Thank you for the opportunity to submit memoranda for the above inquiry. I have also responded to the Water UK consultation request on this subject.

  My overall view is that Anglian Water have an effective working relationship with both the Anglian and Thames regions of the Environment Agency. The real environmental benefits that have been achieved through partnership activity with the Agency should not be underestimated. In the future I am sure that joint activity of this nature will become increasingly important as we strive towards sustainability.

  However, there also are some areas where I feel that there is scope for improving the working relationship between the Agency and the Water Industry. Most notably, from our point of view, would be the issue of prosecutions and the very real need for a "level playing field" nationally.

  To further illustrate these points I have appended some more detailed notes as follows:

—  Annex 1.  Examples of where real environmental benefit has been achieved through partnership activity between Anglian Water and the Environment Agency.

—  Annex 2.  The regional differences in the number of prosecutions bought against water companies for pollution offences.

—  Annex 3.  More general comments related to the headings in the Water UK consultation.

Paul Woodcock,

Head of Water Quality and Environmental Regulation

  Anglian Water are extremely keen to support and develop the partnership approach with the Environment Agency to achieve real environmental gain. This has already been seen in practice and some key examples are given below:

THE AMP2 INVESTMENT PROGRAMME

  Joint activity on development and implementation of the AMP2 programme was extremely successful with obligations being fulfilled and significant, cost effective, environmental improvements being delivered, most notably these included:

—  The most successful bathing water programme in England and Wales;

—  Significant investment and improvement in river water quality through the RNC, Phosphorous removal and CSO programmes;

—  Comprehensive studies—co-operative work in developing the methodology for these studies, implementing marine field work and development of a state-of-the-art coastal modelling system. The model is now a key tool in the design of our Blue Flag investment programme.

BIODIVERSITY INVESTMENT PROGRAMME

  Anglian Water have formed a strong partnership with the Agency regarding work on the BIP. Discretionary expenditure exceeding £6.5 million over the past five years has produced many water quality improvements and management strategies. Two important projects have lead to phosphorous removal at the six largest STW's within the Broads and the creation of the New Wetlands Harvest Sustainable Management Strategy. Additional partnership projects have been focused on species protection and the implementation of national Biodiversity Action Plans. These include, the launch of the Anglian Otters and Rivers Project, to protect and promote otters and their conservation, and the sponsorship of the rare Depressed River Mussel.

THE TRIPARTITE WORKING GROUP—MANAGEMENT OF EUTROPHICATION IN THE RUTHAMFORD RESERVOIRS (ONGOING)

  The group has membership from Anglian Water, EN and the EA. The objectives are to establish agreed eutrophication management plans for the water supply reservoirs. The plans take into account the various demands placed on these resources (water supply, recreation and conservation) and cost benefit considerations. The studies and associated reports are now in the process of being finalised with internal consultation (for the member bodies) due before autumn 1999.

Water Resources Planning (ongoing)

  The Water Resources Plan is being developed and agreed through extensive liaison between Anglian Water and the Agency, beginning with the reassessment of yields for the "Agenda for Action" review. The WRP promotes sustainable development through the use of demand management and where appropriate resource development, following detailed environmental appraisal.

  Specific joint water resources management projects include:

—  RUTSIM

  Anglian Water has developed a model using common Anglian Water/Agency data and software to simulate the Ruthamford system from river abstraction to demand node. The purpose of the model is to provide a tool to optimise on Anglian Water's use of water resources and to provide common ground for assessing future "plans or projects" for the operation and development of the Ruthamford system.

—  Groundwater Investigations and Modelling

  The EA have proposed a strategy of aquifer investigation to better understand and where possible quantify the availability of water resources. The aim is to establish a common understanding of the issues with a view to reaching agreement on the way in which they are best managed.

—  Habitat Directive (Water Resources)

  The NEP review of water abstraction impacts on "conservation" sites was included in the AMP3 business plan submission to Ofwat. A steering group is being set up to manage the investment allowed by Ofwat for the investigations proposed to assess the need for remediation. Work to rehabilitate East Ruston Fen has been progressed through the Biodiversity Investment Programme and EU LIFE funding for the NEP provides for relocation of part of the East Ruston abstraction.

—  Ouse and Nene Strategic Studies (ongoing)

  This extensive work involves the linkage of hydraulic, water resource and quality models. These will then be related to the ecological requirements of, principally, the "European sites" so that water resource scenarios can be assessed in terms of levels of risk to these important sites. The work is being overseen by a steering group comprised of Anglian Water, EN, RSPB and the Agency.

  There would seem to be a significant difference in the approach that the Environment Agency take when determining whether or not to prosecute for pollution offences. From the following table, Anglian Water, Wessex, Southern and Welsh judged more harshly than Severn Trent, Yorkshire or North West. The underlying reason for this needs to be analysed by the Environment Agency.

	Cat 1 & 2 incidents*				Total substantiated incidents Cat 1-3*				No of prosecutions in Financial Year**
No of incidents per prosecution
Company	1996	1997*	1998	1996	1997*	1998	1996	1997	1998	1996	1997	1998
Anglian	38 (five cat. 1s)	37 (one cat. 1)	18 (zero cat. 1s)	378	508	442	8	4	8	47	127	55
Dyr Cymru	31 (three cat. 1s)	25 (two cat. 1s)	19 (one cat. 1)	511	510	420	7	10	6	73	51	70
Northumbrian	33 (three cat. 1s)	22 (four cat. 1s)	13 (one cat. 1)	265	325	155	0	2	1	—	163	155
North West	65 (four cat. 1s)	47 (five cat. 1s)	22 (five cat. 1s)	599	338	239	0	0	0	—	—	—
Severn Trent	43 (six cat. 1s)	45 (four cat. 1s)	22 (zero cat. 1s)	896	964	756	5	1	2	179	964	378
Southern	17 (six cat. 1s)	20 (five cat. 1s)		203	213	173	5	4	4	41	53	43
South West	8 (zero cat. 1s)	14 (three cat. 1s)	8 (one cat. 1)	229	257	210	2	1	3	115	257	70
Thames	23 (zero cat. 1s)	30 (three cat. 1s)		191	157	148	3	3	3	64	52	49
Wessex	22 (one cat. 1)	18 (one cat. 1)	9 (zero cat. 1s)	217	221	192	0	2	5	—	111	38
Yorkshire	35 (one cat. 1)	44 (zero cat. 1s)	38 (four cat. 1s)	389	442	348	0	1	0	—	442	—
OFWAT table 1(d) data. ** OFWAT table 1(c) for 1996-97 data. EA letter for 1998 data, no 98 data was obtainable on numbers of Cat. 1 and 2 for Thames or Southern, therefore figures in italics are `expected' values to be treated with caution.

  The following comments relate to the headings quoted in the consultation request from Water UK, dated 12 August.

UNDERSTANDING THE NEEDS OF THE WATER INDUSTRY

  There is a perception that with the recent amalgamation of the various Waste sectors into the Agency, there has been some reduction in the fundamental understanding of how the Water Industry operates. Indeed the requests we are now receiving to show Agency staff how sewage treatment works (STW) function may be a sign of this.

  The Agency focus, primarily, on protecting and enhancing the environment. As a consequence the augmentation and development of water resources, which is also one of their duties, is not so actively pursued. In addition they also have a duty to take into account the needs of statutory water undertakers in carrying out their duties. Again this due regard is not so vigorously pursued.

  Despite the fact that abstraction licence applications are often made well within designated time scales (many of which are "renewals") and determination dates agreed well in time the Agency determinations are often late and in some instances past the renewal date.

  The Agency appear to be over confident that the potential for growth in water demand can be offest by water savings. The lack of promotion of water supply/resource schemes for the future leaves many companies and the nation vulnerable to drought and climate change.

  The Agency has to deal with an increased amount of legislation in relation to water resource, both EC (Habitats Directive) and National (Licensing review). Legislation affecting discharge consenting is also becoming more onerous. Their role as a regulator requires both balance and pragmatism in the interpretation of this legislation in order to be effective. It is essential that legislation is implemented in a transparent and nationally consistent manner.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN NATIONAL AND REGIONAL ENVIRONMENT AGENCY OFFICES

  There can, on occasion, appear to be differences of view between Regional and National offices of the Agency, sometimes on policy and sometimes on such things as PR and media contact—the Hall of Shame initiative is an example of this.

  There is significant difference between national, regional and local agency interpretations of policy. This has been raised nationally many times and it is improving. However, there is still insufficient "control" over interpretation of policy—eg local levels may interpret the precautionary principle as a "no development" policy where this is not the objective of the national or regional level.

RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN ENVIRONMENT AGENCY AND OTHER REGULATORS

  From a Water Industry perspective the recent negotiations between the Environment Agency and OFWAT for the AMP3 settlement did not appear to have been conducted in the most professional manner.

  OFWAT and DWI would seem to have some discrepancies between their sustainability policies. Some processes and policies are, when viewed holistically, not analogous, for example, reduced consumption of energy can not be accomplished at the same time as increased treatment of drinking water or additional Ultra Violet disinfection at STW's.

INPUT TO ENVIRONMENT AGENCY FORWARD PLANNING

  Although at a local level the Agency are keen to get the general public involved eg local licence determinations, they do not appear to be so keen to involve at a strategic level.

  The Agency appear to have concentrated on water efficiency and conservation and have, relatively speaking, neglected the process of assessment and development of water resources. For example, the review of groundwater resource evaluation through modelling is yet to have been undertaken, yet a demand management centre with regular bulletins and advice has been run for years.

  The LEAP process has noticeably improved over recent years, by more accurately reflecting actual situations and by having a more balanced view.

HOW THE ENVIRONMENT AGENCY BALANCES THE NEEDS OF ALL ITS CUSTOMERS

  The Agency's primary customer is the environment not the management of water resources for public water supplies apart from where there are operating agreements. It must be questioned whether the forward planning of water resource/supply should remain within their remit. A national Water Resources unit independent of the Agency would be beneficial. This would allow the Agency to concentrate, as it does now, on environmental regulation and protection.

ANY OTHER POINTS

  There is a perception that Agency (and DWI for that matter) are starting to push for quality standards so onerous that it is difficult to argue them on a reasonable cost/benefit basis. In the interests of our customers and sustainability there should be a wider national debate on what the Community should, and indeed, wants to pay for.

October 1999