Minutes:
(1) Mr Martin Banks, Sewerage Policy Manager Southern Water, explained that his role was to co-ordinate Southern Water’s responses to the Lead Local Flood Authorities.
(2) Mr Banks said that Southern Water recycled an average of 718 m litres of wastewater per day. Its assets for this purpose consisted of 365 wastewater treatment works, 2,375 pumping stations, and 39,600 km of sewers. 99% of the beaches for which Southern Water had responsibility met the European water quality standards.
(3) Mr Banks then set out the legal roles and responsibilities for flooding and drainage. The lead Local Flood Authorities were responsible for groundwater and surface water flooding. Responsibility for river and coastal flooding was divided between the Environment Agency, the Lead Local Flood Authority, the Internal Drainage Boards and riparian owners. Highway Drainage was in the remit of the local highway authority or Highways England on trunk roads or motorways. Private home owners had responsibility for private drainage up to the point where their pipes connected with the public sewer. Southern Water as a water and sewerage company managed the risk of flooding from foul or combined sewers as well as public surface water sewers.
(4) Mr Banks said Southern Water’s Business Plan promised to reduce internal flooding by 25% with no serious pollution incidents by 2020. He then described ongoing activities across the region which included almost £80m being spent on the replacement or refurbishment of sewers; £75m spent on the refurbishment of pumping stations; between £12m and £15m on sewer jetting and £9m to £10m on CCTV surveys to allow early interventions.
(5) Mr Banks said that the sum of £12m was to be spent on reducing the risk of groundwater infiltration into the sewer network in the region. Flood alleviation schemes were to be delivered in Ramsgate, Walmer and other currently unspecified areas. Rising main replacements were planned for Ramsgate, Yalding, Aylesford, Ashford, Isle of Sheppey and Seasalter to prevent flooding and pollution. Work was continuing on the flood prevention scheme in the Nailbourne Valley at Bishopsbourne. Meanwhile, Southern Water was continuing to work closely with the Lead local Flood Authorities on surface water management plans.
(6) Mr Banks continued by describing the development of Southern Water’s Drainage Area Plans (DAPs). These informed the current and future performance of the sewerage network by considering existing issues and the potential impact of future development, identifying options to guide current and future investment plans. They also gave consideration to the reduction of the impact of surface water on the drainage network. The DAPs stressed the need to work in collaboration with other organisations with drainage responsibilities, such as the Environment Agency, the Local Authorities and the IDBs.
(7) Mr Banks said that the DAPs for Horsemonden, Staplehurst and Headcorn were now complete. Some members of the public commented that they were unaware of any consultation having taken place on these. DAPs were currently underway in Dover and Folkestone, Eastchurch, Tonbridge, Thanet, New Romney, Hythe, Queenborough, Medway, Gravesend and Sittingbourne.
(8) Mr Banks turned to the “Keep it Clear” campaign which involved the investment of £1.4m to keep the sewer network running clear in the South East. One element of this campaign would be a wide-reaching educational programme where teams would be visiting 75,000 homes and 28,000 catering businesses to offer advice on what should not be flushed down the toilet or poured down the sink. An example that people were often not aware of was wet wipes, which should never be allowed to enter the drainage system.
(9) The second element of the “Keep it Clear” campaign would involve checking manholes and putting cameras in sewers in order to check whether they were working properly, using high powered water jets to clear any blockages that were discovered.
(10) Mrs Brown noted that the UK power networks aimed to raise their stations above the flood levels. She asked whether Southern Water intended to do the same for the pumping stations. Mr Banks replied that Southern Water had reviewed the cost benefit of doing so. The key sites in Kent such as Burham and Aylesford were already protected. Southern Water was reviewing the use and development of the removal barriers at Gravesend Waste Water Treatment Works.
(11) Mr Rodgers noted that during the flooding of 2013/14, the flood water had been joined by sewage. He asked what could be done to separate the two in areas of high risk. Mr Banks replied that whenever an area was overwhelmed by surface water, drainage into the sewage system would arise via the drainage systems from older developments. Southern Water always preferred the installation of surface water separation schemes but these proved to be unsuccessful in areas of bad drainage. Southern Water was unable to provide a back-up drainage system in these circumstances.
(12) Mr Bird asked for information on the resilience of pumping stations. Mr Banks replied that back-up generators would always be provided. In the event of a more widespread problem, Southern Water would look to the UK power network to provide the necessary service.
(13) Mr Tant informed the Committee that Kent County Council and Southern Water were working together to tackle groundwater flooding and the resultant infiltration of surface water into the sewage system.
(14) RESOLVED that Mr Banks be thanked for his presentation and that its content be noted.