The Natural Mineral Water, Spring Water and Bottled Drinking Water (England) Regulations 2007

• (1) For the purpose of paragraph 18(1)(b) and 19(1)(b), the performance criterion for uncertainty of measurement (k = 2) for a parameter specified in the first column of the table in Section 2 is not less than the percentage specified in the second column of the table of the concentration for the parameter specified in the second column of the table in Part 3 of Schedule 2.

• (2) Food authorities must estimate uncertainty of measurement for a parameter specified in the first column of the table in Section 2 at the level of the concentration for the parameter specified in the second column of the table in Part 3 of Schedule 2.

SECTION2 — Minimum performance characteristics for a method of analysis

Parameters	Uncertainty of measurement - percentage of the parametric concentration	Other requirements relating to the uncertainty of measurement	Other requirements
Antimony	40
Arsenic	30
Benzene	40
Benzo(a)pyrene	50	Where there is no method of analysis for benzo(a)pyrene that has an uncertainty of measurement that does not exceed 50%, the best available method of analysis with an uncertainty of measurement not exceeding 60% must be used.
Boron	25
Bromate	40
Cadmium	25
Chromium	30
Copper	25
Cyanide	30		The method of analysis must determine total cyanide in all forms.
1,2-dichloroethane	40
Fluoride	20
Lead	25
Mercury	30
Nickel	25
Nitrate	15
Nitrite	20
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons—
(a) individual substance	25
(b) total substances	50
Selenium	40
Tetrachloroethenes—
(a) individual substance	50
(b) total substances	30
Trichloroethenes—
(a) individual substance	50
(b) total substances	40
Trihalomethanes—
(a) individual substance	25
(b) total substances	40

SECTION3 — Alternative minimum performance characteristics for a method of analysis that may be used until the end of 31st December 2019

Parameters	Trueness - percentage of the parametric concentration	Precision -percentage of the parametric concentration	Limit of detection -percentage of the parametric concentration	Other requirements
Antimony	25	25	25
Arsenic	10	10	10
Benzene	25	25	25
Benzo(a)pyrene	25	25	25
Boron	10	10	10
Bromate	25	25	25
Cadmium	10	10	10
Chromium	10	10	10
Copper	10	10	10
Cyanide	10	10	10	The method of analysis must determine total cyanide in all forms.
1,2-dichloroethane	25	25	10
Fluoride	10	10	10
Lead	10	10	10
Mercury	20	10	20
Nickel	10	10	10
Nitrate	10	10	10
Nitrite	10	10	10
Pesticide – individual substance	25	25	25
Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons—
(a) individual substance	25	25	25
(b) total substances	25	25	25
Selenium	10	10	10
Tetrachloroethenes—
(a) individual substance	50	50	50
(b) total substances	25	25	10
Trichloroethenes—
(a) individual substance	50	50	50
(b) total substances	25	25	10
Trihalomethanes—
(a) individual substance	25	25	25
(b) total substances	25	25	10

PART6 — Monitoring obligations relating to radon

Representative surveys

22

• (1) Each food authority must undertake representative surveys to determine the scale and nature of likely exposure to radon originating from different types of groundwater sources and wells in different geological areas within its area.

• (2) The representative surveys must be designed in such a way that underlying parameters determining the likely exposure to radon, including the geology and hydrology of the area, the radioactivity of the rock types and soil types within the area and the type of wells within the area, can be identified and used to determine whether any source or well within the food authority’s area is in an area of likely high exposure to radon.

Monitoring obligation

23

Each food authority must monitor the concentration of radon in any water in its area to which this Schedule applies unless an exemption from monitoring under paragraph 24 is in force.

Exemption

24

• (1) A food authority is not required to monitor the concentration of radon in any water in its area if—

• (a) on the basis of an assessment of representative surveys, monitoring data and such other information that it considers to be reliable, it is satisfied that the activity concentration of radon in the water does not exceed 100 Bq/l and has decided that it is unlikely to do so for at least five years beginning with the day after the day on which it comes to that decision (“assessment decision”),

• (b) it notifies the Secretary of State of its assessment decision and provides the Secretary of State with a copy of the representative surveys, monitoring data and any other information that the authority took into account in coming to that decision,

• (c) it notifies the Secretary of State that, on the basis of its assessment decision, the authority has decided not to monitor the activity concentration of radon in the water for a period of five years beginning with the day after the day on which the notification is submitted to the Secretary of State, and

• (d) in a case where sub-paragraph (2) applies, the food authority is satisfied that the activity concentration of radon in the water is unlikely to exceed 100 Bq/l for a period of five years beginning with the day after the day on which the food authority submits the notification under paragraph (c).

• (2) This sub-paragraph applies where a notification under sub-paragraph (1)(c) is submitted more than three months after the day after the day on which a food authority makes an assessment decision under sub-paragraph (1)(a).

• (3) A notification submitted by a food authority under sub-paragraph (1) may relate to all or some of the water in its area to which this Schedule applies.

• (4) The exemption from monitoring provided for in sub-paragraph (1) lapses after a period of five years beginning with the day after the day on which the food authority submits the notification referred to in sub-paragraph (1)(c).

• (5) But the exemption lapses immediately if the food authority becomes aware (by whatever means) at any time during the five year exemption period that the activity concentration of radon in the water exceeds 100 Bq/l or it has reason to suspect that the activity concentration of radon in the water may exceed 100 Bq/l.

Analysis of sample

25

• (1) Where it is necessary under paragraph 23 for a food authority to monitor any water in its area to which this Schedule applies, the food authority must analyse a sample of the water to determine whether the activity concentration of radon in the water in that sample exceeds 100 Bq/l.

• (2) The food authority must analyse the sample using a method of analysis that is capable of measuring the activity concentration of radon in the water with a level of detection not exceeding 10 Bq/l.

• (3) The limit of detection for a method of analysis relating to the activity concentration of radon must be calculated in accordance with ISO Standard ISO 11929:2010(en) entitled “Determination of the characteristic limits (decision threshold, detection limit and limits of the confidence interval) for measurements of ionizing radiation - Fundamentals and application” published by the International Organization for Standardization on 24th February 2010, with probabilities of errors of the first and second kind of 0.05 each.

• (4) In relation to the limit of detection, the uncertainty of measurement must be calculated and reported as complete standard uncertainties, or as expanded standard uncertainties with an expansion factor of 1.96, in accordance with ISO/IEC Guide 98-3:2008 (JCGM/WG1/100) entitled “Uncertainty of measurement — Part 3: Guide to the expression of uncertainty in measurement (GUM:1995)” published by the International Organization for Standardization on 30th September 2008, as amended by—

• (a) ISO/IEC Guide 98-3:2008/Suppl 1:2008 (JCGM/WG1/101) entitled “Propagation of distributions using a Monte Carlo method” published by the International Organization for Standardization on 20th November 2010, and

• (b) ISO/IEC Guide 98-3:2008/Suppl 2:2011 (JCGM/WG1/102) entitled “Extension to any number of output quantities” published by the International Organization for Standardization on 9th November 2011.

Action following the result of analysis

26

• (1) This paragraph applies if the result of an analysis of a sample of water carried out by a food authority under paragraph 25, or under any other provision of this Schedule, detects an activity concentration of radon exceeding 100 Bq/l.

• (2) If an activity concentration of radon exceeding 1,000 Bq/l is detected in a sample of water, the food authority must take action under paragraph 57 (remedial action).

• (3) If an activity concentration of radon exceeding 100 Bq/l but not exceeding 1,000 Bq/l is detected in a sample of water (“Sample X”), the food authority must—

• (a) take and analyse an extra sample of the water as soon as reasonably practicable after the result of Sample X is detected to determine the activity concentration of radon in the extra sample;

• (b) if the food authority considers it appropriate to do so, continue taking and analysing extra samples of the water to determine the activity concentration of radon in those samples at such intervals and for such period as the food authority, taking into account the provisions of sub-paragraphs (4) to (6), considers appropriate.

• (4) The food authority must, disregarding the result of Sample X, determine the average of the activity concentration of radon in the water for such 12 month period as the authority considers appropriate (whether the 12 month period used by the food authority for the purpose of its monitoring programme or some other 12 month period) on the basis of—

• (a) the results of the analyses of samples of the water carried out before the determination of the result of Sample X,

• (b) the result of the analysis of the extra sample under sub-paragraph (3)(a), and

• (c) where extra samples are taken under sub-paragraph (3)(b), the results of the analyses of those extra samples.

• (5) No further action by the food authority is required if the outcome of the determination under sub-paragraph (4) is that the average of the activity concentration of radon in the water for the relevant 12 month period does not exceed 100 Bq/l.

• (6) The food authority must take action under paragraph 57(1) (remedial action) if the outcome of the determination under sub-paragraph (4) is that the average of the activity concentration of radon in the water for the relevant 12 month period exceeds 100 Bq/l.

• (7) Sub-paragraphs (3) to (6) do not apply if the food authority is of the opinion that—

• (a) even if it took extra samples under sub-paragraph (3) to enable it to determine the activity concentration of radon in those extra samples, it would have insufficient results from previous determinations relating to the activity concentration of radon in the water to enable it to make the determination required by sub-paragraph (4) within such period as the food authority considers to be reasonable, or

• (b) for some other reason, the result of such a determination under sub-paragraph (4), based on the results of those extra samples and previous determinations, may give a distorted result.

• (8) Where an activity concentration of radon exceeding 100 Bq/l but not exceeding 1,000 Bq/l is detected in a sample of water and, by virtue of sub-paragraph (7), sub-paragraphs (3) to (6) do not apply, a food authority must take action under paragraph 57(1).

Taking of samples: reduced frequency

27

• (1) A food authority may, from time to time, decide to reduce the frequency at which it takes and analyses samples of any water in its area under paragraph 25 to determine the activity concentration of radon in the water where—

• (a) the result of the analysis of the last sample of the water carried out by the food authority shows that the activity concentration of radon in the water does not exceed 100 Bq/l,

• (b) that result, taken together with the results of such other analyses of the water previously carried out by the food authority as it considers relevant to its decision, show that the activity concentration of radon in the water is stable, and

• (c) the authority is satisfied that the change in the monitoring arrangements will not increase any risk to human health.

• (2) A food authority that has made a decision under sub-paragraph (1) to reduce the frequency at which it takes samples of any water, may decide at any time to start taking samples of the water again at the frequency provided for in the table in Part 3 or, in accordance with sub-paragraph (1), at some other reduced frequency.

Treated bottled drinking water

28

The provisions of this Part, except for paragraph 27, apply to bottled drinking water that has been treated to reduce the level of radionuclides in the water in the same way as it applies to water that has not been treated in that way.

PART7 — Monitoring obligations relating to tritium

Monitoring obligation

29

Each food authority must monitor the activity concentration of tritium in any water in its area to which this Schedule applies if an anthropogenic source of tritium or other artificial radionuclide is present within the catchment area, unless an exemption from monitoring under paragraph 30 is in force.

Exemption

30

• (1) A food authority is not required to monitor the activity concentration of tritium in any water in its area if—

• (a) on the basis of an assessment of representative surveys, monitoring data and such other information as it considers to be reliable, it is satisfied that the activity concentration of tritium in the water does not exceed 100 Bq/l and has decided that it is unlikely to do so for at least five years beginning with the day after the day on which it comes to that decision (“assessment decision”),

• (b) it notifies the Secretary of State of its assessment decision and provides the Secretary of State with a copy of the representative surveys, monitoring data and any other information that the authority took into account in coming to that decision,

• (c) it notifies the Secretary of State that, on the basis of its assessment decision, the authority has decided not to monitor the activity concentration of tritium in the water for a period of five years beginning with the day after the day on which the notification is submitted to the Secretary of State, and

• (d) in a case where sub-paragraph (2) applies, the food authority is satisfied that the activity concentration of tritium in the water is unlikely to exceed 100 Bq/l for a period of five years beginning with the day after the day on which the food authority submits the notification under paragraph (c) to the Secretary of State.

• (2) This sub-paragraph applies where a notification under sub-paragraph (1)(c) is submitted more than three months after the day after the day on which a food authority makes an assessment decision under sub-paragraph (1)(a).

• (3) A notification submitted by a food authority under sub-paragraph (1) may relate to all or some of the water in its area to which this Schedule applies.

• (4) The exemption from monitoring provided for in sub-paragraph (1) lapses after a period of five years beginning with the day after the day on which the food authority submits the notification referred to in sub-paragraph (1)(c).

• (5) But the exemption lapses immediately if the food authority becomes aware (by whatever means) at any time during the five year exemption period that the activity concentration of tritium in the water exceeds 100 Bq/l or it has reason to suspect that the activity concentration of tritium in the water may exceed 100 Bq/l.

Analysis of sample

31

• (1) Where it is necessary under paragraph 29 for a food authority to monitor any water in its area to which this Schedule applies, the food authority must analyse a sample of the water to determine whether the activity concentration of tritium exceeds 100 Bq/l.

• (2) The food authority must analyse the sample using a method of analysis that is capable of measuring the activity concentration of tritium in the water with a level of detection not exceeding 10 Bq/l.

• (3) The provisions in paragraph 25(3) and (4) (relating to the calculation and reporting of the limit of detection) apply in the same way to the calculation of the limit of detection for a method of analysis used to measure the activity concentration of tritium as they apply to the calculation and reporting of the limit of detection for a method of analysis used to measure the activity concentration of radon.

Action following the results of analysis

32

• (1) This paragraph applies if the result of an analysis of a sample of any water carried out by a food authority under paragraph 31, or under any other provision of this Schedule, detects an activity concentration of tritium exceeding 100 Bq/l in that sample (“Sample X”).

• (2) The food authority must—

• (a) take and analyse an extra sample of the water as soon as reasonably practicable after the result of Sample X is detected by it to determine the activity concentration of tritium in the extra sample,

• (b) if the food authority considers it appropriate to do so, continue taking and analysing extra samples of the water to determine the activity concentration of tritium in those samples at such intervals and for such period as the food authority, taking into account sub-paragraphs (3) to (5), considers appropriate,

• (c) determine, by analysis, the gross alpha activity and gross beta activity of the water using water from the same sample, and

• (d) taking into account such information about likely sources of radioactivity affecting the water as the food authority considers relevant, analyse a sample of the water (whether water from the same sample or from a different sample of the water) to determine whether such other artificial radionuclides as the food authority may consider relevant are present in the water.

• (3) The food authority must, disregarding the result of Sample X, determine the average of the activity concentration of tritium in the water for such 12 month period as the authority considers appropriate (whether the 12 month period used by the food authority for the purpose of its monitoring programme or some other 12 month period) on the basis of—

• (a) the results of the analyses of samples of the water carried out before the determination of the result of Sample X,

• (b) the result of the analysis of the extra sample under sub-paragraph (2)(a), and

• (c) where extra samples are taken under sub-paragraph (2)(b), the results of the analyses of those extra samples.

• (4) No further action by the food authority is required if the outcome of the determination under sub-paragraph (3) is that the average of the activity concentration of tritium in the water for the relevant 12 month period does not exceed 100 Bq/l.

• (5) The food authority must take action under paragraph 57(1) (remedial action) if the outcome of the determination under sub-paragraph (3) is that the average of the activity concentration of tritium in the water for the relevant 12 month period exceeds 100 Bq/l.

• (6) Sub-paragraphs (2)(a) and (b) and (3) to (5) do not apply if the food authority is of the opinion that—

• (a) even if it took extra samples under sub-paragraph (2)(a) and (b) to enable it to determine the activity concentration of tritium in those extra samples, it would have insufficient results from previous determinations relating to the activity concentration of tritium in the water to enable it to make the determination required by sub-paragraph (3) within such period as the food authority considers to be reasonable, or

• (b) for some other reason, the result of such a determination under sub-paragraph (3) based on the results of those extra samples and previous determinations may give a distorted result.

• (7) Where an activity concentration of tritium exceeding 100 Bq/l is detected in a sample of water and, by virtue of sub-paragraph (6), sub-paragraphs (2)(a) and (b) and (3) to (5) do not apply, the food authority must take action under paragraph 57(1).

• (8) Where a determination of the gross alpha activity and gross beta activity must be made by a food authority under sub-paragraph (2)(c), the food authority must apply the provisions of paragraph 38(2) to (8), in the case of gross alpha activity, and paragraph 39(2) to (8), in the case of gross beta activity, in carrying out that determination and deciding what further action, if any, to take.

Taking of samples: reduced frequency

33

• (1) A food authority may, from time to time, decide to reduce the frequency at which it takes and analyses samples of any water in its area under paragraph 31 to determine the activity concentration of tritium in the water where—

• (a) the result of the analysis of the last sample of the water carried out by the food authority shows that the activity concentration of tritium in the water does not exceed 100 Bq/l,

• (b) that result, taken together with the results of such other analyses of the water previously carried out by the food authority as it considers relevant to its decision, show that the activity concentration of tritium in the water is stable, and

• (c) the authority is satisfied that the change in the monitoring arrangements will not increase any risk to human health.

• (2) A food authority which has made a decision under sub-paragraph (1) to reduce the frequency at which it takes samples of water, may decide at any time to start taking samples of the water again at the frequency provided for in the table in Part 3 or, in accordance with sub-paragraph (1), at some other reduced frequency.

Treated bottled drinking water

34

The provisions of this Part, except for paragraph 33, apply to bottled drinking water that has been treated to reduce the level of radionuclides in the water in the same way as it applies to water that has not been treated in that way.

PART8 — Monitoring obligations relating to indicative dose

SECTION1 — General

Monitoring obligation

35

If a source of artificial or elevated natural radioactivity is present in a food authority’s area, it must monitor the indicative dose for any water in its area to which this Schedule applies unless an exemption from monitoring under paragraph 36 is in force.

Exemption

36

• (1) A food authority is not required to monitor the indicative dose for any water in its area to which this Schedule applies if—

• (a) on the basis of representative surveys, monitoring data and such other information that it considers to be reliable, it is satisfied that the indicative dose for the water does not exceed 0.10 mSv and has decided that it is unlikely to do so for at least five years beginning with the day after the day on which it comes to that decision (“assessment decision”),

• (b) it notifies the Secretary of State of its assessment decision and provides the Secretary of State with a copy of the representative surveys, monitoring data and any other information that the authority took into account in coming to that decision,

• (c) it notifies the Secretary of State that, on the basis of its assessment decision, the authority has decided not to monitor the indicative dose for the water for a period of five years beginning with the day after the day on which the notification is submitted to the Secretary of State, and

• (d) in a case where sub-paragraph (2) applies, the food authority is satisfied that the indicative dose for the water is unlikely to exceed 0.10 mSv for a period of five years beginning with the day after the day on which the food authority submits the notification under paragraph (c) to the Secretary of State.

• (2) This sub-paragraph applies where a notification under sub-paragraph (1)(c) is submitted more than three months after the day after the day on which a food authority makes an assessment decision under sub-paragraph (1)(a).

• (3) A notification submitted by a food authority under sub-paragraph (1) may relate to all or some of the water in its area to which this Schedule applies.

• (4) The exemption from monitoring provided for in sub-paragraph (1) lapses after a period of five years beginning with the day after the day on which the food authority submits the notification referred to in sub-paragraph (1)(c).

• (5) But the exemption lapses immediately if the food authority becomes aware (by whatever means) at any time during the five year exemption period that the indicative dose for the water exceeds 0.10 mSv or it has reason to suspect that the indicative dose for the water may exceed 0.10 mSv.

Screening

37

• (1) For the purpose of monitoring the indicative dose for any water in its area to which this Schedule applies, the food authority may use such screening strategy as it considers to be reliable to determine whether it is necessary for it to carry out a paragraph 45 determination for the water, including—

• (a) screening by determining the gross alpha activity in a sample,

• (b) screening by determining the gross beta activity in a sample,

• (c) screening by determining the activity concentration of a single radionuclide in a sample, or

• (d) screening by determining the activity concentration of two or more radionuclides in a sample.

• (2) A food authority, in deciding which radionuclide to analyse for the purpose of screening under sub-paragraph (1)(c), and which radionuclides to analyse for the purpose of screening under sub-paragraph (1)(d), must take into account all information available to the authority that it considers relevant relating to likely sources of radioactivity that may affect the water.

Screening by determining gross alpha activity

38

• (1) This paragraph applies where a food authority decides to screen any water under paragraph 37(1)(a) (screening of gross alpha activity) to determine whether it is necessary for the authority carry out a paragraph 45 determination for the water.

• (2) The food authority must analyse a sample of water to determine whether the gross alpha activity in a sample is less than 0.1 Bq/l.

• (3) Where the gross alpha activity detected in a sample does not exceed 0.1 Bq/l, the food authority may assume that the indicative dose for the water does not exceed 0.10 mSv.

• (4) Where sub-paragraph (3) applies, the food authority does not need to carry out any further analysis for the purpose of carrying out a paragraph 45 determination for the water, unless it knows from other sources of information that specific radionuclides are present in the water that mean that the indicative dose for the water is likely to exceed 0.10 mSv.

• (5) Where the gross alpha activity detected in a sample exceeds 0.1 Bq/l, the food authority must determine, by analysis, the activity concentration of such other radionuclides in the water (using water from the same sample or another sample of the water) as the food authority believes or suspects may be present in the water, taking into account such information about likely sources of radioactivity affecting the water as the food authority considers relevant.

• (6) For the purpose of this paragraph, the food authority may set an alternative screening level for gross alpha activity in relation to any water that it is monitoring—

• (a) if it is satisfied that, if set at the alternative level that it proposes, the indicative dose for the water will not exceed 0.10 mSv, and

• (b) if called upon to do so by the Secretary of State, it can demonstrate to the Secretary of State that, at that alternative screening level, the indicative dose for the water will not exceed 0.10 mSv.

• (7) When determining the gross alpha activity in a sample of water for the purpose of this paragraph, the food authority must analyse the sample using a method of analysis that is capable of detecting gross alpha activity in the sample at a level of detection not exceeding 0.04 Bq/l.

• (8) The provisions in paragraph 25(3) and (4) (relating to the calculation and reporting of the limit of detection) apply in the same way to the calculation of the limit of detection for a method of analysis used to measure gross alpha activity as they apply to the calculation and reporting of the limit of detection for a method of analysis used to measure the activity concentration of radon.

Screening by determining gross beta activity

39

• (1) This paragraph applies where a food authority decides to screen any water under paragraph 37(1)(b) (screening of gross beta activity) to determine whether it is necessary for the authority to carry out a paragraph 45 determination for the water.

• (2) The food authority must analyse a sample of the water to determine whether the gross beta activity in the sample is less than 1.0 Bq/l.

• (3) Where the gross beta activity detected in a sample does not exceed 1.0 Bq/l, the food authority may assume that the indicative dose for the water does not exceed 0.10 mSv.

• (4) Where sub-paragraph (3) applies, the food authority does not need to carry out any further analysis for the purpose of carrying out a paragraph 45 determination for the water, unless it knows from other sources of information that specific radionuclides are present in the water that mean that the indicative dose for the water is likely to exceed 0.10 mSv.

• (5) Where the gross beta activity of a sample exceeds 1.0 Bq/l, the food authority must determine, by analysis, the activity concentration of such other radionuclides in the water (using water from the same sample or from another sample of the water) as the food authority believes or suspects may be present in the water, taking into account such information about likely sources of radioactivity affecting the water as the food authority considers relevant.

• (6) For the purpose of this paragraph, the food authority may set an alternative screening level for gross beta activity in relation to any water that it is monitoring—

• (a) if it is satisfied that, if set at the alternative level that it proposes, the indicative dose for the water will not exceed 0.10 mSv, and

• (b) if called upon to do so by the Secretary of State, it can demonstrate to the Secretary of State that, at that alternative screening level, the indicative dose for the water will not exceed 0.10 mSv.

• (7) When determining the gross beta activity in a sample of water for the purpose of this paragraph, the food authority must analyse the sample using a method of analysis that is capable of detecting gross beta activity in the sample at a level of detection not exceeding 0.4 Bq/l.

• (8) The provisions in paragraph 25(3) and (4) (relating to the calculation and reporting of the limit of detection) apply in the same way to the calculation of the limit of detection for a method of analysis used to measure gross beta activity as they apply to the calculation and reporting of the limit of detection for a method of analysis used to measure the activity concentration of radon.

Screening based on analysis relating to one radionuclide

40

• (1) This paragraph applies where a food authority decides to screen any water under paragraph 37(1)(c) by determining the activity concentration of one radionuclide in the water to determine whether it is necessary for the authority to carry out a paragraph 45 determination for the water.

• (2) The food authority must analyse a sample of the water to determine whether the activity concentration of the relevant radionuclide in the sample exceeds 20% of its derived concentration.

• (3) Where the activity concentration of the radionuclide in the sample does not exceed 20% of its derived concentration, the food authority may assume that the indicative dose for the water does not exceed 0.10 mSv.

• (4) Where sub-paragraph (3) applies, the food authority does not need to carry out any further analysis for the purpose of carrying out a paragraph 45 determination for the water.

• (5) Where the activity concentration of the relevant radionuclide in the sample exceeds 20% of its derived concentration, the food authority must determine, by analyses, the activity concentration of such other radionuclides in the water (using water from the same sample or from another sample of the water) as the food authority believes or suspects may be present in the water, taking into account such information about likely sources of radioactivity affecting the water as the food authority considers relevant and the result of any analysis carried out by it under paragraph 32(2)(d).

Screening based on analysis relating to more than one radionuclide

41

• (1) This paragraph applies where a food authority decides to screen any water under paragraph 37(1)(d) by determining the activity concentration of more than one radionuclide in the water (“the relevant radionuclides”) to determine whether it is necessary for the authority to carry out a paragraph 45 determination for the water.

• (2) The food authority must analyse a sample of the water to determine whether, in relation to each of the relevant radionuclides, the activity concentration of any of the relevant radionuclides in the sample exceeds 20% of its derived concentration.

• (3) Where the activity concentration of each of the relevant radionuclides in a sample is analysed and none of them are found to be present in the sample at an activity concentration that exceeds 20% of the derived concentration that applies to them, the food authority may assume that the indicative dose for the water does not exceed 0.10 mSv.

• (4) Where sub-paragraph (3) applies, the food authority does not need to carry out any further analysis for the purpose of carrying out a paragraph 45 determination for the water.

• (5) Where the food authority screens a sample of water for more than one radionuclide and the activity concentration of any one or more of those radionuclides in the sample exceeds 20% of the derived concentration that applies to it or them, the food authority must determine, by analyses, the activity concentration of such other radionuclides in the water (using water from the same sample or from another sample of the water) as the food authority believes or suspects may be present in the water, taking into account such information about likely sources of radioactivity affecting the water as the food authority considers relevant and the result of any analysis carried out by it under paragraph 32(2)(d).

Stopping or reducing the frequency of sampling: screening for indicative dose

42

• (1) In relation to screening for indicative dose, a food authority may, from time to time, decide to stop taking samples for screening purposes, or to take such samples at a reduced frequency, where—

• (a) it is satisfied that only naturally occurring radionuclides are present in the water,

• (b) the result of the analysis of the last sample of the water carried out by the food authority for screening purposes shows that—

• (i) where screening has been carried out under paragraph 38, the gross alpha activity in the water did not exceed 0.1 Bq/l,

• (ii) where screening has been carried out under paragraph 39, the gross beta activity in the water did not exceed 1.0 Bq/l, or

• (iii) where screening has been carried out under paragraph 40 or 41, the activity concentration of any radionuclide in the water analysed for the purpose of that screening did not exceed 20% of its derived concentration,

• (c) in a case where the results of the analyses of previous samples taken by the food authority for screening purposes are available and the food authority considers them to be relevant to its decision, the results of the analyses of those samples, taken together with the result of the analysis of the last sample, show that—

• (i) where screening has been carried out under paragraph 38, the gross alpha activity in the water is stable,

• (ii) where screening has been carried out under paragraph 39, the gross beta activity in the water is stable, or

• (iii) where screening has been carried out under paragraph 40 or 41, the activity concentration of any radionuclide analysed for the purpose of that screening is stable, and

• (d) the authority is satisfied that the change in the monitoring arrangements will not increase any risk to human health.

• (2) Where a food authority has made a decision under sub-paragraph (1) to stop taking samples of water for the purpose of screening under paragraph 38, 39, 40 or 41 but a change occurs in relation to the supply of the water that the food authority believes is likely to influence the activity concentration of radionuclides in the water, the food authority must—

• (a) take and analyse a sample of the water using one of the screening methods specified in paragraph 37(1), or

• (b) take and analyse a sample of the water and use the results of that analysis to make a paragraph 45 determination for the water.

• (3) A food authority which has made a decision under sub-paragraph (1) to stop taking samples of any water, or to reduce the frequency at which it takes samples of the water, may at any time decide to start taking samples of the water again at the frequency provided for in the table in Part 3 or, in accordance with sub-paragraph (1), at some other reduced frequency.

Analysis of sample

43

• (1) Where sub-paragraph (2) applies, a food authority must, taking into account such information about likely sources of radioactivity affecting the water as the authority considers relevant, analyse a sample of the water to determine—

• (a) which radionuclides are present in the water, and

• (b) in relation to each radionuclide found to be present in the water (including radionuclides found to be present in the water as the result of an analysis carried out by it under paragraph 32(2)(d)), the activity concentration at which the radionuclide is present in the water.

• (2) This sub-paragraph applies where a food authority is obliged under paragraph 35 to monitor any water in its area to which this Schedule applies and—

• (a) the food authority has not carried out any screening during the relevant period under paragraph 38, 39, 40 or 41, and

• (b) the water is not water to which a decision to stop taking samples for screening purposes is in force under paragraph 42.

• (3) When analysing a sample of water for the purpose of this Part to determine the presence and activity concentration of a radionuclide specified in the first column of the table in Section 2 (minimum levels of detection), the food authority must analyse the sample using a method of analysis that is capable of detecting the activity concentration of the relevant radionuclide at a level of detection not exceeding that specified in the second column of the table, as read, in the case of Ra-228, with the additional provisions specified in the third column of the table.

• (4) The provisions in paragraph 25(3) and (4) (relating to the calculation and reporting of the limit of detection) apply in the same way to the calculation of the limit of detection for a method of analysis used to measure the activity concentration of a radionuclide specified in the first column of the table in Section 2 as they apply to the calculation and reporting of the limit of detection for a method of analysis used to measure the activity concentration of radon.

Obligation to make an indicative dose determination

44

• (1) A food authority must make a paragraph 45 determination for any water in its area to which this Schedule applies if—

• (a) it has not carried out any screening of the water under paragraph 38, 39, 40 or 41 and the obligation does not arise during a period in which a decision made under paragraph 42 to stop taking samples for screening purposes applies,

• (b) it has carried out such screening and a determination made under paragraph 38(5), 39(5), 40(5) or 41(5) detected the presence of a radionuclide in the water at an activity concentration that exceeds 20% of its derived concentration, or

• (c) a food authority decides to comply with paragraph 42(2) by taking and analysing a sample of the water and using the results of that analysis to make a paragraph 45 determination for the water.

• (2) Sub-paragraph (1) does not apply if the obligation arises during a period in which a decision made under paragraph 47 to stop taking samples for the purpose of carrying out a paragraph 45 determination applies.

Determination relating to indicative dose

45

• (1) This paragraph applies where it is necessary under paragraph 44 for a food authority to make a determination relating to whether the indicative dose for any water in its area to which this Schedule applies exceeds 0.10 mSv.

• (2) The food authority must use the formula in sub-paragraph (3) to make a determination relating to the indicative dose for the water by—

• (a) carrying out the calculation in sub-paragraph (4) for each radionuclide that the food authority has found, by analysis, to be present in the water, and

• (b) adding together the results of all the calculations done under paragraph (a).

• (3) For the purposes of sub-paragraph (2), the formula is—

• (4) For the purpose of sub-paragraph (2)(a), the calculation is Ci(obs) ÷ Ci(der).

• (5) For the purpose of the formula in sub-paragraph (3) and the calculation in sub-paragraph (4)—

• (a) Ci(obs)is the activity concentration (observed concentration) at which a radionuclide has been found, by analysis, to be present in the water expressed in becquerels per litre, and

• (b) Ci(der) is the derived concentration for that radionuclide expressed in becquerels per litre.

• (6) For the purpose of the formula in sub-paragraph (3),n is the number of radionuclides the food authority has found, by analysis, to be present in the water.

• (7) Any non-integer numbers resulting from the calculation carried out under sub-paragraph (2), as read with sub-paragraphs (3) and (4), must be taken into account in calculating and making a determination under this paragraph.

Action following the result of a paragraph 45 determination

46

• (1) If a paragraph 45 determination for any water produces a result that does not exceed 1, the indicative dose for the water is to be considered as not exceeding 0.10 mSv and no further investigation by the food authority is required.

• (2) If a paragraph 45 determination for any water produces a result that exceeds 1 (“Indicative Dose Determination X”), sub-paragraphs (3) to (7) apply to such water.

• (3) The food authority must—

• (a) take and analyse an extra sample of the water as soon as reasonably practicable after the result of Indicative Dose Determination X is known and use the result of the analysis of that sample to carry out another paragraph 45 determination for the water;

• (b) if the food authority considers it appropriate to do so taking into account the determination made under paragraph (a), continue taking and analysing extra samples of the water, and use the results of those analyses to carry out further paragraph 45 determinations for the water, at such intervals and for such period as the food authority (taking into account the provisions of sub-paragraphs (4) to (6)) considers appropriate.

• (4) The food authority must, disregarding the determination of Indicative Dose Determination X, determine the average of the indicative dose determinations for the water for such 12 month period as the authority considers appropriate (whether the 12 month period used by the food authority for the purpose of its monitoring programme or some other 12 month period) on the basis of—

• (a) the results of paragraph 45 determinations relating to the water carried out before the determination of Indicative Dose Determination X,

• (b) the result of the extra paragraph 45 determination for the water carried out under sub-paragraph (3)(a), and

• (c) where any extra paragraph 45 determinations for the water are carried out under sub-paragraph (3)(b), the results of those extra determinations.

• (5) No further action by the food authority is required if the outcome of the determination under sub-paragraph (4) is that the average of the indicative dose determinations for the water for the relevant 12 month period does not exceed 1.

• (6) The food authority must take action under paragraph 57(1) (remedial action) if the outcome of the determination under sub-paragraph (4) is that the average of the indicative dose determinations for the water for the relevant 12 month period exceeds 1.

• (7) Sub-paragraphs (2) to (6) do not apply if the food authority is of the opinion that—

• (a) even if it took extra samples under sub-paragraph (3) to enable it to make extra paragraph 45 determinations under that sub-paragraph, it would have insufficient results from previous paragraph 45 determinations for the water to enable it to make the determination required by sub-paragraph (4) within such period as the food authority considers to be reasonable, or

• (b) for some other reason, the result of such a determination under sub-paragraph (4), based on the results of those extra samples and the previous paragraph 45 determinations, may give a distorted result.

• (8) Where the paragraph 45 determination for a sample of water exceeds 1 and, by virtue of sub-paragraph (7), sub-paragraphs (2) to (6) do not apply, the food authority must take action under paragraph 57(1).

• (9) For the purposes of the determination required under sub-paragraph (4), any non-integer numbers resulting from the calculation carried out by a food authority under paragraph 45(2), as read with sub-paragraphs (3) and (4) of that paragraph, must be taken into account in determining whether the result of the determination of the average of the indicative dose for the water for the relevant 12 month period exceeds 1.

Stopping or reducing the frequency of sampling: indicative dose

47

• (1) A food authority may, from time to time, decide to stop taking samples for the purpose of carrying out a paragraph 45 determination for any water, or to take such samples at a reduced frequency, where—

• (a) it is satisfied that only naturally occurring radionuclides are present in the water,

• (b) the result of the last paragraph 45 determination for the water carried out by the food authority produces a result that does not exceed 1,

• (c) in a case where the results of previous paragraph 45 determinations for the water are available and the food authority considers them to be relevant to its decision, the average of the results of those determinations produce a result that does not exceed 1, and

• (d) the authority is satisfied that the change in the monitoring arrangements will not increase any risk to human health.

• (2) Where a food authority has made a decision under sub-paragraph (1) to stop taking samples of water for the purpose of carrying out a paragraph 45 determination for the water but a change occurs in relation to the supply of the water that the food authority believes is likely to influence the concentration of radionuclides in the water, a food authority must—

• (a) take and analyse a sample of the water using one of the screening methods specified in paragraph 37, or

• (b) take and analyse a sample of the water and use the results of that analysis to make a paragraph 45 determination for the water.

• (3) A food authority which has made a decision under sub-paragraph (1) to stop taking samples of any water, or to reduce the frequency at which it takes samples of the water, for the purpose of making paragraph 45 determinations for any water in its area may at any time decide to start taking samples of the water again at the frequency provided for in the table in Part 3 or, in accordance with sub-paragraph (1), at some other reduced frequency.

Treated bottled drinking water

48

The provisions of this Part, except for paragraph 47, apply to bottled drinking water that has been treated to reduce the level of radionuclides in the water in the same way as it applies to water that has not been treated in that way.

SECTION2 — Minimum levels of detection

Radionuclides	Limit of detection – Bq/l	Additional provision
U-238	0.02
U-234	0.02
Ra-226	0.04
Ra-228	0.02	The limit of detection in the second column only applies to the initial screening relating to the indicative dose for a new water source.If initial analysis indicates that it is not plausible that Ra-228 will exceed 20% of its derived concentration, the food authority may increase the minimum limit of detection to 0.08 Bq/l for routine Ra-228 nuclide specific measurements, until a recheck is required following a change in the supply of the water that the food authority believes may influence the activity concentration of Ra-228 in the water. The food authority may increase the minimum level of detection back to 0.08 Bq/l again following the result of any recheck if the result of the analysis carried out in relation to that determines that the concentration of Ra-228 in the water does not exceed 20% of its derived concentration.
Pb-210	0.02
Po-210	0.01
C-14	20
Sr-90	0.4
Pu-239/Pu-240	0.04
Am-241	0.06
Co-60	0.5
Cs-134	0.5
Cs-137	0.5
I-131	0.5

SECTION3 — Interpretation

Derived concentration

49

• (1) In this Part, “derived concentration” in relation to a radionuclide specified in the first column of the following table, means the derived concentration of the radionuclide specified in the second column of that table.

Radionuclide	Derived concentration - Bq/l
U-238	3.0
U-234	2.8
Ra-226	0.5
Ra-228	0.2
Pb-210	0.2
Po-210	0.1
C-14	240
Sr-90	4.9
Pu-239/Pu-240	0.6
Am-241	0.7
Co-60	40
Cs-134	7.2
Cs-137	11
I-131	6.2

• (2) In this Part, “derived concentration” in relation to a radionuclide that is not specified in the first column of the table in sub-paragraph (1) means the derived concentration of the radionuclide expressed in becquerels per litre and calculated using the following formula—

• (3) For the purpose of the formula in sub-paragraph (2) “ICRP dose coefficient mSv” means the number of millisieverts per becquerel represented by the dose coefficient for an adult for the relevant radionuclide specified in the last column of the table in Annex F (effective dose coefficients for ingestion of radionuclides for members of the public) to ICRP Publication 119 entitled “Compendium of Dose Coefficients based on ICRP Publication 60” published in Volume 41 of Supplement 1 2012 of the Annals of the ICRP on behalf of the International Commission on Radiological Protection by Elsevier and approved by the Commission in October 2011 (ISBN 978-1-4557-5430-4).

PART9 — Monitoring obligations relating to indicator parameters

SECTION1 — Parametric concentrations and values for indicator parameters

Parameter	Parametric concentration or value	Units ofmeasurement	Further provision	Additional requirements
Aluminium	200	µg/l
Ammonium	0.50	mg/l
Chloride	250	mg/l		The water must not be aggressive.
Clostridium perfringens and spores of Clostridium perfringens	0	number/100ml	This parameter only needs to be checked if the water originates from, or is influenced by, surface water.
Colour	Acceptable to consumers and no abnormal change
Conductivity	2,500	µS cm⁻¹ at 20°C		The water must not be aggressive.
Hydrogen ion concentration	9.5	pH units		The pH of the water must not be lower than 4.5.The water must not be aggressive.
Iron	200	µg/l
Manganese	50	µg/l
Odour	Acceptable to consumers and no abnormal change
Oxidisability	5.0	mg/l O₂	This parameter does not need to be checked if total organic carbon is analysed.
Sulphate	250	mg/l		The water must not be aggressive.
Sodium	200	mg/l
Taste	Acceptable to consumers and no abnormal change
Colony Count 22° C	No abnormal change
Coliform bacteria	0	number/250ml
Total organic carbon	No abnormal change		This parameter does not need not be checked for supplies of less than 10,000m³ a day.
Turbidity	Acceptable to consumers and no abnormal change

SECTION2 — Monitoring obligations

Analysis of sample

50

• (1) Each food authority must monitor the concentration or value (as the case may be) of each of the parameters specified in the first column of the table in Section 1 in water in its area to which this Schedule applies by analysing a sample of the water to determine whether—

• (a) the concentration of, or value for, the parameter in the sample exceeds the concentration of, or value for, that parameter specified in the second column of the table—

• (i) as measured, where relevant, by reference to the unit of measurement specified in the third column of the table, and

• (ii) as read, in relation to a parameter specified in the first column of the table for which there is an additional requirement specified in the fourth column of the table, with the provision relating to the need to check the parameter specified in the fourth column of the table, and

• (b) in relation to a parameter specified in the first column of the table for which there is an additional requirement specified in the fifth column of the table, the water complies with that additional requirement.

• (2) For the purpose of the determination required by sub-paragraph (1), the food authority must analyse the sample—

• (a) in the case ofClostridium perfringens, and spores of Clostridium perfringens, using the method of analysis in BS EN ISO 14189:2016 entitled “Water quality — Enumeration of Clostridium perfringens — Method using membrane filtration (ISO 14189:2013)” (ISBN 978 0 580 92184 1), as amended by a corrigendum issued on 31st August 2016;

• (b) in the case of coliform bacteria, using the method of analysis in—

• (i) BS EN ISO 9308-1:2014+A1:2017 entitled “Water quality — Enumeration of Escherichia coli and coliform bacteria. Part 1: Membrane filtration method for waters with low bacterial background flora (ISO 9308-1:2014)” (ISBN 978 0 580 92379 1) published by the BSI on 31st October 2014, as amended on 28th February 2017, or

• (ii) BS EN ISO 9308-2:2014 entitled “Water quality — Enumeration of Escherichia coli and coliform bacteria. Part 2: Most probable number method” (ISBN 978 0 580 84023 4) published by the BSI on 30th November 2013, as amended by a corrigendum issued on 30th June 2014;

• (c) in the case of each of the other indicator parameters, using a method of analysis that complies with Section 3.

Clostridium perfringens

51

In a case where a food authority determines that a sample of water contains any Clostridium perfringens, or spores of Clostridium perfringens, the food authority must investigate the water supply to determine whether there is any potential danger to human health arising from the presence in the water of pathogenic microorganisms.

Uncertainty of measurement

52

A food authority must not use the uncertainty of measurement percentage specified in the second column of the table in Section 4 (which is concerned with whether a method of analysis complies with minimum performance characteristics) as an additional tolerance when determining whether the concentration of a parameter specified in the first column of the table in Section 1 in a sample of water exceeds the concentration for that parameter specified in the second column of the table in Section 1.

SECTION3 — Method of analysis

Method of analysis

53

In relation to a parameter specified in the first column of the table in Section 1—

• (a) where there is a method of analysis that meets minimum performance characteristics that can be used by a food authority to analyse a sample for the purpose of making a determination in relation to that parameter under paragraph 50, the food authority must analyse the sample using that method of analysis (or using any one of them in a case where more than one method of analysis meets minimum performance characteristics);

• (b) where there is no such method of analysis, the food authority must analyse a sample under paragraph 50 using the best available technique not entailing excessive cost.

Minimum performance characteristics

54

• (1) For the purpose of paragraph 53(a), a method of analysis for a parameter specified in the first column of the table in Section 4 (minimum performance characteristics for a method of analysis) is a method of analysis that complies with minimum performance characteristics if it is a method of analysis that—

• (a) is capable of measuring values equal to the parametric concentration of that parameter with a limit of quantification of 30% or less of the relevant parametric concentration,

• (b) has an uncertainty of measurement that does not exceed the percentage of the parametric concentration for the parameter specified in the second column of the table in Section 4, as read with any further provision relating to the calculation of the uncertainty of measurement specified in the third column of the table, and

• (c) in the case of total organic carbon, complies with the requirement specified in the fourth column of the table.

• (2) For the purpose of sub-paragraph (1)(b), the performance criterion for uncertainty of measurement (k = 2) for a parameter specified in the first column of the table in Section 4 is not less than the percentage specified in the second column of the table of the concentration or value for the parameter specified in the second column of the table in Section 1.

• (3) A method of analysis for hydrogen ion concentration pH is a method of analysis that complies with minimum performance characteristics if it is a method of analysis that—

• (a) is capable of measuring hydrogen ion concentration pH equal to 4.5 pH with a limit of quantification of 30% or less, and

• (b) has an uncertainty of measurement that does not exceed 0.2 of a pH unit.

• (4) For the purpose of sub-paragraph (3)(b), the performance criterion for uncertainty of measurement (k = 2) for hydrogen ion concentration pH is not less than 0.2 of a pH unit.

• (5) Unless otherwise specified in the third column of the table in Section 4, food authorities must estimate uncertainty of measurement for a parameter specified in the first column of the table at the level of the concentration for the parameter specified in the second column of the table in Section 1.

• (6) Where a method of analysis that complies with the requirements of sub-paragraph (1) is used to determine whether the concentration of a parameter specified in the first column of the table in Section 4 exceeds the concentration specified for that parameter in the second column of the table in Section 1, the result of the analysis carried out using that method of analysis must be expressed using at least the same number of significant figures as the number of significant figures used to specify that parametric concentration in the second column of the table in Section 1.

Alternative minimum performance characteristics

55

• (1) For the purpose of paragraph 53(a), until the end of 31st December 2019, a method of analysis for a parameter specified in the first column of the table in Section 5 (alternative minimum performance characteristics for a method of analysis that may be used until the end of 31st December 2019) is a method of analysis that complies with minimum performance characteristics if it is a method of analysis that—

• (a) is capable of measuring concentrations with a trueness not less than the percentage of the parametric concentration specified in the second column of the table,

• (b) is capable of measuring concentrations with a precision not less than the percentage of the parametric concentration specified in the third column of the table, and

• (c) has a limit of detection that does not exceed the percentage of the parametric concentration specified in the fourth column of the table.

• (2) For the purpose of paragraph 53(a), until the end of 31st December 2019, a method of analysis for hydrogen ion concentration pH is a method of analysis that complies with minimum performance characteristics if it is a method of analysis that is capable of measuring hydrogen ion concentration pH with—

• (a) a trueness not less than 0.2 of a pH unit, and

• (b) a precision not less than 0.2 of a pH unit.

• (3) “Precision” is the same for the purposes of this paragraph, and the table in Section 5, as it is in paragraph 20(2).

• (4) “Limit of detection” is the same for the purposes of this paragraph, and the table in Section 5, as it is in paragraph 20(3).

SECTION4 — Minimum performance characteristics for a method of analysis

Parameters	Uncertainty of measurement - percentage of the parametric concentration	Other requirements relating to the uncertainty of measurement	Other requirements
Aluminium	25
Ammonium	40
Chloride	15
Conductivity	20
Iron	30
Manganese	30
Oxidisability	50
Sodium	15
Sulphate	15
Total organic carbon	30	The uncertainty of measurement must be estimated at the level of 3 mg/l of the total organic carbon.	BS EN 1484: 1997 entitled “Water analysis —Guidelines for the determination of total organic carbon (TOC) and dissolved organic carbon (DOC)” (ISBN 0 580 28372 0) published by the BSI on 15th October 1997 must be used.
Turbidity	30	The uncertainty of measurement must be estimated at the level of 1.0 nephelometric turbidity unit in accordance with BS EN ISO 7027-1:2016 entitled “Water quality — Determination of turbidity. Part 1: Quantitative methods (ISO 7027-1: 2016)” (ISBN 978 0 580 81961 2) published by the BSI on 31st July 2016.

SECTION5 — Alternative minimum performance characteristics for a method of analysis that may be used until the end of 31st December 2019

Parameters	Trueness - percentage of the parametric concentration	Precision -percentage of the parametric concentration	Limit of detection - percentage of the parametric concentration
Aluminium	10	10	10
Ammonium	10	10	10
Chloride	10	10	10
Conductivity	10	10	10
Iron	10	10	10
Manganese	10	10	10
Oxidisability	25	25	10
Sodium	10	10	10
Sulphate	10	10	10
Turbidity	25	25	25

PART10 — Delegation of tasks by a food authority

SECTION1 — Delegation of tasks

Delegation

56

• (1) A food authority may delegate a task specified in the first column of the table in Section 2 (tasks that may be delegated) on an one-off or occasional basis or for such duration as may, from time to time, be agreed between the food authority and the person to whom the task is to be delegated.

• (2) Any arrangement entered into under sub-paragraph (1) must provide that the delegate must comply with any provision in this Schedule relating to the exercise of that task, including any provision relating to—

• (a) the taking of samples,

• (b) the frequency (if relevant, taking into account the duration of the arrangement) at which the samples are to be taken,

• (c) the method of analysis that must be used to analyse samples, including any minimum performance characteristics that apply to the selection of a method of analysis,

• (d) the calculation of the limit of detection,

• (e) the use of uncertainty of measurement percentages,

• (f) the validation and documenting of the methods of analysis used, and

• (g) the use of quality management practices.

• (3) In relation to a task specified in the first column of the table in Section 2 for which there is an entry in the second column of the table, any arrangement entered into under sub-paragraph (1) must provide that—

• (a) the food authority must, where specified in the second column of the table, provide the delegate with the instructions needed to carried out the task, and

• (b) the delegate must carry out the delegated task on the basis specified in the second column of that table.

• (4) A food authority must not enter into an arrangement under sub-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 with the delegate to ensure that—

• (i) where the result of an analysis indicates that the concentration or value of any parameter has been exceeded, the delegate will communicate the result of the analysis to the food authority immediately after determining the result, and

• (ii) in every other case, the delegate will communicate the result of the analysis to the food authority within 28 days beginning with the day after the day on which it has determined the result.

SECTION2 — Tasks that may be delegated

Task that may be delegated	Basis of delegation (where relevant)
The task of taking samples under paragraph 4 of all waters in a food authority’s area to which this Schedule applies or of such of those waters as are specified in the arrangement
The task of taking samples under paragraph 5 of all waters in a food authority’s area to which this Schedule applies or of such of those waters as are specified in the arrangement
The task of analysing samples of water under paragraph 7(1) (microbiological parameters)
The task of analysing samples of water under paragraph 8(1) (chemical parameters)
The task of analysing samples of water under paragraph 13 (other parameters)	The food authority must provide the delegate with instructions relating to the identity of the property, element, substance or organism that is to be checked and the delegate must analyse the samples in accordance with those instructions.
The task of analysing samples of water under paragraph 25 (radon)
The task of taking an extra sample, or extra samples, of water under paragraph 26(3) (radon)	In a case where the food authority has provided general instructions to the delegate in relation to the application of paragraph 26(3) concerning the number of samples to be taken and, in a case where more than one extra sample may need to be taken, the period during which extra samples are to be taken (“the specified matters”), the delegate must take an extra sample, or extra samples, in accordance with those instructions.In a case where the food authority has not provided general instructions to the delegate in relation to the specified matters, the food authority must provide the delegate with specific instructions concerning those matters at the time an extra sample falls to be taken under paragraph 26(3) and the delegate must take the samples in accordance with those instructions.
The task of analysing an extra sample, or extra samples, of water under paragraph 26(3) (radon)
The task of analysing samples of water under paragraph 31 (tritium)
The task of taking an extra sample, or extra samples, of water under paragraph 32(2) (tritium)	In a case where the food authority has provided general instructions to the delegate in relation to the application of paragraph 32(2) concerning the number of samples to be taken and, in a case where more than one extra sample may need to be taken, the period during which extra samples are to be taken (“the specified matters”), the delegate must take an extra sample, or extra samples, in accordance with those instructions.In a case where the food authority has not provided general instructions to the delegate in relation to the specified matters, the food authority must provide the delegate with specific instructions concerning those matters at the time an extra sample falls to be taken under paragraph 32(2) and the delegate must take the samples in accordance with those instructions.
The task of analysing an extra sample, or extra samples, of water under paragraph 32(2)(a) and (b) (tritium)
The task of measuring gross alpha activity and gross beta activity in a sample under paragraph 32(2)(c)
The task of analysing samples of water under paragraph 32(2)(d) (relating to the determination of the presence of artificial radionuclides in the water), and the taking of such extra sample, or extra samples, of the water as may be needed for that purpose
The task of analysing samples of water under paragraph 38(2) (screening by determining gross alpha activity)
The task of analysing samples of water under paragraph 38(5) (relating to the determination of the presence and concentration of certain radionuclides in the water), and the taking of such extra sample, or extra samples, of the water as may be needed for that purpose	The food authority must provide the delegate with instructions specifying the radionuclides in the sample for which analysis must be carried out by the delegate and the delegate must analyse the samples in accordance with those instructions.
The task of analysing samples of water under paragraph 39(2) (screening by determining gross beta activity)
The task of analysing samples of water under paragraph 39(5) (relating to the determination of the presence and concentration of certain radionuclides in the water) and the taking of such extra sample, or extra samples, of the water as may be needed for that purpose	The food authority must provide the delegate with instructions specifying the radionuclides in the sample for which analysis must be carried out by the delegate and the delegate must analyse the samples in accordance with those instructions.
The task of analysing samples of water under paragraph 40(2) (screening based on analysis relating to one radionuclide)
The task of analysing samples of water under paragraph 40(5) (relating to the determination of the presence and concentration of certain radionuclides in the water) and taking such extra sample, or extra samples, of the water as may be needed for that purpose	The food authority must provide the delegate with instructions specifying the radionuclides in the sample for which analysis must be carried out by the delegate and the delegate must analyse the samples in accordance with those instructions.
The task of analysing samples of water under paragraph 41(2) (screening based on analyses relating to more than one radionuclide)
The task of analysing samples of water under paragraph 41(5) (relating to the determination of the presence and concentration of certain radionuclides in water) and taking such extra sample, or extra samples, of the water as may be needed for that purpose	The food authority must provide the delegate with instructions specifying the radionuclides in the sample for which analysis must be carried out by the delegate and the delegate must analyse the samples in accordance with those instructions.
The task of analysing samples of water under paragraph 43(1) (relating to the determination of the presence, and concentration of, certain radionuclides in water)	The food authority must provide the delegate with instructions specifying the radionuclides in the sample for which analysis must be carried out by the delegate and the delegate must analyse the samples in accordance with those instructions.
The task of carrying out a paragraph 45 determination (relating to indicative dose)
The task of taking an extra sample, or extra samples of water under paragraph 46(3) (further sampling required following an indicative dose determination)	In a case where the food authority has provided general instructions to the delegate in relation to the application of paragraph 46(3) concerning the number of samples to be taken and, in a case where more than one extra sample may need to be taken, the period during which extra samples are to be taken (“the specified matters”), the delegate must take an extra sample, or extra samples, in accordance with those instructions.In a case where the food authority has not provided general instructions to the delegate in relation to the specified matters, the food authority must provide the delegate with specific instructions concerning those matters at the time an extra sample falls to be taken under paragraph 46(3) and the delegate must take the samples in accordance with those instructions.
The task of analysing an extra sample, or extra samples, of water under paragraph 46(3)
The task of analysing samples of water under paragraph 50(1) (indicator parameters)

PART11 — Remedial action

Remedial action

57

• (1) If, taking into account the provisions of this Schedule, a food authority determines that water in its area to which this Schedule applies contains a parameter specified in the first column of the table in Part 4 of Schedule 2 that exceeds (or is to be considered as exceeding) the activity concentration or value specified in the second column of the table (as measured by reference to the unit of measurement specified in the third column of the table), the food authority must—

• (a) immediately investigate the non-compliance in order to identify the cause,

• (b) assess whether the non-compliance poses a risk to human health that requires action,

• (c) require the proprietor of the food business bottling the water to take remedial action as soon as possible to restore the quality of the water if the authority considers that it is necessary for such action to be taken to protect human health,

• (d) notify the general public of the risks and remedial action taken, and

• (e) advise the general public on any additional precautionary measures that may be needed for the protection of human health in respect of radioactive substances.

• (2) Sub-paragraph (1)(a) and (b) do not apply where paragraph 26(2) applies.

SCHEDULE13 — Application and modification of provisions of the Act