MAIN FEATURE
For England in the Storm Overflow Discharge Reduction Plan of 2022 (SODRP) sets tighter standards than the UWWTRs… a limit of 10
spills rather than 20, and does not have a cost benefit get-out clause.
discharging near designated bathing waters by reducing the frequency of discharges to meet Environment Agency spill standards by 2035.
• No more than an average of 10 spills per year by 2050.
The SODRP does not have a cost benefit clause to protect customers from high bills. The targets are absolute. The SODRP is policy rather than a legal requirement, but the targets will be made a legal requirement for each overflow by writing them into the discharge permit. There is a phased programme from now to 2050 to get all overflows compliant and permitted.
So the SODRP sets tighter standards than the UWWTRs. It sets a limit of 10 spills rather than 20 and does not have a cost benefit get-out clause. So the UWWTRs should be redundant; but they are still the law. There is therefore some confusion as to how overflows should be prioritised over the years to 2050. Should priority should be given to overflows that are causing the most impact, those that are furthest away from the SODRP targets or those that fail to meet the old UWWTR rules? Let us hope
6
that this is resolved soon so that we can get to work.
Other principles
The government is consulting on guidance on overflow discharges and the document sets out some principles for how options to improve overflows should be selected. These include:
• Nature based “green” solutions such as sustainable drainage should be preferred to “grey” solutions of pipes and concrete.
• Other benefits to communities and the environment should be taken into account. Again this would favour “green” solutions as these give benefits including amenity, urban cooling and absorbing carbon dioxide.
• A solution for the long term should normally be built in one go unless there were good reasons for incremental or modular delivery.
There is a huge amount of work to do to reduce spills from existing overflows through retrofit, but there is also a need to avoid making things worse with new housing and commercial development. So what are the implications for the
| February 2025 |
draintraderltd.com water industry and its supply chain.
New development The government has said that it will at last implement Schedule 3 of the 2010 Flood and Water Management Act to require sustainable drainage solutions for runoff from new development (though still delayed). The devil will be in the detail but this will be a good move. This is likely to bring in new requirements for inspection of designs and construction to ensure that they are satisfactory.
With surface water going to SuDS water companies should have an increased focus on ensuring that foul drainage systems are strictly foul only. I would expect new requirements for flow monitoring to confirm that the systems are not taking runoff. I also expect more focus on infiltration into foul sewers through leaking joint and damaged pipes. Measurement from some recent developments that were built and tested to current practice showed massive infiltration in the next very wet winter. I think that we might see a requirement for vacuum testing of new sewers to show that they will not suffer from infiltration or perhaps a
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64
