Ofwat has rejected an appeal by Amazon against Severn Trent’s decision to refuse its application to discharge trade effluent from its distribution site to Branton Wastewater Treatment Works.

E-commerce giant Amazon UK Services Ltd.applied to Severn Trent in November 2023 for a consent to discharge trade effluent from its site for a proposed truck wash station to the works. Amazon’s application proposed a truck wash consisting of a full water reclaim system installed alongside a three-stage sludge interceptor with an automated penstock valve to contain any contamination in the event of a large volume oil or chemical spillage.

However, Amazon needed consent from the water company to discharge trade effluent from the site into a public sewer, in the event that the interceptor was overloaded and such an overflow could then enter Severn Trent’s sewers.

Amazon had estimated the maximum volume of effluent to be discharged per 24 hours as 30.7m³. According to the application – the estimate was based on a "worst case scenario" in which the reclaim system at the site was not working.

In December 2023, Severn Trent wrote to Amazon formally rejecting the application for a consent to discharge trade effluent. The refusal letter explained that the application was rejected on the basis that "there is no sewage works capacity currently available to receive and treat the effluent".

In January 2024 Amazon sought clarification on what was meant by the phrase 'currently available' and also questioned whether Severn Trent Water had a date in mind when sufficient capacity would be available. Severn Trent Water responded that it was currently awaiting confirmation of the future development and capacity availability at Branton WWTW and that once the information was available, it would then contact the customer.

Amazon subsequently contacted Ofwat in February 2024 in order to formally appeal against Severn Trent Water's decision to refuse the application for a consent to discharge trade effluent under section 122 of the Water Industry Act 1991. Ofwat opened a full investigation in order to determine the appeal in April 2024.

Reasons cited by Amazon in its appeal had included:

• Severn Trent Water's rejection was unsupportable by the sole reason provided and that there should be other "contributable factors", of which it had not been informed.
• Severn Trent Water was not fulfilling its statutory duty under section 94 of the Water Industry Act 1991 which states that water and sewerage undertakers have a duty to provide a sewerage network, which includes an obligation to consider existing and future obligations to allow for the discharge of trade effluent into public sewers.
• Severn Trent's lack of capacity at Branton WWTW, resulting in the inability to accept trade effluent, was an issue that was either known to Severn Trent or should have been known to them if fulfilling its duty under section 94 of the Act, Severn Trent should therefore have taken action to ensure that the lack of capacity was resolved, to ensure it could provide for the disposal of trade effluent.
• Severn Trent Water's rejection meant that the Amazon site was operating at a financial and operational disadvantage. Amazon submitted that, without an operational truck wash, it was losing out on a saving of £329,000 per annum. As a result of Severn Trent Water's decision, Amazon had outsourced its truck washing to a third party, the cost of which was greater than the cost of insourcing. In addition to increased costs, and as a result reduced savings, Amazon also stated that, as the third party manually washed the trucks by hand, trucks are unavailable for longer than planned and, due to the third party's capacity restraints, trucks were also washed less frequently.

Now the regulator has issued its decision as final there are no routes of appeal if either of the parties disagree with the final decision. At this point, the only route of challenge to the final decision is via judicial review proceedings. Judicial review claims must be submitted promptly and within three months from the decision to be challenged.

Ofwat said its decision not to overturn Severn Trent Water’s decision takes into that if Amazon was to make a new application, it would then be open to the company to appeal any subsequent decision to Ofwat if Amazon was unhappy with that decision. “we would consider that appeal on the basis of the future facts as they stand at the time.”

Ofwat went on to explain it understood that Branton WWTW was exceeding its Dry Weather Flow (DWF) permit limit, meaning that if Severn Trent Water knowingly accepted any additional flows, not only would this “likely exacerbate” the existing compliance issues at the WWTW serving the site, the water company may also be committing a criminal offence.

Ofwat says in its decision document:

“We have engaged with Severn Trent Water regarding the issues …. and have established that the company is undertaking remedial work to address the capacity concerns at Branton WWTW, which is forecast for full completion on 8 June 2025. Severn Trent Water explained that as a result of these works it will be able to process trade effluent from the appellant's site from 25 April 2025 (provided the appellant issues a new trade effluent application within 60 days of this date).”

Ofwat’s draft decision was issued to both parties on 27 March 2025, following which the regulator has not received any representations or objections from either party.

Click here to read the decision paper in full