Hi

We are in the process of employing a contractor to complete legionella risk assessments and have had two consultants complete assessments in our buildings.

The buildings are retail bakery shops which use waster for cleaning, hand washing etc. Both have similar systems which are as follows
Cold water if fed by mains water which enters the building on ground floor and feeds 4 cold taps directly again all on the ground floor. These taps are 3 normal single cold taps without spray heads and 1 manual mixer tap again without spray head.
Hot water system is fed by 120ltr electric heated calorifier on the 1st floor which is fed by an insulated cold water storage tank of 100ltr on a second floor. This then feds four hot water taps all on ground floor. These taps are 3 normal single hot taps without spray heads and 1 manual mixer tap again without spray head.

The building are occupied 8am to 5pm 6 days a week and not occupied on Sunday.

Both assessments state the system will require annul checks to calorifier and cold water storage tank as per ACOP but here is the difference one assessment requires monthly temperature checks on sentinel outlets while the other state system is low risk system and requires no monthly temperature checks.

Here is the question which is correct?

Any thoughts happily received

Both could be.


There isn't a correct answer that this forum can give you. Both are in compliance with the ACoP depending on the results of findings during the risk assessment.
Checking temps monthly is a standard recommendation but, based on evidence, can be pared back on lower risk systems (although never doing them would be a step too far!). That evidence would be demonstrating short pipe runs, good insulation, consistent temperatures overtime and regular use which would identify obvious failures in hot/cold system.

Presume two assessments done as field testing assessors with a view to awarding contract?

Are you talking about a full water hygiene inspection or a legionella risk assessment. Having spent some time in FM and also ensuring compliance this was one area that I dealt with.

If you look at having water hygiene inspections this will give you a full list of areas that you will need to address. Just because the taps are being used doesn't mean you are not liable to legionella. Cleaning regime, temperature at chlorifers (both at feed and return), outlet temperatures, flexi-pipes (if you have any), dead-legs, tanks, lagging, mains supply etc. all need to be considered. As part of the regular Planned Preventative Maintenance you would look at regular cleaning and the flushing of taps used on an irregular basis - however this has its own risk due to aerosols being created.

just off the top of my head as I've been out of this field for a while. I would suggest the better one is the one that will conduct water hygiene inspections that will provide full written reports which will provide a risk rating for the finding for potential legionella bacteria.

Legionella is dead simple.
Keep it moving. Keep it hot/cold. Keep it clean.



Legionella is dead complicated.
Wall cavities, unseen dead-legs, varying water chemistry, unexpected flow loops, patterns of use, historic plumbing etc.




18oC within the first few seconds only is arguably fine. Cold temp typically taken after two minutes. BUT...entirely correct to ID that it was raised in initial water flow and therefore a potential risk factor which could be remedied.
Depending on size of system, not so sure I'd declare a setting with vulnerable people to be low risk to the point that no temp checks were necessary.

I can't think of a single area of health & safety that is exempt from risk assessment.
<cue some smart blighter coming up with one!>

Risk assessment is a process.
I suspect your point is more aimed towards the need to document and record the risk assessment ... or the extent to which an assessor should assess?

HSG274 Part 2 gives some limited advice on areas that can be considered to be 'low risk' but in order to determine that they are 'low risk'...you've done a risk assessment.

I would argue that the 5 or less employees rule plays a part in determining whether you've got to document the findings. But if you've got 5 or less employees but a system requiring numerous control measures and checks (for whatever reason) then the ACoP says that you need to keep a record of those checks. So paperwork gonna happen anyways.