Hello

I am reaching out into the wider H&S community to ask about how organisations are dealing with Water Supply (Water Fittings) Regulations 1999, also called the RASS regulations by the plumbing trade.

The aim of the regs is to ensure that fittings to the end of taps etc will not allow the back siphoning of dirty water into the mains. The regs are enforced by your local water company ie the commercial business  that sends you a water bill.  We are having issues that our local water supplier has decided that the eyewash stations which we have fitted to handwash basins in our chemistry labs are unacceptable as there exists the possibility   that someone might leave the eyewash in a sink of dirty water and that the water might back siphon into the mains. Note this is not a risk assessment based approach-if it dangles into a sink, it is unacceptable, end of story. If we shorten the hoses of course it will be difficult, if not impossible to spray the eyewash to onto someone’s face.

We are looking at having retractable hoses fitted   but there is a significant   cost associated with this ( we have at least a dozen eyewash stations which might need upgrading)

The questions I am asking a more general than about this specific issue:

1. Has anybody else been gotten by their water company?
2. How prescriptive an approach have they taken?
3. Is there much variation between different water companies?

Plus an aside:

When I first tried to post this, I simply used the name of the regulations as the title only to be told that a posting had already been made. I looked it up and yes, a short posting appeared in  July 2002!

Of course this system fails to catch all these questions on RIDDOR!

We have been told that a non-return valve even a pukka one, is not acceptable. We must shorten the hoses. As I have said a very prescriptive approach.

AK - the first time I really looked carefully at eyewash stations was about 3 years ago, when we were looking at asset management for - a water company! (Unfortunately not the water company who supplies your water).

What I learned from lots of Googling etc was that most eyewash installations are probably designed to US ANSI standards as the EN and thence BS standards are relatively recent (whatever type of eyewash station).

Methinks this is one where you should be challenging the regulator to quote chapter, verse and precedent. Can they cite a single example of water from an eyewash station (that should if anything be CLEANER [subject to an appropriate maintenance and testing regime as required by the various BS ENs] than the water coming from the mains) being siphoned back into the mains and contaminating a drinking supply?

Noting your valid point that this is NOT about risk, then at the very least you need to know exactly what Regulation they are thinking of using in any threatened enforcement action, particularly when they have already rejected your suggested solutions [No pun intended].

Good for your CPD if nothing else!

me I'll challenge anyone but  the people making the final decision might not be up for it. What annoyed me was that the decision was taken without consulting H&S about items which are safety critical and are used quite often. 

But it will not be sterile after it has been in someone’s eye and over their face and lands in the sink. Anyway, mains tap water is not sterile to start with. However, for that to back flow surely the sink would need to have a plug in it. Can’t you just remove the plugs ? or lower the sink instead of shortening the hose ?

Just a thought

Chris

We might simply decide that eyewash stations are too important to be messed about in this way so we will simply tell staff to use the eyewash away from the sink and clear up the mess later. Not ideal but then we will be able to say that we are fully compliant with the law as interpreted by a commercial organisation with links to the plumbing trade!