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

2. 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

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

4. 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.

5. 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

6. 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

7. 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

8. 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.

9. 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

10. 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.

11. IDENTIFIED CHALLENGES (cont) Inadequate preparation and Monitoring programme that is not risk informed
Inadequate preparation for assessment
WSIs are requested to 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.

12. 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.

13. 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

14. 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.

15. 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).