1. DISTRIBUTION WATER QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAMME – AN INTEGRATED APPROACH?
Francois van Wyk
RAND WATER
18 April 2018

2. WHY AN INTEGRATED APPROACH?
Legally compliant
Water quality
Monitoring programme
Management of the supply system to deliver safe water
Enabling consumer confidence: Blue Drop certification, supply of safe water
Enhanced relationship between Rand Water and municipalities
Efficient and effective MP throughout the supply system
Enabling transparency (data/information) for the total supply system
Clarification of roles and responsibilities

3. WHY AN INTEGRATED APPROACH?
PRESENTATIONS
TAP Programme – Karl Lubout
Municipal Reticulation Programme – Karl Lubout
Rand Water’s Bulk Distribution Programme – Lelethu Bungu
SANS Requirements for Distribution Monitoring – Mariette Swart
Discussions

4. TAP ANALYSES RETAIL WATER QUALITY MONITORING
KARL LUBOUT
RAND WATER
18 April 2018

5. CONTENT INTRODUCTION HISTORY THE PRESENT SITUATION FUTURE SCENARIOS
CONCLUSION

6. DIAGRAMME OF THE WATER SUPPLY CHAIN
INTRODUCTION
DIAGRAMME OF THE WATER SUPPLY CHAIN

7. HISTORY TAP started in 1998 Interested individuals (20) Schools (4)
Voluntary programme
Public need to know
Monthly reports to individuals
Management reporting
Water Quality data on entire supply chain
Monthly management report

8. PRESENT SITUATION Tap Analyses Programme
100 monthly samples in 16 municipal areas
Analyse for changeable parameters
WSA’s may use Water Quality data for Blue Drop
Analyses performed at Rand Water Analytical Services
WSA’s assisting with sample collection

9. THE PRESENT SITUATION MUNICIPAL RETICULATION WATER QUALITY MONITORING
Rand Water and WSA – fragmented
Potential duplication
Variable approach → common goal
Access to accredited labs a challenge
Independent of Rand Water system

10. FUTURE SCENARIOS Status quo remains
WSP and WSA monitor Water Quality independently
Monthly reports and quarterly meetings
Integration opportunity
Align monitoring programmes
Centralise sampling and analyses
Economies of scale
Access to accredited facilities
Transparency
All parties can access all data

11. CONCLUSION
An integrated water quality monitoring programme covering the entire supply chain. Is this initiative worth pursuing?

12. BULK DISTRIBUTION WATER QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAMME
LELETHU BUNGU
RAND WATER
18 April 2018

13. DIAGRAMME OF THE WATER SUPPLY CHAIN
INTRODUCTION
DIAGRAMME OF THE WATER SUPPLY CHAIN

14. CONTENT Criteria used to develop Rand Water’s MP
Locations, frequency, determinands
Current monitoring / reporting situation
Opportunity / benefits of Integration

15. CRITERIA USED Legal Requirements: (SANS241:2015)
Minimum prescribed monitoring
Risk informed monitoring
Quality assurance of water supplied to customers
5 km points
Reservoirs
Problematic areas / parameters
End points
High risk areas: schools, hospitals, stadiums
Customer meter points etc

16. LOCATIONS, FREQUENCY & DETERMINANDS
Pipelines, Best vs worst water quality
Endpoints
Reservoirs
Determinands
Full SANS: Conducted on strategic locations which are defined as:
End points; Reservoirs
Problematic areas such as low residuals, long retention and back flows
High risk areas (schools, clinics, hospitals, stadiums)
Minimum Prescribed + Risk Informed Monitoring
All identified sample points

17. LOCATIONS, FREQUENCY & DETERMINANDS
Full SANS determinands = monthly
Minimum prescribed SANS 241:2015
Risk Informed Monitoring, SANS 241:2015
Determinand
Frequency
Turbidity
Fortnightly
Acute Health Bacteriological risk
Conductivity
N/A
Acute Health Chemical risk
Monthly pH
Chronic Health Chemical risk
Disinfectant residuals
Aesthetic risk
Quarterly
E.coli
 Operational Risk
 Monthly
Standard Plate Count
Total Coliforms

18. CURRENT MONITORING / REPORTING SITUATION

19. CURRENT MONITORING / REPORTING SITUATION

20. CURRENT MONITORING / REPORTING SITUATION

21. OPPORTUNITY / BENEFIT OF INTERGRATION
Current fragmented approach – Overkill?
Resources
Criteria / principles – same goal
Improved monitoring from the plant to the end consumer
Rand Water reports only within municipal boundaries
Municipalities only monitor within their networks
Integrated approach
DWS: Role of WSA and Rand Water in terms of WQ monitoring?

22. SANS 241: 2015 Monitoring requirements
18 April 2018
Mariette Swart

23. scope
1.1 This part of SANS 241 deals with the evaluation of water quality risks, monitoring and verification of water quality to enable the management of the identified water quality risks
It is NOT intended to provide a comprehensive water management plan

24. SANS 241: 2015 management actions
Risk assessment: raw water  through the treatment works  to the point of delivery
Monitoring: establish & implement operational & compliance monitoring programmes-
location of sampling points
sampling frequency
determinands
Water Quality Verification: compliance calculation against numerical limits in SANS 241-1
Response monitoring: incident management & monitoring determinands exceeding SANS limits

25. content
Risk assessment: raw water  through the treatment works  to the point of delivery
Monitoring: operational & compliance monitoring programme
Water Quality Verification: compliance calculation against numerical limits in SANS 241-1
source of data
timeframes
Response monitoring: incident management & monitoring determinands exceeding SANS 241-1limits
SANS241 timelines

26. (2) Routine monitoring programme
(2.1) Prescribed monitoring prg (Table 1 determinands + Table 1+2 frequencies)
Risk assessment
full SANS analyses (= monitoring)
WQ focussed
(2.2) Risk defined monitoring prg (Table 3 frequencies)
(3.2) Overall compliance (risk categories)
(3) Verification
(3.1) Determinand compliance

27. risk assessment where & when: apply to monitoring prg WHERE? Raw water
Final water
Representative points of delivery from WSP
Representative points of delivery to consumers
Where the poorest water quality is anticipated
ensure identification of all spatial risks
WHEN
frequency that covers periods of poorest water quality, or during peak demand
ensure identification of all temporal risks
Minimum: annually
Special conditions (page7 SANS 241-2)

28. Total nr of samples per month
prescribed WQ monitoring prg
Table 1: Minimum monitoring for prescribed risk indicators
Determinand
Raw water
Final water
Distribution system
Conductivity / TDS
Not applicable
pH value
Fortnightly
Turbidity
Disinfection residuals
E. coli
Fortnightly (see table 2)
HPC
Treatment chemicals
Weekly
Fortnightly
Table 2: Min sample nr for E. coli in distribution
Population served
Total nr of samples per month
< 5 000 2
5 000 –
1 per 5000 head + 1 additional –
1 per head + 11 additional
>
1 per head + 36 additional
where & when:
80% coverage of network / representative points
(spatial / temporal risks; control points & high usage points)

29. Distribution system (critical distribution system points)
risk defined monitoring prg
Determinands exceeding SANS limits
raw water: include raw & final water
final water: include raw, final & critical control points in distribution
distribution water: include critical points in distribution
Table 3: Frequency of analyses
Risk
Raw water
Final water
Distribution system (critical distribution system points)
Acute health bacteriological risk
See table 2
Protozoan parasite risks
Monthly
Not applicable
Acute health chemical risks
Chronic health chemical risks
Aesthetic risks
Quarterly
Operational risk

30. Opportunity and benefits for integration
discussion
Who (WSA: municipalities vs. Rand Water) needs to do monitoring what:
To ensure SANS compliance (Table 2)
Determinands to include under risk monitoring programme
Opportunity and benefits for integration

31. THANK YOU