Annual Report on the Quality of Tasmania's Drinking Water

Annual Report on the Quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water

Director of Public Health

1 July 2003 – 30 June 2004

Public and Environmental Health Service

Contents Page No.

1. Introduction...... 4 2. Background...... 5 2.1 Water Supply Systems ...... 5 2.2 Water and Public Health...... 5 3. Implementation of the Water Quality Guidelines ...... 6 4. Validity of Microbiological Monitoring...... 7 5. Results - Bulk Water Authorities ...... 8 5.1 Cradle Coast Water ...... 8 5.2 Hobart Water ...... 9 5.3 Esk Water ...... 10 6. Results - Local Government Schemes ...... 11 6.1 Break O’ Day Council...... 11 6.2 Brighton Council ...... 12 6.3 Burnie City Council ...... 12 6.4 Central Coast Council...... 13 6.5 Central Highlands Council...... 13 6.6 Circular Head Council...... 14 6.7 Clarence City Council...... 15 6.8 Derwent Valley Council...... 15 6.9 Devonport City Council...... 16 6.10 Dorset Council ...... 16 6.11 Flinders Council ...... 17 6.12 George Town Council ...... 18 6.13 Glamorgan/Spring Bay Council ...... 18 6.14 Glenorchy City Council ...... 19 6.15 Hobart City Council...... 19 6.16 Huon Valley Council...... 20 6.17 Kentish Council ...... 21 6.18 Kingborough Council...... 21 6.19 King Island Council ...... 22 6.20 Latrobe Council...... 22 6.21 Launceston City Council ...... 23 6.22 Meander Valley Council...... 23 6.23 Northern Midlands Council ...... 24 6.24 Sorell Council ...... 25 6.25 Southern Midlands Council ...... 25 6.26 Tasman Council...... 26 6.27 Waratah/Wynyard Council...... 26 6.28 West Coast Council...... 27 6.29 West Tamar Council...... 27 7. Summary Information...... 28 7.1 Bulk Water Authorities ...... 28 Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 2 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 7.2 Local Government...... 28 8. Discussion...... 29 8.1 Bulk Water Authorities ...... 29 8.2 Local Government...... 29 9. Partnership Arrangements between Water Suppliers and State Government...... 30 References...... 31

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 3 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 1. Introduction

The Water Quality Guidelines issued under the Public Health Act 1997 protect public health and establish best practice standards for drinking water quality improvement.

Throughout the world, clean water is becoming a precious commodity. Positive health and economic outcomes are achieved for Tasmania if drinking water supplies are kept free from disease-causing organisms and pollution through the application of best practice standards.

To protect the health of Tasmanians, the Department of Health and Human Services administers the regulation of drinking water supplies across the State. An important requirement of the Water Quality Guidelines is the annual reporting of public drinking water quality by water suppliers to the Director of Public Health.

The water suppliers’ reports are written in accordance with the model report detailed in Appendix B of the Water Quality Guidelines. The water suppliers’ reports detail compliance with the above guidelines for public water supply systems under their control and describe the various systems in place for the protection of public health. The particular focus of the water suppliers’ reports is on the frequency and results of water quality testing throughout the year.

The Annual Report on the Quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water issued by the Director of Public Health summarises the water suppliers’ reports and provides information such as the number of public water supply systems under the water suppliers’ control, sampling frequency, sampling results and boil water alerts.

In this, the sixth year of reporting (1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004), all three bulk water authorities and twenty-eight local government authorities have submitted annual water quality reports (there are 29 local government authorities in Tasmania, but Tasman Council does not operate a public water supply system and is therefore not required to provide an annual report).

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 4 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 2. Background

2.1 Water Supply Systems

In Tasmania, there are three bulk water authorities (Hobart Water, Cradle Coast Water and Esk Water), which operate water supply systems in the North, South, and North West of the State. There are also twenty-nine local government authorities in the State. While Councils all have responsibilities for water quality under the Public Health Act 1997, only some local government authorities manage their own drinking water supply schemes. Most Councils purchase water supplies from the three bulk water authorities.

2.2 Water and Public Health

Drinking water should be safe to use and aesthetically pleasing. Ideally, it should be clear, colourless, and well aerated, with no unpalatable taste or odour and it should contain no suspended matter, harmful chemical substances or pathogenic micro-organisms (NH&MRC 1996). The taste, appearance and colour of drinking water are generally the characteristics that consumers use to distinguish poor quality drinking water from good quality drinking water. However, the absence of any unpleasant qualities will not guarantee the water's microbiological or chemical safety.

The safety of water in public health terms is determined by its microbiological, physical, chemical and radiological quality. The most common and widespread health risk associated with drinking water is contamination, either directly or indirectly, by human or animal excreta, and with the micro-organisms contained in faeces (WHO 1996).

Chapter 18 of "Agenda 21" of the United Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED, 1992), reports that "an estimated 80 per cent of all diseases and over a third of deaths in developing countries is caused by the consumption of contaminated water, and on average as much as one-tenth of each person’s productive time is sacrificed to water- related illness”.

The cholera epidemic that began in Peru in 1991 and spread to 16 other countries in Latin America is the most striking demonstration in recent history of the intrinsic interdependence of safe drinking water, human health and economic development. In Peru, where the outbreak was most severe, the abrupt halt of tourism and agricultural exports cost the Peruvian economy one billion US dollars in just ten weeks. The total economic cost to Peru was more than three times the total national dollar investment in water supply and sanitation improvements during the decade of the 1980s (The World Bank 1992).

Incidents of contamination of water supplies with potentially hazardous micro-organisms are not only confined to developing countries, as the problems in Walkerton (Ontario, Canada, May 2000) demonstrated. At Walkerton more than 2,300 individuals were estimated to have suffered illness and 7 died. A similar event in Tasmania would have significant impact on a range of infrastructures and essential services, which in turn could cause significant social disruption. The Walkerton incident also demonstrated that drinking water quality issues are complex and are linked to catchment management, water treatment methods, water quality monitoring methods and water quality testing techniques.

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 5 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 3. Implementation of the Water Quality Guidelines

The Public Health Act 1997 – Water Quality Guidelines, if applied comprehensively to drinking water supplies, are designed to achieve healthy and aesthetically pleasing drinking water which meets with National standards, as they reference the performance standards of the National Health and Medical Research Council/Agriculture Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand - Australian Drinking Water Guidelines.

The focus of the Tasmanian water quality guidelines testing requirements is to seek compliance with the microbiological sampling regimes detailed in the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines and require chemical testing when potential pollutants are identified in catchment surveys. The chemical testing regimes detailed in the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines are not routinely required at this date. Rather, water suppliers are asked to test for harmful chemicals on a risk management basis using for instance Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 4360:1999 - Risk Management. For example, if a water supply is sourced from agricultural areas, pesticide testing should be undertaken in accordance with the procedures detailed in the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines and in accordance with a recognised risk management process.

The Water quality guidelines and Public Health Act 1997 are designed to give drinking water suppliers three choices for water quality:

1. Meet the quality values detailed in the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines; or

2. inform their consumers that the water supply is not always of potable quality and therefore should be treated (for example, being boiled for 1 minute to kill potentially harmful micro-organisms); or

3. cause other public health measures to occur such as closing the supply, providing alternative supplies, or improve the water supply to acceptable industry standards.

To facilitate the implementation of the Water Quality Guidelines, Departmental Environmental Health Officers have consulted with relevant local government and bulk water supply personnel and have provided direct assistance on how to apply and implement the major objectives of the Guidelines using risk assessment methodology.

The current Guidelines are in the process of being reviewed to facilitate the re-issue of the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines and will be re-issued during 2005.

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 6 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 4. Validity of Microbiological Monitoring

The ability to accurately assess the potential health risk from the consumption of drinking water is reliant on the quality of microbiological compliance testing.

The reliability of microbiological analysis is dependent on several factors, such as the sample needs to be representative of the drinking water being tested. This means that an adequate sampling plan should be used and the sampling personnel should be trained in sample collection. The collection of a water sample at an inappropriate point may give a result that is not representative of water quality in the supply as a whole. Similarly, if the aseptic technique of the person taking the samples is poor, indicator bacteria may be introduced into the sample resulting in a false positive result.

Guidance on sampling points and plans can be sourced from the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines and Australian Standard 5667: 1998.

The NHMRC Discussion Paper “Microbial Indicators of Water Quality 2002” recommends that Total coliforms be removed as a health compliance parameter for faecal contamination in the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines and that E.coli be retained as the primary compliance parameter for faecal contamination.

In light of the above, this report now concentrates on E.coli as the primary compliance parameter for drinking water system performance.

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 7 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 5. Results - Bulk Water Authorities

There are three Bulk Water Authorities operating in the State.

The following is a summary of each Bulk Water Authority’s reticulated water schemes and each scheme’s compliance to State water quality standards:

5.1 Cradle Coast Water

Cradle Coast Water has 7 water supply systems under its control:

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued 1. Deep Creek 4,400 Yes Yes No No System 2. Cam River 8,300 Yes Yes No No System 3. Leven River 4,000 Yes Yes No No System 4. Gawler River 10,900 Yes Yes No No System 5. Forth River 31,100 Yes Yes No No System 6. Lake Paloona 700 Yes Yes No No System 7. Lake Barrington 2,000 Yes Yes No No System

Summary

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 8 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 5.2 Hobart Water

Hobart Water has 16 water supply systems under its control:

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued 1. Upper Reservoir Unknown Yes Yes No No 2. Lower Reservoir Unknown Yes Yes No No 3. River Derwent Unknown Yes Yes No No (at Bryn Estyn Inlet) 4. Bryn Estyn Unknown Yes Yes No No Rising Main 5. Lady Barron Unknown Yes Yes No No Creek 6. Risdon Brook Unknown Yes Yes No No Dam 7. Flagstaff Gully Unknown Yes Yes No No Dam 8. Tolosa Dam Unknown Yes Yes No No 9. Limekiln Dam Unknown Yes Yes No No 10. Ridgeway Dam Unknown Yes Yes No No 11. Domain Pit Unknown Yes Yes No No 12. Margate Unknown Yes Yes No No Reservoir 13. Penna Road Pit Unknown Yes Yes No No 14. Richmond Unknown Yes Yes No No Reservoir 15. Kempton Unknown Yes Yes No No Reservoir 16. Box Hill Fenton Unknown Yes Yes No No

Summary

• All water supply systems were sampled in accordance with the ADWG – 96 recommendations. • Microbiological quality was in compliance with the Public Health Act 1997 – Water Quality Guidelines. • The Annual Hobart Water Quality Report was of exceptional quality. • The numbers of consumers receiving water from each scheme is unknown due to Hobart Water being able to source water from a number of locations to supply a single connection point. However, the total consumer population supplied by Hobart Water is 184,942 and the number of households is 80,564.

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 9 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 5.3 Esk Water

Esk Water has 4 water supply systems under its control:

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued 1. North Esk Unknown Yes Yes No No Scheme 2. South Esk Unknown Yes Yes No No Scheme 3. West Tamar Unknown Yes Yes No No 4. Distillery Creek Unknown Yes Yes No No

Summary

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 10 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 6. Results - Local Government Schemes

There are 28 local government authorities operating water supply schemes in the State.

(Tasman Council has no public reticulated water schemes and for the purposes of this report is not evaluated)

The following is a summary of each Council’s reticulated water schemes and each scheme’s compliance to State water quality standards:

6.1 Break O’ Day Council

The Break O’ Day Council has 6 water supply systems under its control:

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued 1. St Helens Town 2400 Yes Yes No No Supply 2. Scamander 350 Yes Yes No No Town Supply 3. St Marys Town 750 Yes Yes No No Supply 4. Cornwall Town 50 Yes No Yes Yes Supply 5. Fingal Town 420 Yes No Yes Yes Supply 6. Mathinna Town 180 Yes No Yes Yes Supply

Summary

• All water supply systems were sampled in accordance with the ADWG – 96 recommendations. • St Helen’s, Scamander and St Mary’s water supply systems were in compliance with the Public Health Act 1997 – Water Quality Guidelines microbiological requirements. • Cornwall, Fingal and Mathinna’s water supply systems were not in compliance with the Public Health Act 1997 – Water Quality Guidelines microbiological requirements and have had permanent boil water alerts issued to protect consumers.

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 11 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 6.2 Brighton Council

Hobart Water supplies water to the municipal area.

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued Brighton 14,000 Yes Yes No No

Summary

6.3 Burnie City Council

The Burnie City Council is the water supplier for the Burnie municipal area.

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued Burnie 20,000 Yes Yes No No

Summary

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 12 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 6.4 Central Coast Council

Cradle Coast Water supplies water to the municipal area.

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued Central Coast 15,000 Yes Yes No No

Summary

6.5 Central Highlands Council

The Central Highlands Council has 6 water supply systems under its control:

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued 1. Bothwell Water 230 Yes Yes No No Supply 2. Ellendale Water 75 Yes No Yes Yes Supply (untreated water supply) 3. Gretna Water 65 Yes No Yes Yes Supply (untreated water supply) 4. Hamilton Water 109 Yes Yes No No Supply 5. Ouse Water 100 Yes Yes No No Supply 6. Wayatinah 70 Yes Yes No No Water Supply

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 13 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 Summary

• All water supply systems were sampled in accordance with the ADWG – 96 recommendations. • Bothwell, Hamilton, Ouse and Wayatinah’s water supply systems were in compliance with the Public Health Act 1997 – Water Quality Guidelines microbiological requirements. • Ellendale and Gretna’s water supply systems were not in compliance with the Public Health Act 1997 – Water Quality Guidelines microbiological requirements and permanent boil water alerts have been issued to protect consumers. • Council has an improvement program in place to raise the standard of both Ellendale and Gretna’s water supply and treatment.

6.6 Circular Head Council

Cradle Coast Water supplies water to the municipal area.

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumer Sampling Requirements Required Issued Smithton 1658 Yes Yes No No Stanley 317 Yes Yes No No Irish Town 104 Yes Yes No No

Summary

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 14 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 6.7 Clarence City Council

Hobart Water supplies water to the municipal area.

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued Clarence Council 49,000 Yes Yes No No

Summary

6.8 Derwent Valley Council

Hobart Water supplies water to the municipal area.

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued Maydena 400 Yes Yes No No National Park/ 200 Yes Yes No No Westerway New Norfolk 5000 Yes Yes No No

Summary

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 15 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 6.9 Devonport City Council

Cradle Coast Water supplies water to the municipal area.

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued Devonport Council 25,000 Yes Yes No No

Summary

6.10 Dorset Council

Dorset Council has 10 water supply systems under its control:

Meets Health-related Boil Microbiological Boil Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued 1. Bridport 1234 Yes Yes No No 2. Scottsdale 1922 Yes Yes No No 3. Branxholm 266 Yes No Yes Yes (no disinfection) 4. Derby 86 Yes No Yes Yes (no disinfection) 5. Gladstone 91 Yes No Yes Yes (no disinfection) 6. Legerwood 100 Yes Yes Yes Yes (no disinfection) 7. Ringarooma 232 Yes No Yes Yes (no disinfection) 8. Herrick 40 Yes No Yes Yes (no disinfection) 9. Pioneer 100 Yes No Yes Yes (no disinfection) 10. Winnaleah 160 Yes No Yes Yes (no disinfection)

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 16 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 Summary

• All water supply systems were sampled in accordance with the ADWG – 96 recommendations. • The Bridport and Scottsdale water supply systems were in compliance with the Public Health Act 1997 – Water Quality Guidelines microbiological requirements, as were Legerwood, Ringarooma and Winnaleah. • However, while Legerwood, Ringarooma and Winnaleah water supply systems were in mostly in compliance with the Public Health Act 1997 – Water Quality Guidelines microbiological requirements, they required a precautionary boil water alert because they were untreated. • Pioneer, Herrick, Gladstone, Derby and Branxholm water supply systems were not in compliance with the Public Health Act 1997 – Water Quality Guidelines microbiological requirements and boil water alerts were issued to protect consumers. • Council has upgraded the Scottsdale water treatment plant and has protected water resources by developing sustainable development strategies and integrated catchment management groups. The Scottsdale water supply now complies with microbiological requirements. • Council regularly informs all consumers drinking untreated water of the need to boil water before consumption.

6.11 Flinders Council

Flinders Council has 2 water supply systems under its control:

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued 1. Whitemark Water not Yes No Yes Yes used for potable use 2. Lady Barron Water not Yes Yes Yes Yes used for (no disinfection) potable use

Summary

• All water supply systems were sampled in accordance with the ADWG – 96. • Whitemark’s water supply systems were not in compliance with the Public Health Act 1997 – Water Quality Guidelines microbiological requirements, however the town water supply is not used for potable use. Drinking water is sourced from tank water and the town water supply is used only for garden and non-potable use. • Lady Baron’s water supply systems were in compliance with the Public Health Act 1997 – Water Quality Guidelines microbiological requirements, but required precautionary boil water alert because it was untreated.

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 17 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 6.12 George Town Council

Esk Water supplies water to the municipal area.

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued George Town Unknown Yes Yes No No

Summary

6.13 Glamorgan/Spring Bay Council

Glamorgan/Spring Bay Council has 5 water supply systems under its control:

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued 1. Orford 600 Yes Yes No No 2. Triabunna 900 Yes Yes No No 3. Swansea 450 Yes No No Yes 4. Bicheno 750 Yes Yes No No 5. Coles Bay 150 Yes Yes No No

Summary

• All water supply systems were sampled in accordance with the ADWG – 96 recommendations. • Microbiological quality was in compliance with the Public Health Act 1997 – Water Quality Guidelines, except for Swansea where the water is disinfected but the microbiological standard may not comply during periods of higher turbidity (following rain events) due to insufficient flocculation and filtration systems. • Swansea has a permanent boil water alert issued.

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 18 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 6.14 Glenorchy City Council

Hobart Water supplies water to the municipal area.

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued Glenorchy 43,000 Yes Yes No No

Summary

• All water supply systems were sampled in accordance with the ADWG – 96. • Microbiological quality was in compliance with the Public Health Act 1997 – Water Quality Guidelines. • There were no boil water alerts issued, except during a localised event that related to eels entering water pipes.

6.15 Hobart City Council

Hobart Water supplies water to the City Council area.

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued Hobart 49,000 Yes Yes No No

Summary

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 19 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 6.16 Huon Valley Council

Huon Valley Council has 10 water supply systems under its control:

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiologica Water Water Water Supply Adequate l Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued 1. Huonville 4000 Yes Yes No No 2. Huon - 900 Yes Yes No No Rocky Creek Dam 3. Jackson's Road, 26 Yes No Yes Yes Franklin (Untreated) 4. Geeveston - 420 Yes Yes No No Donnelly's Water Treatment Plant 5. Geeveston - 1100 Yes Yes No No South Creek, Kermandie Road 6. Dover Water 900 Yes Yes No No Treatment Plant 7. Cygnet - 1500 Yes Yes No No Agnes Creek Water Treatment Plant 8. Cygnet - 1400 Yes Yes No No Nicholls Rivulet Reservoir 9. Judbury - 150 Yes No Yes Yes Dora Creek (Untreated) 10. Mountain River - 90 Yes No Yes Yes Stevenson's Creek (Untreated)

Summary

• All water supply systems were sampled in accordance with the ADWG – 96 recommendations. • Huonville, Huon (Rocky Creek Dam), Geeveston (Donnelly’s), Geeveston (South Creek), Dover, Cygnet (Agnes Creek and Nicholls Rivulet) water supply systems were in compliance with the Public Health Act 1997 – Water Quality Guidelines microbiological requirements. • The Judbury, Jackson’s Road (Franklin), and Mountain River water supply systems are untreated and therefore permanent boil water alerts have been issued to protect consumers.

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 20 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 6.17 Kentish Council

Cradle Coast Water supplies water to the municipal area.

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued Kentish Council Unknown Yes Yes No No

Summary

6.18 Kingborough Council

Hobart Water supplies water to the municipal area.

Meets Health Boil Related Water Boil Microbiological Alert Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Require Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements d Issued Kingborough 20,000 Yes Yes No No

Summary

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 21 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 6.19 King Island Council

King Island has 2 water supply systems under its control:

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued 1. Currie Unknown Yes Yes No No 2. Grassy Unknown Yes Yes No No

Summary

6.20 Latrobe Council

Cradle Coast Water supplies bulk water to the municipal area.

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued Latrobe 6180 Yes Yes No No

Summary

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 22 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 6.21 Launceston City Council

Esk Water supplies water to the municipal area.

(Launceston Council administers the water supply system for the township of Lilydale).

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued 1. Launceston 62,000 Yes Yes No No Council 2. Lilydale 313 Yes Yes Yes Yes Township (no disinfection)

Summary

• All water supply systems were sampled in accordance with the ADWG – 96 recommendations. • Launceston’s water supply systems were in compliance with the Public Health Act 1997 – Water Quality Guidelines. • The Lilydale township water supply system is not disinfected and therefore a permanent boil water alert has been issued to protect consumers.

6.22 Meander Valley Council

Meander Valley Council has 7 water supply systems under its control:

Meets Health-related Boil Microbiological Boil Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued 1. Bracknell 360 Yes Compliance for Yes Yes most of year (temporary) 2. Carrick 350 Yes Yes No No 3. Deloraine 2032 Yes Yes No No 4. Exton 100 Yes Yes No No 5. Mole Creek 213 Yes No Yes Yes (Permanent Boil Water Alert) 6. Prospect/ 7650 Yes Yes No No Hadspen 7. Westbury/ 1400 Yes Yes No No Hagley

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 23 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 Summary

• All water supply systems were sampled in accordance with the ADWG – 96 recommendations. • Carrick, Deloraine, Exton, Prospect/Hadspen, and Westbury/Hagley supply systems were in compliance with the Public Health Act 1997 – Water Quality Guidelines microbiological requirements. • The Mole Creek and Bracknell water supply systems were not in compliance with the Public Health Act 1997 – Water Quality Guidelines microbiological requirements and boil water alerts were issued to protect consumers. However Bracknell’s boil water alert was for a short period.

6.23 Northern Midlands Council

Northern Midlands Council has 11 water supply systems under its control:

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiologica Water Water Water Supply Consumer Adequate l Operating Alert Alert System s Sampling Requirements Required Issued 1. Campbell Town 525 Yes No Yes Yes 2. Avoca 105 Yes Yes No No 3. Conara 36 Yes No Yes Yes 4. Cressy 318 Yes No Yes Yes 5. Epping 23 Yes No Yes Yes 6. Evandale 855 Yes No Yes Yes 7. Longford Unknown Yes No Yes Yes 8. Perth Unknown Yes No Yes Yes 9. Poatina Unknown Yes No Yes Yes (no disinfection) 10. Ross 200 Yes No Yes Yes 11. Rossarden 110 Yes No Yes Yes (no disinfection)

Summary

• All water supply systems were sampled in accordance with the ADWG – 96 recommendations for small towns. Campbell Town, Avoca, Conara, Cressy, Evandale, Epping, Longford and Ross were in the most part in compliance with the Public Health Act 1997 – Water Quality Guidelines microbiological operating requirements, however during flood conditions the water supply was not potable and boil water notices were issued to protect consumers during these conditions. • Poatina’s and Rossardens water supply systems were not in compliance with the Public Health Act 1997 – Water Quality Guidelines microbiological requirements as the water is untreated. Permanent boil water alerts were issued to protect consumers.

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 24 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 6.24 Sorell Council

Hobart Water supplies water to the municipal area.

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued Sorell 4000 Yes Yes No No

Summary

6.25 Southern Midlands Council

Southern Midlands Council has 3 water supply systems under its control:

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued 1. Oatlands 500 Yes Yes No No 2. Tunbridge 150 Yes Yes No No 3. Colebrook 300 Yes Yes No No

Summary

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 25 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 6.26 Tasman Council

The municipal area is serviced by tank water only and there are no reticulated drinking water schemes that require monitoring by Council.

6.27 Waratah/Wynyard Council

Waratah Wynyard Council has two water supply systems under its control and one water supply controlled by Cradle Coast Water Authority, which is purchased and reticulated by the Council:

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Consumers Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Household Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Connections Sampling Requirements Required Issued 1. Cam River 3,176 Yes Yes No No 2. Yolla 59 Yes Yes No No 3. Waratah 92 Yes No No Yes

Summary

• All water supply systems were sampled in accordance with the ADWG – 96 recommendations. • Cam River system returned an overall ADWG compliance for the rate for the twelve months of 98.3% for thermotolerant coliforms. Supply for this system is purchased from the Cradle Coast Water Authority. • The Yolla system returned an overall ADWG compliance for the rate for the twelve months of 95.1% for thermotolerant coliforms. The system experienced one failure during the twelve months in February 2003. Boil water notices were not required as failures were not sequential and follow-up testing and investigation provided clear results. • The Waratah system returned an overall ADWG compliance for the rate for the twelve months of 89.9% for thermotolerant coliforms. A Boil water notice was issued on this supply and stayed in place for some 7 weeks as new disinfection equipment was purchased and installed. Despite the failure the system quality improved overall. • In accordance with the ADWG guidelines a risk management approach has been followed in regard to all failures. The water supplies for both Yolla and Waratah are tested in excess of the recommended frequency given by the ADWG for the number of consumers.

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 26 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 6.28 West Coast Council

West Coast Council has 5 water supply systems under its control:

Meets Health-related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued 1. Queenstown 2,500 Yes Yes No No 2. Strahan 700 Yes Yes No No 3. Zeehan 350 Yes Yes No No 4. Rosebery 1200 Yes Yes No No 5. Tullah 350 Yes Yes No No

Summary

6.29 West Tamar Council

Esk Water supplies water to the municipal area.

Meets Health Related Boil Boil Microbiological Water Water Water Supply Adequate Operating Alert Alert System Consumers Sampling Requirements Required Issued West Tamar Council Unknown Yes Yes No No

Summary

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 27 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 7. Summary Information

7.1 Bulk Water Authorities

Sampling

• All the bulk water authorities sampled their water supply systems in accordance with the recommendations of the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines for the reporting period.

Compliance to Health-related Microbiological Operating Requirements

• All bulk water authorities operated in compliance with the Public Health Act 1997 – Water Quality Guidelines requirements for the reporting period.

7.2 Local Government

Sampling

• All Local Government Authorities sampled their water supply systems in line with the recommendations of the ADWG for the reporting period based upon the numbers of the consumers being serviced and the water supply systems history.

• However some Councils were not conducting retests in an acceptable time period after failures.

Compliance to Health-related Microbiological Operating Requirements

• There were 91 Local Government water supply systems operating in Tasmania during the reporting period, which is the same as the last reporting period.

• There were 58 Local Government water supply systems in the State that were operated in full compliance with the Public Health Act 1997 – Water Quality Guidelines microbiological requirements for the reporting period, this compares with 61 the last reporting period (a decrease of 3 from last reporting period).

• There were 33 Local Government water supply systems that operated in the State with a boil water alert during the reporting period, which compares to 30 last reporting period. However, this increase of 3 can be attributed to temporary flood conditions occurring in the North of the State during the reporting period.

• Of the 33 Local Government water supplies that had boil water alerts in place during the reporting period, there were 10 Local Government water supply systems which had temporary boil water alerts and 23 which were permanently in place because of either continuing poor water quality, or because there was no disinfection. This compares to 7 Local Government water supply systems, which had temporary boil water alerts last reporting period and 23 Local Government water supply systems permanently in place last year. Therefore the number of permanent boil water alerts in Tasmania for the reporting period remains the same and flood conditions caused an increase in the overall number of temporary boil water alerts by 3 during the reporting period.

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 28 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 8. Discussion

8.1 Bulk Water Authorities

Sampling

All bulk water supplies sampled to the recommendations of the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines.

Compliance to Health-related Microbiological Operating Requirements

All bulk water authorities met with the microbiological operating requirements of the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines.

8.2 Local Government

Sampling

All Councils sampled their water supply systems in an adequate manner for microbiological indicators and followed the advice of the ADWG for the operation of small rural remote systems. However each failed water sample must be followed up by a resample as soon as possible.

For example, the ADWG recommends that when the population serviced by a reticulated system is fewer than 1000 persons and sampling is conducted less than weekly, the relevant health authority should rely upon regular sanitary surveys of the water supply system and the existence of an adequate disinfectant residual being maintained in the system.

Sanitary surveys are always required on a regular basis because the greatest sources of microbial hazards are human and livestock wastes and therefore water systems should be assessed to determine the likelihood of that type of contamination entering the water system and analysis undertaken of the effect upon water quality.

In such situations, risk assessment involves estimating the likelihood that a hazard will occur and the consequences if it does. The aim being to distinguish between high and low risks so that attention and resources can be directed towards mitigating hazards before they become dangers to public health, as sampling will only indicate problems after a contamination event.

The Australian Standard on Risk Management should be consulted on how to conduct risk assessment on water supplies and the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines should be consulted on rural and remote water supplies.

Compliance with Health-related Microbiological Operating Requirements

As in previous years, small local government water supply systems in remote areas experienced the most problems with microbiological water quality. However, the implementation of the revised Australian Drinking Water Guidelines and the proposed new State Guidelines for the Management of Drinking Water Quality with their concentration on individual drinking water quality plans and improved catchment management, will improve

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 29 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 these rural and remote systems so eventually the 33 water supplies that required boil water alerts during 2003-2004 will reduce in number.

While the number of permanent boil water alerts for small rural communities in Tasmania has remained the same, Councils report that upon consultation with consumers in some small communities, they prefer to be provided with water at reasonable cost (such as basically treated river water) than pay a large increase in water rates to be provided with fully treated water. While not all residents of these towns are happy with poor quality water and with permanent boil water alerts, it can be assumed that the alternate is no reticulated water at all in some areas.

Dorset Council for example operates a number of water supplies that are not subjected to disinfection. Council has as a consequence placed permanent boil water alert on some water supplies and become involved in catchment management to protect water supplies from contaminants.

Such strategies would appear to be successful in the prevention of water borne disease, in that no outbreaks of waterborne disease have been detected in rural areas with permanent boil water alerts. However, it remains the case that visitors to an area, or tourists passing through, may not be aware of the need to boil water and may be vulnerable to infection. Ongoing attention to water supply upgrades is therefore strongly encouraged, particularly in larger communities or “tourist towns”.

The Department recommends that all people on boil water alerts always drink boiled water until they are informed by the water supplier, that the water is of potable quality.

9. Partnership Arrangements between Water Suppliers and State Government

The Department of Health and Human Services would like to acknowledge bulk water authorities and those local government authorities who submitted reports for their co- operation in the implementation of the Public Health Act 1997 and the Water Quality Guidelines and their efforts in improving the quality of drinking water available to Tasmanians.

Dr Roscoe Taylor Director of Public Health

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 30 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005 References

Australian Bureau Statistics 1999, Tasmanian Water Supply Data, Commonwealth Government Canberra.

National Health & Medical Research Council and Natural Resource Management Council of Australia and New Zealand 2004, Australian Drinking Water Guidelines, NHMRC and NRMMC, Australia

World Health Organisation 1996, Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality, Geneva.

United Nations 1992, Agenda 21, Chapter 18, United Nations Conference on Environment & Development, Rio.

The World Bank 1992, The Economic Impact of the Peruvian Cholera Epidemic, New York.

Steve E. Hrudey and Elizabeth J. Hrudey 2004, Safe Drinking Water, Lessons from Recent Outbreaks in Affluent Nations, IWA Publishing.

Annual Report on the quality of Tasmania’s Drinking Water Page 31 of 31 1 July 2003 - 30 June 2004 Released 23 May 2005