INDUSTRY COMMENT
Water Regulation 4: what it really means for specifiers and product choice
B
Many specifiers – and indeed key stakeholders across the water and broader construction and infrastructure sector – wrongly believe WRAS approval is the only recognised form of Regulation 4 compliance. This can restrict their product choice and slow down project timescales. Jonathan Price, business development manager at Kiwa Watertec, explains how alternative certification pathways are changing this
y recognising Water Regulation 4 as the standard for compliant products, rather than just WRAS approval, specifiers can confidently specify a broader range of innovative options,
accelerate project timelines and be assured of compliance. Highly stringent standards are in place governing the specification of products which are used to transport or receive water from the UK public mains supply. Regulation 4 of the Water Supply (Water Fittings) Regulations has set out exacting and clearly defined standards for safety, quality and performance for more than 25 years, and these standards leave no room for compromise. Indeed, Water Regulation 4 plays a vital role
in protecting the integrity of the UK’s drinking water supply – and therefore public health. Critically, it provides assurance that any product specified and installed within plumbing systems cannot contaminate water, compromise performance, or create unnecessary risk within either buildings or infrastructure. The exacting nature of the stipulations within
Water Regulation 4 provides a measure of confidence for all stakeholders, including specifiers and building owners, that the products being supplied and used are safe and fit for purpose.
For many years, the demonstration of compliance with Regulation 4 across the UK has generally taken a single and established route: certification via the Water Regulations Approval Scheme, more commonly known as WRAS. It is fair to say that there has been a dearth of
recognised alternatives to WRAS. That means that the WRAS route has become ingrained across specifications, practices and the broader sector. Indeed, there are numerous examples of where the two names have been used interchangeably. This has created a perception among some manufacturers of water and plumbing products – and indeed other leading lights in the sector – that the only permissible route to achieving compliance with Water Regulation 4 lies in achieving certification via WRAS. In many cases, WRAS certification – rather than Water Regulation 4 certification – is what is demanded by the market, leading even those who are fully aware that Regulation 4 certification is needed, to request certification via WRAS to appease these demands. In many organisations, a significant disconnect has arisen between sales and marketing teams who are wedded to WRAS, and compliance teams whose more profound understanding of the difference between Regulation 4 compliance and certification via WRAS means they know that it is the former which should be the goal.
These perceptions, and the resulting focus on WRAS certifications, have over many years generated enormous demand for the certification services offered by WRAS. However, certification capacity within WRAS is limited, and significant bottlenecks can arise, potentially resulting in delays in the issue of compliance certificates. The result is that there is a constant risk that a high-quality, high-performance product, which meets or even exceeds the relevant performance requirements, may not be allowed entry into the marketplace simply because it has not reached its turn in the queue at WRAS to undergo certification.
Delays of several weeks or even months in achieving certification are not uncommon as the backlog of products undergoing certification within WRAS at any one time continues to multiply and the WRAS process includes cut-off deadlines which are every 5-6 weeks. There is, however, a key point to note here: namely, that while the quality of the certification service provided by WRAS is beyond reproach, WRAS itself is not – and has never been – the only certifying body.
What this means is that approval via WRAS is not in any situation a pre-requisite for certification – and, therefore, for any product to be specified or installed within a building. This situation has opened up an opportunity for other organisations capable of providing a similarly rigorous certification process, and therefore an additional and equally credible means to show compliance with Water Regulation 4.
Indeed, the efforts of leading players in the testing and certification sector have been the catalyst for the development of novel services,
26 BUILDING SERVICES & ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER JUNE 2026
such as Kiwa’s KUKreg4 service, which provides a route to certification which is no less rigorous but can be speedier and more efficient. Dedicated, professional support at every touchpoint – testing, inspection and certification – ensures a streamlined approach which can radically cut the time for the entire process to weeks, days, or even a single day in some instances.
This is thanks to a single-touch approach whereby the entire testing and decision-making process is undertaken in-house, without any reference to an external party. As well as being cost-effective, this approach offers specific advantages for manufacturers of products which have already been certified overseas. In these instances, there is no need for testing and documentation processes to be repeated, while the data garnered from the overseas testing can be reused for the UK certification. To give an example, it is possible to combine the KUKreg4 certification process with other certifications required for European standards, including EN1111, EN817, EN200 and EN13959. This enables manufacturers to work with a single partner for all compliance issues across multiple markets. Several approaches are available. The first is
largely similar to the standard WRAS approach, entailing complete retesting and reissue five years on. This is what we refer to as KUKreg4 level 3.
Customers can also opt for a solution where
more frequent manufacturer inspections take place – resulting in feedback on continuous improvement. This provides assurance of the consistency of manufacturing standards over an extended period
Read the latest at:
www.bsee.co.uk
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
