Memorandum submitted by Southern Water
(DFWMB 31)
As requested I am writing to outline the detail
behind my question which we (Southern Water) will also cover in
our response to the DEFRA consultation.
OFWAT stressed the need to ''manage demand for
drainage services''. One response to this need is to reduce the
amount of surface water being received in the public sewerage
system. This approach is particularly important where the public
sewer is a combined system ie carries both foul and surface water
flows. Limiting the surface water input has the advantages of
reducing the risk of flooding by releasing capacity in the sewer
and reducing the risk of environmental harm which may be caused
through increased storm spills from the system.
An approach to controlling or restricting the
amount of surface water that reaches the public system would be
to remove the current ''right to connect'' for surface water.
However, we note in the draft Floods & Water Management Bill
that the issue of ''right to connect'' is dealt with, not through
a removal, but via an approval process where Water Companies (''Sewerage
Undertakers'') are consultees only. Hence my question—is
this proposed process robust and does it have sufficient rigour
to deal with the issues of managing flood risk going forward?
Removal of the "right to connect"
surface water would encourage the development of a range of SuDs
(Sustainable Drainage Systems) ranging from permeable pavements
through to wetlands etc.
The relevant clauses in the draft Bill are:-
233 Right to connect
(2) After section 106 insert:—
"106 A Sustainable drainage
(1) A person may exercise the right under
section 106(1) in respect of surface water only if —
(a) the construction of the drainage
system that is to communicate with the public sewer was approved
under section 223 of the Water and Flood Management Act 2009 (sustainable
drainage standards), and
(b) the proposals for approval
included a proposal for the communication with the public sewer.
223 Requirement of approval before construction
(1) The construction of a drainage system
may not be commenced without the approval of the approving body.
222 Approving body
(1) For the purposes of the operation of
this Part in relation to England the approving body for a drainage
system is —
(a) the unitary authority for the
area in which it is to be constructed, or
(b) if there is no unitary authority,
the county council for the area
227 Sewerage undertaker
(1) Before determining an application for
approval under section 223 the approving body must consult
any relevant sewerage undertaker
(2) As soon as is reasonably practicable
after determining an application for approval the approving body
must notify any relevant sewerage undertaker.
If we are to achieve the long term goal of "managing
the demand for drainage services" then perhaps we need a
more robust approach to the "right to connect"? For
example, by removing the "right to connect" surface
water in all circumstances where the connection is to a combined
system or where there is evidence of heightened flood risk, or
by strengthening the Water Company/Sewerage Undertaker's role
in the Local Authority process.
Southern Water
June 2009
| 
