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

• (iii) paragraph 40(2), where a decision is taken by the food authority under paragraph 40(1) to screen water by analysing one radionuclide to determine whether it is necessary for the authority to carry out a paragraph 45 determination for the water;

• (iv) paragraph 41(2), where a decision is taken by the food authority under paragraph 41(1) to screen water by analysing more than one radionuclide to determine whether it is necessary for the authority to carry out a paragraph 45 determination for the water;

• (v) paragraph 43(1) (determination relating to the presence and concentration of radionuclides);

• (f) paragraph 12, as read with paragraph 50(1) (indicator parameters);

• (g) paragraph 13 (other parameters not mentioned in this sub-paragraph).

• (3) For the purpose of its sampling obligations under this Schedule, a food authority must take samples of water at the point at which the water is put into a bottle.

Sampling: non-radioactive substances

5

• (1) In the case of samples of water that a food authority must take and analyse to enable it to discharge its obligations under the provisions specified in paragraph 4(2)(a), (b), (f) and (g), each food authority must take and analyse such samples regularly, having regard to the provisions contained in—

• (a) Article 17(2) of Regulation (EC) No 178/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down the general principles and requirements of food law, establishing the European Food Safety Authority and laying down procedures in matters of food safety (monitoring responsibilities), and

• (b) Article 9 of Regulation (EU) 2017/625.

• (2) Where, under sub-paragraph (1), a food authority only takes one sample in a year of any water in its area to which this Schedule applies, the authority must take the samples from year to year at intervals that are spread out in such a way—

• (a) to avoid the results, when considered together, giving a potentially distorted picture of the state of the water because the samples have been taken too closely together in time, and

• (b) so that the results, when considered together, provide information about the water that is representative of the quality of the water during the relevant years.

• (3) Where, under sub-paragraph (1), a food authority takes more than one sample in a year of any water in its area to which this Schedule applies, the authority must take the samples at intervals that are spread out throughout the year in such a way—

• (a) to avoid the results, when considered together, giving a potentially distorted picture of the state of the water because the samples have been taken too closely together in time, and

• (b) so that the results, when considered together, provide information about the water that is representative of the quality of the water during the course of that year.

Monitoring: radioactive substances

6

In the case of samples that a food authority must take and analyse to discharge its obligations under the provisions specified in paragraph 4(2)(c) to (e), the samples must—

• (a) be taken and analysed by the food authority no less frequently than provided for in the table in Part 3, unless—

• (i) a decision is taken by the authority under paragraph 27, 33, 42 or 47 to reduce the minimum frequency at which it must take and analyse samples, in which case the authority must take and analyse samples at the reduced minimum frequency decided by it under the relevant paragraph until such time as it takes a different decision relating to the minimum frequency at which relevant samples must be taken and analysed;

• (ii) a decision is taken by the authority under paragraph 42 or 47 to stop taking and analysing samples, in which case the authority, in accordance with that decision, is not obliged to take and analyse samples until such time as it takes a different decision relating to the minimum frequency at which relevant samples must be taken and analysed;

• (b) be taken, in so far as possible, so that the number of samples are distributed equally in time and (where appropriate) location.

Microbiological parameters

7

• (1) A food authority must monitor the value for each of the parameters specified in the first column of the table in Part 2 of Schedule 2 (microbiological parameters) in any water in its area to which this Schedule applies by analysing a sample of the water to determine whether the value for the parameter in the sample exceeds the value specified for the parameter in the second column of the table, as measured by reference to the unit of measurement specified in the third column of the table.

• (2) For the purpose of the determination required by sub-paragraph (1), the food authority must analyse the sample using the method of analysis for the relevant parameter specified in Part 4.

Chemical parameters

8

• (1) A food authority must monitor the concentration of each of the parameters specified in the first column of the table in Part 3 of Schedule 2 (chemical parameters) in any water in its area to which this Schedule applies by analysing a sample of the water to determine whether the concentration of the parameter in the sample exceeds the concentration specified for the relevant parameter in the second column of the table—

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

• (b) as read, in the case of a parameter for which there is an entry in the fourth column of the table, with the further provision relating to the parameter or parametric concentration specified in that entry.

• (2) For the purpose of the determination required by sub-paragraph (1), the food authority must analyse the sample using a method of analysis that complies with Part 5.

• (3) But sub-paragraph (2) does not apply, and it is not necessary for a food authority to analyse a sample of water under sub-paragraph (1) to determine whether the concentration of acrylamide, epichlorohydrin or vinyl chloride exceeds the concentration specified for that parameter in the second column of the table in Part 3 of Schedule 2, where—

• (a) the food authority is satisfied that the water, before it is bottled, does not come into contact with a pipe or other construction product that has been constructed using that parameter as a component in its construction, or

• (b) in other cases, the food authority is satisfied, on the basis of a certificate of conformity, declaration of conformity or declaration of performance relating to a pipe or other construction product that the water comes into contact with, or may come into contact with, before being bottled, and any other related information that it considers to be relevant, that any residual monomer concentration of that parameter in the water does not exceed the concentration for that parameter specified in the second column of the table in Part 3 of Schedule 2.

• (4) A food authority must not use the uncertainty of measurement percentage specified in the second column of the table in Section 2 of Part 5 (which is concerned with whether a method of analysis complies with minimum performance characteristics) as an additional tolerance when determining whether a parameter specified in the first column of the table in Part 3 of Schedule 2 exceeds the concentration for that parameter specified in the second column of the table in Part 3 of Schedule 2.

• (5) In sub-paragraph (3)(b)—

• “certificate of conformity” means a certificate of conformity issued on or before 30th June 2013—under the Construction Products Regulations 1991; ......

• “construction product” has the meaning given in point (1) of Article 2 of Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down harmonised conditions for the marketing of construction products and repealing Council Directive 89/106/EEC;

• “declaration of conformity” means a declaration of conformity issued on or before 30th June 2013—under the Construction Products Regulations 1991; ......

• “declaration of performance” means a declaration of performance drawn up in accordance with Article 4 of Regulation (EU) No 305/2011 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

Radon

9

A food authority must monitor the level of radon in any water in its area to which this Schedule applies in accordance with Part 6.

Tritium

10

A food authority must monitor the level of tritium in any water in its area to which this Schedule applies in accordance with Part 7.

Indicative dose

11

A food authority must monitor the level of the indicative dose for any water in its area to which this Schedule applies in accordance with Part 8.

Indicator parameters

12

A 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 of Part 9 (indicator parameters) in any water in its area to which this Schedule applies in accordance with Part 9.

Other parameters

13

Where a food authority believes, or has reason to suspect, that a property, element, substance or organism that is not specified in any of the tables in Schedule 2 or the table in Section 1 of Part 9, may be present in any water in its area to which this Schedule applies at any concentration, or in any number, that may constitute a potential danger to human health, it must take and analyse samples of the water, on a case by case basis, to determine whether that property, element, substance or organism is present in the water and whether it is present in the water at any concentration, or in any number, that may constitute a potential danger to human health.

Delegation of tasks

14

To enable a food authority to discharge its functions under this Schedule, a food authority may from time to time enter into an arrangement with another person under which the food authority delegates specified tasks to the delegate to carry out on behalf of the food authority on condition that—

• (a) such arrangement is in accordance with—

• (i) Part 10, and

• (ii) Article 29 of Regulation (EU) 2017/625, and

• (b) the food authority notifies the Secretary of State, in advance of the proposed delegation, of the tasks that are being delegated to a delegated body.

Quality management practices

15

• (1) A food authority must not analyse a sample taken for the purpose of carrying out its monitoring obligations under regulation 16A, as read with this Schedule, unless quality management practices that comply with BS EN ISO/IEC 17025:2017 entitled “General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories” (ISBN 978 0 580 88466 5) published by the BSI on 31st December 2017, or another equivalent standard accepted at international level, are being complied with at the laboratory in which the sample is analysed.

• (2) But, in the case of the analysis of a sample for the purposes of the monitoring obligations under the provisions specified in sub-paragraph (3), it is sufficient if the laboratory at which the sample is analysed has a system of analytical quality control in place that is checked by the United Kingdom Accreditation Service from time to time.

• (3) The provisions are those in—

• (a) paragraph 9, as read with Part 6 (radon),

• (b) paragraph 10, as read with Part 7 (tritium), and

• (c) paragraph 11, as read with Part 8 (indicative dose).

Validation and documentation

16

• (1) A food authority must ensure that any analysis that it carries out for the purpose its monitoring obligations under regulation 16A, as read with this Schedule, is validated and documented in accordance with BS EN ISO/IEC 17025:2017 entitled “General requirements for the competence of testing and calibration laboratories” (ISBN 978 0 580 88466 5) published by the BSI on 31st December 2017 or another equivalent standard accepted at international level.

• (2) But, in the case of the analysis of a sample for the purpose of the monitoring obligations under the provisions specified in sub-paragraph (3), it is sufficient if the laboratory at which the sample is analysed has a system of analytical quality control in place that is checked by the United Kingdom Accreditation Service from time to time.

• (3) The provisions are those in—

• (a) paragraph 9, as read with Part 6 (radon),

• (b) paragraph 10, as read with Part 7 (tritium), and

• (c) paragraph 11, as read with Part 8 (indicative dose).

PART3 — Minimum sampling and analyses frequencies for monitoring radioactive substances

Average volume of water bottled each day within a supply zone m³	Number of samples per year
(1)The volume of water bottled each day must be calculated as an average taken over a year.	(1)The volume of water bottled each day must be calculated as an average taken over a year.
(2)“a supply zone” means a geographically defined area within which water intended for human consumption comes from one or more sources and within which water quality may be considered as being approximately uniform.	(2)“a supply zone” means a geographically defined area within which water intended for human consumption comes from one or more sources and within which water quality may be considered as being approximately uniform.
1,000 or less	1
More than 1,000 but less than or equal to 10,000	1
More than 1,000 but less than or equal to 10,000	Plus 1 for each 3,300m³ of the average volume produced each day
More than 1,000 but less than or equal to 10,000	Plus 1 for any remaining part of the average volume produced each day that is less than 3,300m³
More than 10,000 but less than or equal to 100,000	3
More than 10,000 but less than or equal to 100,000	Plus 1 for each 10,000 m³ of the average volume produced each day
More than 10,000 but less than or equal to 100,000	Plus 1 for any remaining part of the average volume produced each day that is less than 10,000 m³
More than 100,000	10
More than 100,000	Plus 1 for each 25,000 m³ of the average volume produced each day
More than 100,000	Plus 1 for any remaining part of the average volume produced each day that is less than 25,000 m³

PART4 — Methods of analyses relating to specified microbiological parameters

Parameter	Method of analysis
Escherichia coli (E. coli)	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 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 June 2012, as amended by a corrigendum issued on 30th June 2014
Enterococci	BS EN ISO 7899-2:2000, BS 6068-4.4:2000 entitled “Water quality — Detection and enumeration of intestinal enterococci — Part 2: Membrane filtration method” (ISBN 0 580 34953 5) published by the BSI on 15th August 2000
Pseudomonas aeruginosa	BS EN ISO 16266:2008 entitled “Water quality — Detection and enumeration of Pseudomonas aeruginosa — Method by membrane filtration” (ISBN 978 0 580 59736 7) published by the BSI on 31st March 2008
Colony count 22ºC – enumeration of culturable microorganisms	BS EN ISO 6222: 1999, BS 6068-4.5:1999 entitled “Water quality — Enumeration of cultural micro-organisms — Colony count by inoculation in a nutrient agar culture medium” (ISBN 0 580 32495 8) published by the BSI on 15th August 1999
Colony count 36ºC – enumeration of culturable microorganisms	BS EN ISO 6222: 1999, BS 6068-4.5:1999 entitled “Water quality — Enumeration of cultural micro-organisms — Colony count by inoculation in a nutrient agar culture medium” (ISBN 0 580 32495 8) published by the BSI on 15th August 1999

PART5 — Methods of analysis relating to chemical parameters

SECTION1 — Methods of analysis

Method of analysis

17

In relation to a parameter specified in the first column of the table in Part 3 of Schedule 2 (chemical parameters)—

• (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 8, 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 8 using the best available technique not entailing excessive cost.

Minimum performance characteristics

18

• (1) For the purpose of paragraph 17(a), a method of analysis for a parameter specified in the first column of the table in Section 2 (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 concentrations 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,

• (c) in the case of benzo(a)pyrene, complies, where relevant, with the requirement specified in the third column of the table, and

• (d) in the case of cyanide, complies with the requirement specified in the fourth column of the table.

• (2) In the case of a parameter specified in the first column of the table in Section 2, where a method of analysis that complies with the requirements of sub-paragraph (1) is used to determine whether the concentration of that parameter exceeds the concentration specified for that parameter in the table in Part 3 of Schedule 2, 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 table in Part 3 of Schedule 2.

Minimum performance characteristics: individual pesticides

19

• (1) For the purpose of paragraph 17(a), a method of analysis for an individual pesticide 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 equal to the parametric concentration for that pesticide with a limit of quantification of 30% or less of the relevant parametric concentration;

• (b) has an uncertainty of measurement that does not exceed 30% of the parametric concentration for that pesticide or, where there is no method of analysis for the pesticide that does not exceed 30% of that concentration, an uncertainty of measurement that does not exceed—

• (i) where there is a method of analysis for the pesticide that has an uncertainty of measurement of more than 30% but less than 80%—

• (aa) the uncertainty of measurement percentage that applies in relation to that method of analysis, or

• (bb) where there is more than one such method of analysis for the pesticide, the lowest of those percentages, or

• (ii) 80%, where there is not a method of analysis for the pesticide that has an uncertainty of measurement of less than 80%.

• (2) Where a method of analysis that complies with the requirements of sub-paragraph (1) is used to determine whether the concentration of an individual pesticide exceeds the parametric concentration specified in the table in Part 3 of Schedule 2 that applies to that pesticide, 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 the parametric concentration that applies to that pesticide in the table.

Alternative minimum performance characteristics

20

• (1) For the purpose of paragraph 17(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 3 (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 parametric 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 parametric concentrations with a precision not less than the percentage of the parametric concentration specified in the third column of the table,

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

• (d) in the case of cyanide, complies with the requirement specified in the fifth column of the table.

• (2) For the purpose of sub-paragraph (1)(b) and the table in Section 3, “precision” (the random error) is twice the relative standard deviation (within a batch and between batches) of the spread of results from the mean as further described in ISO 5725-1:1994(en) entitled “Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and results – Part 1: General principles and definitions” published by the International Organization for Standardization on 22nd December 1994, as amended by ISO 5725-1:1994/Cor 1:1998 entitled “Accuracy (trueness and precision) of measurement methods and results – Part 1: General principles and definitions TECHNICAL CORRIGENDUM 1” published by the International Organization for Standardization on 2nd May 1998.

• (3) For the purpose of subparagraph (1)(c) and the table in Section 3, the limit of detection is—

• (a) three times the standard deviation within a batch of a natural sample containing a low concentration of the parameter, or

• (b) five times the standard deviation of a blank sample within a batch.

Uncertainty of measurement

21

• (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.