Provincial Blue Drop challenges Presented by: Lusanda Nxodo at Rand Water, Water quality compliance workshop Date:19 April 2017

TABLE OF CONTENTS Regulatory documents that are governing drinking water quality. Required information per Blue Drop Assessment Criteria. Blue Drop current trend Identified challenges during assessments. Mitigation measures

REGULATORY DOCUMENTS THAT GOVERN DRINKING WATER Water Service Act of 1997 Regulation 2834 Draft Regulation 813

REQUIRED INFORMATION PER BLUE DROP ASSESSMENT CRITERIA Weight Key Parameters 1.Water Safety Planning (WSP) 35% Water Safety Planning Process Risk assessments Monitoring Programme Credibility of data Incident Management 2.Process Management and Control 8% Water Treatments Works classification compliance Process controllers registration. WTW Logbook Process controllers training Water Safety Planning: WSP: Risk management addressing associated risks from catchment to point of use. Compliance with Regulation 17 (draft) and 2834: e.g. Class A with process controllers working 3 shifts requires 4x class IV and 1 Class V supervisor.

REQUIRED INFORMATION PER BLUE DROP ASSESSMENT CRITERIA (CONT) Weight Key Parameters 3.Water quality Verification 30% Microbiological compliance Chemical compliance Operational compliance 4.Management accountability and local regulations. 10% Management Commitment Publication of Performance Service level Agreement/ Perfomance Agreement Submission of data Aesthetic compliance is bonus

REQUIRED INFORMATION PER BLUE DROP ASSESSMENT CRITERIA (CONT) Weight Key Parameters 5.Asset Management 14 % O and M budget and expenditure. O and M Manuals Asset register Annual process audit Availability and Competence of maintenance team. 6.Water Use Efficiency and loss management 3% Water demand management strategy and implementation. Water Balance. Eletrician Fitter And Instrumentation technician

NATIONAL TRENDS SINCE INCEPTION Performance category 2009 2010 2011 2012 2014 Trend Analysis National BD score 51.4 67.2 72.9 87.6 79.6 Number of WSA’s assessed 107 153 162 152 Number of systems assessed 402 787 914 931 1036 Number of Blue drop awarded 25 38 66 98 44

IDENTIFIED CHALLENGES Uploading of data on Blue Drop System (BDS) Limited application of Water Safety Plan Lack of commitment from top management Water Services Authorities solely depending on Water Services Providers. Inadequate preparation from the WSA’s Monitoring programme that is not risk informed.

IDENTIFIED CHALLENGES (cont) Uploading of data on Blue Drop System (BDS) and Application of Water Safety Plan During Blue Drop Progress Assessment Tool (BDPAT) the Municipal Information Spread sheet (MIS) and BDS are used as source of information. Partial uploading Not updating documents Late submission of data

IDENTIFIED CHALLENGES (cont) Challenge per BD application criteria -Risk based monitoring programme -Credibility of data -Incident management (poor incident register documenting, no corrective and preventative actions taken during water quality failures.) Time frames and Implementation. Risk listed – no mitigation measures. Risk still remain in red after 3 reviews of a document. The main challenge here is the fact that the WSA do not put time frames on implementation projects. WSA list risks without mitigation measures/ without indicating on how to minimise them. Revised Water Safety plans still have risk at the same category no improvement of risk moving from high risk to medium or from medium to low.

IDENTIFIED CHALLENGES (cont) Inadequate preparation and Monitoring programme that is not risk informed Inadequate preparation for assessment WSIs are requested to email Portfolio of Evidence and information prior to assessment, however during assessments the documents are not readily available. No adherence to deadline on requested information. Full SANS 241 analyses not done per annum.

IDENTIFIED CHALLENGES (cont) Lack of Commitment from top management Contributes 10% to the scoring Non-approval of Blue Drop regulatory documents. No service level and Performance agreement in place. No budget allocation for maintenance and training of personnel. Top management refers to Municipal Manager, COO and Technical service Director During the National Assessments, this parameter contributes 10% to the scoring. Lack of commitment from top management is portrayed by: Unsigned/ non-approval of Blue Drop regulatory documents such as Water Safety Plan (WSP) and Incident management protocol which makes it difficult for the technical team to get approval for projects etc. No Service level agreement / Performance level agreement in place. Minimal budget allocation for maintenance and training of personnel.

IDENTIFIED CHALLENGES (cont) Water Services Authorities solely depending on Water Services Providers Absence of Contractors/ service providers, WSA can not respond to some questions. No involvement of WSA official to the development of Blue drop regulatory documents. No skill development This does not imply that WSA must stop using Service Providers, however there are WSA’ s that let service providers to handle everything from process management, asset and drinking water compliance. This lead to a challenge during assessment when a Service provider is not available WSA officials can not account for their own supply system, even though the required documents are in place. WSA turned blind eye on skill development, when the service providers contracts expire or terminated,WSA has to start from stretch which is a problem during assesment

IDENTIFIED CHALLENGES (cont) Challenge per BD Application DWQ Process-WSA’s don’t indicate the operators and supervisors which lead to wrong scoring. Drinking Water Quality compliance: -WSA not monitoring as per the registered monitoring programme. Asset management: -Qualifications -no updated process audits reports No updated O and M manual, budget and expenditure (MIS-distribution network). Stuff turn over.

Mitigation Measures Request action plans of key results areas that affected their scoring. Conduct Regional PAT assessments Write Report with recommendations and monitor progress. Engage with other sections within DWS to assist. Grants is based on the business plans and prioritisation. Request action plans of key results areas that affected their scoring and monitor implementation. Gauteng Provincial office initiated: Regional PAT assessments, where official divided the Gauteng municipality and conduct PAT, write report with recommendations. Send the report to the WSA and monitor progress after. Those that need assistance, the reports are sent to water sector support for support in order to overcome the challenges. Assistance is provided in monetary (RBIG,WSIG) or technical. For monetary: detailed business plans indicating who will be benefiting, job creations and sustainability is requested. RBIG (Regional Bulk Infrastructure Grant) and WSIG ( Water and Sanitation Infrastructure Grant).