Drinking Water for New Zealand

Managed by ESR for the Ministry of Health.         Data extracted from the National WINZ Database.
 

nz map

 

go to ESR web page Home Drinking water header
ESR Website
Home Supplies NZ Proceses Water Carriers Laboartories WINZ User Reference  
From 26 June 2017, data on this website is unchanging while the underlying databases are restructured.

NZ Processes

Drinking-Water Standards for New Zealand

DWS 2005 cover 2008The current Standard is the Drinking-Water Standards for New Zealand 2005 (revised 2008). You can link to the latest official copy from our list of Ministry of Health documents or click the picture here.

While originally the DWSNZ 2005 was to become the sole standard from 1 January 2006, the 2000 Standards can be used in some situations until 31 December 2014.

Compliance with the Standards

For a drinking-water supply, compliance is determined by considering how the quality of the water compares with the requirements of the Standards. To meet these Standards, some sort of monitoring process is usually required.

Non-Compliance or Transgression. What's the Difference?

Monitoring is the process of taking samples from a water supply at specified intervals to measure potent contaminants. Good systematic and ongoing management is important.

If an individual sample result fails to meet the maximum allowable value (MAV) or some other requirement, it is said to be a transgression. In some cases a few transgressions are allowable.

Compliance with the Standards is not based on the results of a single monitoring sample, but is an overall measure of whether the Standards requirements are met for a full 12 month period:

Compliance can include evaluation of aspects such as:

How much monitoring is necessary?

The amount of monitoring required is specified in the Drinking-Water Standards for New Zealand 2005. The standards speak about "determinands", which are chemical substances, microbiological organisms, or some other characteristic of the water that can be measured, "something for which you can test".

The standards divide all determinands of public health significance into four classes according to the priority with which they should be measured. This avoids unnecessary monitoring. Of the four classes, only determinands in the Priority 1 and 2 classes require measuring, but the others have been defined in case they are required in the future.

What are Priority 1 determinands?

The determinands with the highest priority for monitoring, appropriately called "Priority 1 determinands", must be measured in all drinking-water supplies. These are currently micro-organisms which are of public health significance.

The first of these is bacteria. To gain an indication of water contamination by faecal material, a bacteria called E. coli is measured.

Giardia and Cryptosporidium are protozoa of increasing concern in drinking-waters, so these are also Priority 1 determinands. Because direct testing for these protozoa is often not practicable, the standards offer options for stopping their passage. Treatment processes such as coagulation and filtration are recognised as effective when properly managed.

The standards specify how frequently monitoring samples must be taken, such as monthly for a small supply through to at least daily for a metropolitan area. In all cases, a minimum of a year’s sampling is required to demonstrate compliance with the standards.

Possible Reasons for E. coli Non-Compliance in the Zone or Plant

Factor Explanation
Transgressions E. coli detected in more water samples than the minimum number allowable for a zone or plant of this population.
No samples taken No E. coli samples taken (or recorded.)
Not enough samples Some monitoring samples taken, but not enough. (The Standards specify how many and how often, etc.)
Inadequate Scheduling Enough samples were taken, but either there were excessively long gaps between samples at some dates, or else samples were concentrated on too few days of the week. (For example, if all samples are taken on Mondays, the supply will not comply.)
No evidence that corrective actions were taken If E. coli transgressions are found in monitoring samples, the water supplier must take appropriate corrective actions to recheck the quality, fix any problems, and if necessary inform health authorities and warn consumers.
Corrective Actions taken, but delayed Corrective actions taken too slowly to meet the requirements of the Standards and to minimise the potential risk to consumers.
Not a recognised laboratory Only samples analysed by a Ministry of Health recognised laboratory are acceptable for demonstrating compliance. Who are these laboratories?

What are Priority 2 determinands?

A second level of potential contaminants, known appropriately as "Priority 2 determinands", is also defined in the standards. These are determinands known to have adverse effects upon human health. Unlike Priority 1 determinands, they do not have to be measured in every supply. Monitoring is usually required if the Ministry of Health believes that levels in a particular supply exceed half the maximum allowable value (MAV) for a particular health-significant determinand.

How is a Priority 2 determinand identified? ESR, a Crown Research Institute, assesses supplies on behalf of the Ministry of Health. It uses questionnaires and targeted testing to identify those supplies where significant levels of a particular chemical are likely to be present. Through formal procedures, the Ministry of Health then confirms these chemicals as Priority 2 determinands for that particular supply.

Only supplies with populations of 100 or more have been assessed, and the population must be at least 500 before a Priority 2 determinand is officially assigned and appears in this Register. These limits will be lowered in the future.

Currently around 150 Priority 2 determinands have been assigned, with about 50 assigned to treatment plants and 100 to distribution zones (see latest figures). They are included in the Register listings for those supplies, where they will appear as "Test for:' items like this:

  ZONE:   zonecode        zonename           5,000       De
                   Test for: Arsenic

The water supplier is then required to test regularly for that chemical in the supply, to confirm that it remains below the MAV. Weekly testing is required for fluoride, but for other chemicals this is usually monthly. If concentrations measured remain less than half the MAV for 12 consecutive months, and the Ministry of Health is satisfied that the risk is not significant, that Priority 2 entry will be removed from the Register.

All Priority 2 determinands listed in this Register are chemicals, but micro-organisms or radiological constituents can also be defined.

Why is fluoride a Priority 2?

If you see fluoride beside your supply, it will most likely be because it has been added at the treatment plant to help fight against tooth decay. It is not a contaminant or a health risk at the usual level of application, but since it is a health risk at higher concentrations, it is important that it be regularly monitored. While the Priority 2 general requirement is monthly monitoring, fluoridated supplies must be tested at least weekly.

See all NZ fluoridated supplies

In some areas of the world, fluoride naturally appears at excessive levels in groundwater. However, this is very rare in New Zealand.

The Annual Report of Drinking-Water Quality

For each year since 1999, the Ministry of Health has carried out an annual review of compliance with the drinking-water standards for each community drinking-water supply. This review gives a nation-wide "progress report" on the supply of safe water, while also highlighting those supplies that remain deficient.

Until the end of 2005, the Annual Review was presented for a calendar year. It now covers a 12 month period to 30 June each year.

Once published, the Annual review can be read as a pdf file on the Ministry of Health website (link to review documents) or summarised for individual supplies on this website. Typically, the report is published about a year after the period ends.

Drinking-Water Legislation

The Health (Drinking-Water) Amendment Act was passed in October 2007. Read about it, or connect to the Act itself from the Drinking Water Act page.

Trends

An increased emphasis is being placed upon Risk Management Plans for supplies, rather than relying upon compliance monitoring as the primary means of detecting problems.

 

TOP OF PAGE

Home  |  Water Supplies  |  NZ Processes  |  Water Carriers  |  Laboratories  |  WINZ user  |  Reference  |  About WINZ  |  Contacts

ESR Risk & Response Group Web Solutions ©2008 -