10 |
19 | Tetrachloromethane | 8 | 1 10 |
20 | Chloride | 8 | 1 16 |
21 | Sulphate | 8 | 1 16 |
22 | Total organic carbon | 8 | 8 |
23 | Tritium | 8 | 0 17 |
24 | Gross alpha | 8 | 4 18 |
25 | Gross beta | 8 | 4 18 |
Please see the appendix for all references.
Parameters labelled as items 1 to 6 for sampling at the treatment works only.
Parameters labelled as items 7 to 25 are for sampling at supply points.
The Company uses the chloramination disinfection process, therefore the sampling frequency for nitrite will be at the check monitoring frequency as listed under item 4 in table 3.
The Company does not add sodium hypochlorite after the water has left the treatment works, therefore audit monitoring for bromate (a possible disinfection by-product) shall take place at the supply points.
Check monitoring of nitrite at the treatment works will continue at the reduced rate - results for the last two years have been well below the EU regulatory limit of 0.1 mg/l, the highest result being 0.010 mg/l.
It is proposed that analysis for the parameters given in the monitoring schedules will be undertaken by either the Company laboratory or their consulting analysts.
16th May 2012
Pesticides analysed for at the supply points and in the supply zone
Of the 38 pesticides analysed in 2012 it is proposed that Jersey Water stop analysing for the presence of chlorthal-dimethyl and 1,3-Dichloropropene (cis and trans). Chlorthal-dimethyl was banned from use in the Island in 1997 and withdrawn from stores in 1998. This product has been monitored since 1997 once Eurofins (then Southern Water) could distinguish between it and chlorthal, the breakdown product. The maximum amount found was 0.083ug/l in 1997 and it hasn’t been detected since 1998.
1,3-Dichloropropene (cis and trans) similarly hasn’t been detected since 1998.
Phenoxyalkanoic Acid Herbicides Oxynil Herbicides
Pentachlorophenol (PCP) 2,4-D.B. Bromoxynil
M.C.P.A. Chlorthal Ioxynil
2,4-D Triclopyr
Mecoprop Dichlorprop Triazole
2,4,5-Trichlorophenoxyacetic acid Dicamba
2,3,6-Trichlorobenzoic acid M.C.P.B Propiconazole
Tebuconazole
Urea Herbicides Triazines
Chlortoluron Isoproturon Atrazine Simazine
Linuron Diuron Prometryn Propazine
Carbetamide Monolinuron Trietazine Terbutryn
Methabenzthiazuron Terbuthylazine Cyanazine
Carbamate Others
Chlorpropham Glyphosate
Oxamyl Bentazone
Appendix
Professor John Fawell, a leading consultant who advises the World Health Organisation on water quality matters, has been sought by Jersey Water to give independent advice on sampling frequencies. Using a risk assessment based approach will allow the Company to target areas which are of concern and will fully complement the introduction of the Water Safety Plan in the near future.
Professor Fawell is of the opinion that:
1 Monitoring for Clostridium perfringens is at best a check on filtration efficiency rather than anything else. He says:
“The spores of Clostridium perfringens are not susceptible to chemical disinfection but have been used as an indicator of the efficiency of filtration. This parameter was included in the Directive as a surrogate for Cryptosporidium but since then it has been shown that it is a very poor surrogate and the proposal was that in a revised directive this would be removed and become optional for member states to include in national regulations if desired. The current monitoring programme for Clostridium is not efficient and serves little useful purpose.”
“We have already discussed Clostridium and how this is not very helpful at the monitoring frequency and at the sample points required. In view of the very low frequency of detection and the lack of any pattern the only purpose would be to check the effectiveness of filtration but turbidity is a better parameter, particularly as it can be measured continuously.”
2 “In view of the higher cyanide concentrations we have seen I think we may want to consider increasing operational monitoring in distribution for this parameter because this is formed in distribution from cyanogens chloride, one of the main disinfection by-products from chloramination.”
For this reason Jersey Water will increase cyanide analysis from audit monitoring to check monitoring frequency.
3 Antimony: “This is mostly an issue for some distribution alloys but is only seen at very low concentrations more than ten-fold less than the highest concentrations seen on the Island. We can demonstrate this from the historical data. I would suggest that we could reduce monitoring to one per year or even one every two years.”
4 Arsenic: “This is primarily a ground water contaminant and has only been seen, not surprisingly, has only been seen at a maximum of greater than tenfold less than the standard. The levels have been stable and monitoring once every two or three years would be adequate.”
5 Benzene: “This comes from hydrocarbon pollution but actually is not a good marker. It can penetrate plastic pipes but routine monitoring is not a good way of ensuring you pick it up. I would suggest no more than once a year unless it is picked up in an analytical suite that contains other substances to be monitored more frequently. Risk assessment will help significantly and it is about prevention of petroleum hydrocarbon spills. There are other substances in greater quantity that cause taste and odour at low concentrations and so it is not really a surface water contaminant that is routinely present.”
6 Benzo(a)pyrene and PAH: “These are basically the same. They both come from coal tar linings and B(a)P is pretty well always associated with sediment particles. We have consistently shown that there are no coal tar lined cast-iron mains on the Island so it would be reasonable to not monitor at all.”
7 Boron: “Really need to restrict this to the desalinated water and only very occasionally, perhaps annually. There are no boron sources on the Island and your surface waters are not impacted by sewage. It should be noted that the new WHO GV has been increased to 2.4 mg/litre.”
8 Cadmium: “This is primarily a distribution-related contaminant from galvanised iron and one or two other sources. It can be in some phosphate fertilizers but since we never see it, it would be reasonable to limit monitoring to once every one or two years.”
9 Chromium: “This is a possible distribution contaminant but also in surface and groundwater where there is a significant discharge. We only ever see traces on Jersey and so monitoring could be significantly reduced in line with other metals.”
10 1,2-dichloroethane, trichloro and tetrachloroethene: “These are industrial chemicals that are only an issue in some groundwaters. They are not found above trace concentrations in surface waters and as such very much reduced monitoring would be appropriate.”
11 Fluoride: “There is no artificial fluoridation and only traces of fluoride in Island water. Reduced monitoring by just looking at the treatment works and only once a year.”
12 Mercury: “Recommended for removal from the Directive. I have never encountered it at above trace concentrations in drinking water anywhere in the world. Really no need to monitor.”
13 Nickel: “Can be found in some groundwater and from industrial discharges. It is primarily associated with nickel and chromium plating of taps, there is no sign of a source on the island and so a reduced monitoring regime would be appropriate.”
14 Selenium: “Rarely found in drinking water sources at significant concentrations. Historical evidence shows that it is not found on the Island at above trace concentrations so a very much reduced monitoring would be appropriate.”
15 Sodium: “Is only a problem with regard to taste at very high concentrations but the nature of the Island means it will be found in surface water. However, concentrations have proved to be low and so a reduced monitoring regime would be appropriate.”
16 Chloride and sulphate: “present at quite low concentrations on Jersey and only of concern with regard to taste.”
17+18 Radioactivity. “Radioactivity in water on the Island is low and there is a substantial body of data over the past few years to demonstrate that it is stable and below the screening values. Our risk assessment for water safety plans will show any man-made sources of radioactivity on the Island and appropriate procedures would be put in place to warn of ant spills. Routine monitoring is of little value in this respect. In terms of natural radioactivity, any change will be gradual and the margin of safety is substantial. I would, therefore, regard quarterly sampling as more than adequate and even biannual or annual sampling would provide adequate warning of a change.”
gov.je