Report on Compliance with the Drinking-water … on Compliance with the Drinking-water Standards for...

Report on Compliance with the Drinking-water Standards for New Zealand 2005 (Revised 2008) and duties under Health Act 1956

FF oo rr PP ee rr ii oo dd :: 11 JJ uu ll yy 22 00 11 44 tt oo 33 00 JJ uu nn ee 22 00 11 55 Drinking Water Supplies: All Hurunui District Council Supplies Water Supplier:

Hurunui District Council South Island Drinking Water Assessment Unit (Christchurch) PO Box 1475, Christchurch 8140 Report Identifier HurunuiDistrictCouncil_DWSNZ2005/08Compliance_010915

Report Identifier: HurunuiDistrictCouncil_DWSNZ2005/08Compliance_010915_v1 Scope 1 Appendix 1 Compliance Report for Network supplies DWSNZ 2005 Version 1: 1 September 2014 of 13

Terminology Non-Compliance = Areas where the drinking water supply did not comply with the Drinking Water Standards for New Zealand 2005 (Revised 2008) (DWSNZ) Treatment Plants Bacterial compliance is under section 4 of the DWSNZ Protozoal compliance is under section 5 of the DWSNZ Cyanotoxin compliance is under section 7 of the DWSNZ Chemical compliance is under section 8 of the DWSNZ Radiological compliance is under section 9 of the DWSNZ

Treatment Plant: Bacterial compliance

Summary of E.coli sampling results

Plant name Number of samples required

Number of samples collected

Number of transgressions

Compliance

Amberley SH1 104 113 1 Compliant

Amuri Rural 52 112 0 Compliant

Ashley Rural 104 112 0 Compliant

Racecourse Road (Amberley Beach/Ashley

North)

52 114 0 Compliant

Awatui (Balmoral) 52 52 1 Non-compliant

Awatui Stand-by (Balmoral)

52 Not used Not used N/A

Bakers Ford (Hawarden-Waikari)

104 111 0 Compliant

Blythe (Hurunui Lower Rural)

52 55 0 Compliant

Cheviot 104 113 2 Compliant

Culverden 52 113 0 Compliant

Hanmer 104 114 0 Compliant

Hurunui #1 Rural (Motunau/Greta/Scargill)

104 113 1 Compliant

Kaiwara 52 55 1 Non-compliant

Kowhai (Amberley Beach/Ashley

North)


Leithfield Beach 52 55 1 Non-compliant

Lower Waitohi 52 53 0 Compliant

Mays Well, Leithfield (Ashley Rural)


Parnassus Rural 52 54 0 Compliant

Peaks 52 53 2 Non-compliant

Upper Waitohi 52 114 3 Non-compliant


Waiau Home Stream (Waiau Rural)

52 51 0 Non-compliant

Waiau Township 52 111 1 Compliant

Waipara Township 52 53 0 Compliant

Summary of compliance with sampling / analytical / remedial / operational requirements All plants were assessed for compliance against Bacterial Compliance Criteria 6A (E.coli monitoring only). 14 of the 20 treatment plants that were in operation during the compliance period met all the requirements to comply with Criteria 6A. This amounts to slightly lower achievement of bacterial compliance than for the previous year, when 16 of 21 treatment plants complied. The overall rate of transgression has however improved. Last year, across all HDC treatment plants there were 22 transgressions from 614 samples (transgression rate of 3.6%). In 2014-2015 there were 13 transgressions from 1834 samples (transgression rate of 0.7%), so this is encouraging to see. Of those 6 plants that did not comply, 5 were due to transgressions (Awatui, Kaiwara, Leithfield Beach, Peaks and Upper Waitohi). Waiau Home Stream plant did not comply due to inadequate sampling. The requirement for E.coli samples to be analysed by a Ministry of Health recognised laboratory was met for all treatment plants.


Treatment Plant: Protozoa compliance

Plant Name

Protozoal Risk Category Log Credit Required

Amberley (SH1) N/A – Interim Secure Groundwater

N/A

All other plants Protozoa risk categorisation has not

been completed for any other source

Default (5)

Summary of Compliance with Risk Categorisation process Other than Amberley (SH1), no other HDC treatment plants/sources comply with the requirement to have had a protozoa risk categorisation completed (for supplies under 10,000 this can either be done by catchment survey or by Cryptosporidium and Giardia monitoring of the raw source water). Amberley (SH1) was signed off by the Drinking Water Assessor (DWA) as meeting the ‘interim secure groundwater’ category in March 2015, so the requirement for protozoa risk categorisation does not apply. Summary of Treatment Processes and associated Log Credits

Plant name Treatment Process1

Potential Log Credit Available

Summary of Turbidity results

Compliance with all other requirements

of criterion2

Log credit achieved

Amberley (SH1)

Interim Secure

N/A N/A Yes N/A

All other plants

None of the plants (see comment below regarding Hanmer Springs) have treatment in

place that meets the protozoa removal/inactivation requirements of the

DWSNZ

No 0

1 Treatment Process meeting DWSNZ definition of available combination of treatment technology 2 Further detail provided below under log credit assessment Summary of Log Credit Assessment Hanmer Springs treatment plant has a validated UV unit in place that is potentially capable of complying with the protozoa requirements of the DWSNZ. However, protozoa compliance cannot be achieved until such time as the protozoa risk categorisation has been completed for the source water(s) and the treatment plant is operating in full compliance with the applicable DWSNZ criterion. A water safety plan implementation visit that was undertaken at the Hanmer Springs supply in November 2014 indicated that there are some issues to be resolved in terms of turbidity removal and measurement and UV Intensity and UVT measurement before this plant will be capable of demonstrating compliance.


Amberley SH1 treatment plant met the protozoa compliance from March 2015 because this is when all the criteria for ‘interim groundwater security’ were demonstrated. Log Credit Total (Total of all Treatment Processes) Achieved: Amberley (SH1) - Protozoa compliant due to interim secure groundwater (From March 2015) All other plants - Protozoa non-compliant due to no log credit achieved

Treatment Plant: Cyanotoxin Compliance Hurunui District Council (HDC) currently do not have cyanobacteria management protocols in place for any supplies that are abstracting (either directly or via a hydraulic link) from surface waters. A number of HDC supplies abstract water via infiltration galleries / shallow wells that are known to be hydraulically linked with rivers that from time to time experience toxic algal blooms (e.g. Hurunui , Ashley, Waitohi , Waiau and Waipara Rivers). The DWA considers the following source waters to be at risk of bloom development:

Amuri / Rotherham (Mouse Point Wells – G00649) – shallow wells linked to Waiau River

Ashley Rural (Ashley Rural Bores – G00139) – shallow wells linked to Ashley River

Cheviot (Waiau River Gallery – G00179) – shallow wells linked to Waiau River

Hurunui Lower/Blythe (Hurunui River 1 – S00511) – shallow well linked to Hurunui River

Kaiwara (Hurunui River 2 – S00512) – shallow well linked to Hurunui River

Lower Waitohi/Karaka (Lower Waitohi Gallery – S00524) – infiltration gallery, Waitohi River

Motunau/Greta/Scargill (Well Hurunui No. 1 – G00143) – infiltration gallery , Hurunui River

Parnassus (Parnassus Well – G00651) – shallow well linked to Waiau River

Peaks (Hurunui Rv 3 – S00513) – shallow well linked to Hurunui River

Waiau township (Waiau River Gallery – G01053) – shallow well linked to Waiau River

Waiau Rural (Home Stream – S00537) – shallow well linked to Home Stream and Waiau River

Waipara (Waipara River – S00538) – shallow wells linked to Waipara River

Waitohi Upper (Upper Waitohi Gallery – S00536) – shallow well linked to Waitohi River

Other surface water supplied schemes that may also be at risk:

Hawarden/Waikari (Bishells Road bore – G01096) – unclear of link with river

Balmoral (Awatui Stream – S00532) – unclear of risk of algal bloom development in stream

Hanmer (Rogerson River – S00443) – unclear of risk of algal bloom in river Summary of Management Protocol Compliance Amberley (SH1), Racecourse Rd, Culverden, Leithfield Beach, Kowhai : N/A – groundwater supplies All other HDC Treatment Plants: Non-compliant – no cyanobacteria management protocol in place Priority 2 (Cyanotoxin) Compliance Not applicable – no Priority 2 for cyanotoxin have been assigned to HDC treatment plants.


Treatment Plant: Chemical compliance All HDC Treatment Plants: A Plumbosolvent water notice was provided to consumers at the specified frequency during the compliance period. Priority 2 Determinands: Monitoring Results All HDC Treatment Plants: Not applicable because none have Priority 2 determinands assigned

Treatment Plant : Radiological compliance Radiological compliance is only applicable to groundwater supplies. Results Summary No HDC treatment plants have had radiological determinands assigned as Priority 2.

Plant Name Number of Samples Taken

Exceedences of MAVs

One in ten year test completed?

Amberley SH1 N/A N/A Yes - completed Oct 2013

Racecourse Road N/A N/A No evidence provided

Kowhai N/A N/A Yes – completed June 2014

Culverden N/A N/A No evidence provided

Leithfield Beach (2014 bore)

N/A N/A Yes – completed June 2014

All other treatment plants/ sources*

N/A N/A N/A – surface waters

* Hawarden-Waikari’s source water (Bishells Rd Bore) will need to have radiological testing completed if it is determined to be groundwater rather than hydraulically linked with surface water. This office has no record of radiological testing on Culverden or Racecourse Road source waters. HDC is encouraged to perform radiological testing on these bores as soon as possible in order to determine the radiological risk (or provide results to the DWA if tests have already been undertaken). The DWSNZ require that radiological determinands are tested every 10 years for bore water supplies that are not considered to be equivalent to surface water.


Distribution Zones Distribution zone bacterial compliance is under section 4.4 of the DWSNZ2005/08 Cyanotoxin compliance is under section 7 of the DWSNZ2005/08 Chemical compliance is under section 8 of the DWSNZ2005/08 The following compliance information is derived from WINZ 6 and WINZ 7 databases.

Distribution Zone: Bacterial compliance Summary of E.coli sampling results

Distribution zone name Number of

samples required

Number of samples collected

Number of transgressions

Compliance

Amberley Beach 12 55 0 Compliant

Amberley 52 55 0 Compliant

Ashley Sefton Rural 52 110 0 Compliant

Balmoral 12 12 0 Compliant

Blythe 12 12 0 Compliant

Broomfield 12 52 0 Compliant

Cheviot 52 55 1 Non-compliant

Gore Bay / Port Robinson

12 55 1 Non-compliant

Culverden 12 82 1 Compliant

Hanmer Springs 52 105 0 Compliant

Hawarden / Waikari 52 52 0 Compliant

Kaiwara 12 12 0 Compliant

Leithfield Beach 12 12 0 Compliant

Leithfield Rural 12 11 0 Non-compliant

Lower Waitohi 12 12 0 Compliant

Motunau/Greta/Scargill 52 55 0 Compliant

Parnassus Rural 12 12 0 Compliant

Peaks Rural 12 12 1 Non-compliant

Rotherham 12 53 0 Compliant

Waiau Rural 12 12 0 Compliant

Waiau Township 12 52 0 Compliant

Waipara 12 12 0 Compliant

Waitohi Upper 12 60 0 Compliant

Summary of compliance with general sampling / analytical / remedial action requirements 19 of 23 distribution zones were fully compliant for E.coli. This is a significant improvement from the previous year, when 15 of 23 distribution zones were compliant. The overall rate of transgression has also improved markedly. In 2014-2015, 4 of 960 samples taken in HDC distribution zones transgressed (0.4% transgression rate) compared to 22 of 727 samples transgressing in 2013-2014 (3.0% transgression rate).


Of those 4 zones that did not comply, 3 were due to transgressions (Cheviot, Gore Bay/Port Robinson and Peaks). Leithfield zone did not comply due to inadequate sampling. The requirement for E.coli samples to be analysed by a Ministry of Health recognised laboratory was met for all distribution zones.

Distribution Zone : Cyanotoxin Compliance All HDC Distribution Zones: Not applicable, no Priority 2 chemicals are assigned.

Distribution Zone : Chemical Compliance All HDC Distribution Zones: Not applicable, no Priority 2 chemicals are assigned.

Summary of Audit Activities to Verify DWSNZ Monitoring Data An audit of E.coli compliance monitoring results was undertaken by the DWA (Kirsty Macleod) at Food and Health Standards NZ Ltd’s office on 30th July 2015. The audit compared the hard copy laboratory reports from AsureQuality against the compliance results that had been entered in WINZ 7. 10 samples from each of the following supplies were randomly selected for audit:

Amberley, Ashley Rural, Kaiwara, Motunau/Greta/Scargill and Waiau Rural

Distribution zone and Treatment plant samples were audited. The audit found that all samples examined during the audit had been accurately reported in WINZ 7.


Summary of DWSNZ Compliance Treatment Plants Full compliance (Bacterial / Protozoa /Chemical / Radiological and Cyanotoxin) was achieved by 1 treatment plant:

Amberley SH1 (From March) Bacterial compliance was achieved by 14 treatment plants:

Amberly SH 1

Amuri Rural

Ashley Rural

Racecourse Rd

Bakers Ford (Hawarden/Waikari)

Blythe

Cheviot

Culverden

Hanmer

Motunau/Greta/Scargill (Hurunui No. 1)

Lower Waitohi

Parnassus Rural

Waiau Township

Waipara Township Bacterial compliance was not achieved by 6 treatment plants:

Awatui (Balmoral)

Kaiwara

Leithfield Beach

Peaks

Upper Waitohi

Distribution zones Full compliance (Bacterial / Chemical) was achieved by 19 distribution zones:

Amberley Beach

Amberley

Ashley Sefton Rural

Balmoral

Blythe

Broomfield

Culverden

Hanmer Springs

Hawarden / Waikari

Kaiwara

Leithfield Bea ch


Lower Waitohi

Motunau / Greta / Scargill

Parnassus Rural

Rotherham

Waiau Rural

Waiau Township

Waipara

Waitohi Upper Bacterial compliance was not achieved by 4 distribution zones:

Cheviot

Gore Bay/Port Robinson,

Leithfield Rural

Peaks Rural

Assessment of Compliance with Duties of drinking-water suppliers under the Act The duties of the water supplier under the Health Act have all been met.

Section 69S – Duty of suppliers in relation to the provision of drinking water

Met for all supplies

This decision is based on the following – Ensuring the provision of an adequate supply of drinking (and stock) water to consumers is one of HDC’s main priorities, as reflected in the Long Term Plan objectives and performance measures. HDC have SCADA equipment in place to remotely monitor factors such as flow and pump outage in order to allow them to be alerted and respond quickly to water outage events. This office has not been notified of any water outage affecting HDC consumers that has lasted greater than 8 hours. HDC have been proactive in the area of ensuring customers on restricted schemes are aware of provision issues by developing and distributing a booklet called ‘You are on a restricted supply’.

Section 69U – Duty to take reasonable steps to contribute to protection of source of drinking water

Met for all supplies

This decision is based on the following – HDC have some mechanisms in place to contribute towards protection of their source waters, including representation on the Hurunui /Waiau Zone Committee (under the Canterbury Water Management Strategy). The water safety plans for the HDC supplies identify improvements in linkages with the planning department to ensure that source protection issues can be adequately considered at the planning stage. HDC is in the process of ensuring that the Source Protection Zones (put in place by the Canterbury Land and Water Regional Plan) are highlighted on the HDC planning maps. HDC have recently raised the issue of assessing the risk of any new applications for discharge or potentially contaminating land-use activities within their Source Protection Zones. Source protection is a very important barrier for all supplies but even more so for many of the HDC supplies that access surface water and are some years away from being treated to meet full DWSNZ compliance.


Section 69ZD – Duty to keep records and make them available Met for all supplies

This decision is based on the following – HDC utilise the WINZ 7 database to record compliance results. Data entry is performed by a contractor, Food and Health Standards NZ Ltd (FHSNZ). In previous years the arrangement has been that the database is hosted by HDC and accessed remotely by FHSNZ. It appears that this arrangement may have changed – during the onsite assessment of complaint management systems, it was observed by the DWA that the HDC WINZ 7 database was out of date, with the most current data being almost a year old. Records are made available to the DWA at the DWA’s request and also routinely via quarterly compliance exports from WINZ 7 (received from FHSNZ). Records in relation to details of supply treatment, risk analysis, source waters and monitoring are maintained in a variety of places including asset management records, assessment of water and sanitary services reports and the water safety plans (all of which have either been approved or are in draft form). Recommendation 1: Although compliance data is available via FHSNZ, HDC should ensure that they have current data readily available in their version of WINZ 7. HDC need to rectify what has occurred to prevent the remote access system being utilised and/or instigate data transfer between the FHSNZ WINZ 7version and the HDC WINZ 7.

Section 69ZE – Duty to investigate complaints Met for all supplies

This decision is based on the following – HDC utilise the Napier Computer System (NCS) database to record and track all complaints in relation to drinking water. The DWA examined HDC’s use of this system during a visit to the HDC office on 10th August 2015. A report on all drinking water related complaints for two of the minor supplies (Amberley and Ashley Rural) was produced for the period 1 Jan 2015 to August 2015. A random selection of complaints was examined to check that appropriate investigation and remedial actions were taken and adequately recorded. Two recommendations were made and discussed with Cynthia Otto during this visit: Recommendation 2: Create a complaint category of ‘potential / alleged health concern’ to tag complaints where complainants are linking health effects with drinking water consumption or contact. This will help to ensure that appropriate staff (e.g. the HDC Environmental Health Officer) are involved where necessary. Recommendation 3: All complaints should be entered on the NCS system regardless of how they are initiated to ensure that this system captures all and can be used for trend reporting. A complaint regarding alleged skin irritation from the MIOX dosing at Ashley Rural (that had also come to the attention of Community and Public Health), did not appear to have been lodged on the system. This complaint may have gone directly to the Environmental Health Officer rather than via Customer Services, or the Utilities Team, but still should have been lodged on the complaint database.


The results in this report relate only to the compliance of the above listed treatment plants and distribution zones. During the 2014-2015 compliance period, Hurunui District Council operated supplies in three categories as defined by the Health Act (Minor, Small and Neighbourhood supplies). The legal requirement to take all practical steps to comply with the drinking water standards applied to Minor supplies (Amberley, Ashley Rural, Cheviot, Hanmer, Hawarden/Waikari and Motunau/Greta/Scargill) from 1 July 2014. The legal requirement to take all practical steps to comply with the DWSNZ applied to Small supplies (Amberley Beach, Amuri Rural, Balmoral, Culverden, Kaiwara, Lower Waitohi, Leithfield Rural, Leithfield Beach, Parnassus, Waiau Township, Waiau Rural, Waitohi Upper and Waipara) from 1 July 2015. The legal requirement to take all practical steps to comply with the drinking water standards applies to Neighbourhood supplies (Peaks, Blythe) from 1 July 2016. Information in this report may be provided to the Ministry of Health at their request. With the exception of the Ministry of Health, this report shall not be reproduced without the approval of the Drinking Water Assessment Unit and Hurunui District Council. Completed: 8 September 2015

Kirsty Macleod Drinking Water Assessor South Island Drinking Water Assessment Unit, Christchurch


Assessment Report Information

Report identifier HurunuiDistrictCouncil_DWSNZ2005/08Compliance_010915_v1

Drinking Water Assessment Unit (Inspection Body)

South Island Drinking Water Assessment Unit PO Box 1475 310 Manchester Street Christchurch Ph 03 3786774

Drinking Water Assessor

Kirsty Macleod

Assessment Date 8 September 2015 (covering compliance period 1 July 2014 to 30 June 2015)

Description of assessment work

Assessment of Compliance with Drinking Water Standards for New Zealand 2005 (Revised 2008) for: Treatment Plants: Amberley SH1 (TP00194), Amuri Rural (TP01076), Ashley Rural (TP00191), Awatui (TP01077), Awatui Stand-by (TP01078), Bakers Ford (TP00195), Blythe Pumphouse (TP00970), Cheviot (TP00198), Culverden(TP01080), Hanmer Springs (TP00197), Hurunui No 1 (TP00196), Kaiwara (TP00971), Kowhai (TP02294), Leithfield Beach (TP01082), Lower Waitohi (TP01081), Mays Well Leithfield (TP00192), Parnassus Rural (TP01083), Peaks Pumphouse (TP00972), Racecourse Rd (TP02880), Upper Waitohi (TP01084), Waiau Home Stream Plant (TP01085), Waiau Township (TP00433), Waipara Township (TP01086). Distribution Zones: Amberley Town (AMB001AT), Amberley Beach (AMB004BE), Broomfield (AMB004BR), Rotherham Township (AMU001RO), Ashley/Sefton Rural (ASH002AS), Balmoral Rural (BAL003BA), Cheviot (CHE001CT), Gore Bay/Port Robinson (CHE001GO), Culverden (CUL001CU), Hanmer Springs (HAN001HA), Hawarden/Waikari (HAW001HW), Blythe Rural (HUR002HU), Kaiwara (KAI039KA), Lower Waitohi (KAR005KA), Leithfield Rural (ASH002LE), Leithfield Beach (LEI004LE), Motunau/Greta/Scargill (MOT016MO), Parnassus Rural (PAR009PA), Peaks Rural (PEA001PE), Waiau Township (WAI026WT), Waitohi Upper (WAI066UP), Waiau Rural (WAI067WA), Waipara Township (WAI068WA)

Equipment Used Water Information New Zealand (WINZ) database versions 6 and 7 were used to review compliance data

Water Supply Owner / Person Responsible

Hurunui District Council (David Edge)

Assessment method Standard assessment as per Scope 1A Procedure Drinking Water Standards for New Zealand 2005(Revised 2008)

Documents and Information

Drinking Water Standards for New Zealand 2005(Revised 2008) Part 2A Health Act 1956

Site of Assessment Community and Public Health Food and Health Standards NZ Ltd (verification of monitoring data) Hurunui District Council (review of complaint management system and records)

Omissions from proposed assessment

Nil

Sub-contracted work Nil

Document checked by: Reynold Ball IANZ Accredited Drinking Water Assessor 9.9.2015

Release of report authorised by:

Kirsty Macleod IANZ Accredited Drinking Water Assessor

Signature: Date: 10.09.2015

If you do not agree with the findings of this report a written appeal must be lodged with the Technical Manager, South Island Drinking Water Assessment Unit, PO Box 1475, Christchurch within 2 months of receipt of this report. The Technical Manager will arrange for a review to be undertaken using the Ministry of Health appeals procedure.

Report on Compliance with the Drinking-water … on Compliance with the Drinking-water Standards for...

Documents

Transcript of Report on Compliance with the Drinking-water … on Compliance with the Drinking-water Standards for...