BDS for DCI

7/30/2019 BDS for DCI

1/39


2/39

EWS and its performance in the

Blue Drop / Green Drop

Programmes

WATER & SANITATIONApril 2013


3/39


4/39


5/39

BDS

First in KZN!


6/39

4th in the Country!


7/39


8/39

94

100

100

98

100

98.79

Asset management

Management Accountability

DWQ compliance

Treatment Process Management

Water Safety Planning

Overall

2012 Blue Drop Scores


9/39

GDS RESULTS 2010/11

90.6% overall MunicipalGreen Drop Score

9 Green Drops obtained

Greatest volume ofeffluent at GD quality

First in Kwa-Zulu Natal

Best wastewater works in thecountry

Fourth in the country

Highest ranked Metro


10/39


11/39

NATIONAL TOP 10 GDS PERFORMERS

Green Drop Score

1 Tlokwe LM 97.0%

2 Bitou LM 96.4%

3 George LM 91.0%

4 eThekwini Metro 90.6%

5 City of Johannesburg 90.5%

6 Witzenberg LM 89.7%

7 Beaufort West LM 89.5%

8 Overstrand LM 88.8%

9 Mossel Bay LM 88.6%

10 City of Cape Town 86.8%


12/39

NATIONAL RESULTS 2010/11


13/39


14/39


15/39


16/39

Programmes are NOT

Just water quality

Easy

Cheap

A competition run once a year

Superficial

Merely a Nice to have


17/39

They are

Thorough

Challenging

Progressive Legislated

A measure ofEXCELLENCE

2012 13


18/39

2012-13

BDS Assessment

GDS Audit


19/39

KPA 1: Risk Management

KPA 2: Process Management & Control

KPA 3: Drinking Water Quality Compliance

KPA 4: Management, Accountability & Local Regulation

KPA 5: Asset Management

BDS ASSESSMENT CRITERIA


20/39

Key Performance Areas and Indicators

Key Performance

area

KPA

percentages

Key performance Indicator KPI

percentages

1 Water Safety

Planning

30 35 35 1.1 Water safety planning process 10 10 5

1.2 Risk assessment & Review of

Control measures

30 30 35

1.3 Risk-based monitoring

programmes

25 25 25

1.4 Credibility and Submission of

Drinking Water Quality Data

20 15 15

1.5 Incident Management 15 20 20


21/39

Catchment to tap

Risk Matrix

Statistics

Sampling

Plans

Budget

Completion

StakeholdersAssessment of

efficacy

Confirmation samples

EvaluationWater

Safety Plan

RiskAssessment

RiskMitigation


22/39

Monitoring Programmes

Compliance monitoring

Currently 7 plans registered

including a risk based

programme Includes

Microbiological

Chemical

Physical

Organoleptic

Performed by EWS

laboratory

Operational monitoring

3 plans registered covering

the small EWS works

Mainly chemical and physical Performed on site

Major works run and

analysed by Umgeni Water


23/39

Incident management

Incident management protocol

Available at

Water works

Scientific services

Head office

Developed in conjunction with major service

provider Incident log

Operated on conservative principles


24/39

Key Performance

area

KPA

percentages

Key performance

Indicator

KPI percentages

2 Drinking Water

Quality

ProcessManagement

&

Control

15 10 10 2.1 Compliance with

Regulation - Works

Classification

15 10 10

2.2 Compliance with

Regulation - Process

Controller

Registration

50 50 40

2.3 Availability ofsigned WTP logbook 35 40 50


25/39

Key Performance

area

KPA

percentages


percentages

3 Drinking

Water QualityCompliance

30 30 25 3.1 Compliance per Determinand

(according to MonitoringProgramme)

60 60 60

3.2 Risk Assessment Defined Health

Index

20 20 20

3.3 Operational Efficiency Index 20 20 20


26/39

Year 2012 Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec

Microbiological (Compliance monitoring)

Sites monitored 213 218 211 217 222 222 224 222 220 215 219 212

Coverage (%) 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9 99.9

Compliance (%) 90.2 88.7 84.2 90.9 90.3 91.8 93.0 91.8 90.0 88.5 89.7 83.8

Operational monitoring

Compliance (%) 92.8 91.5 92.0 93.1 92.6 93.6 94.4 93.6 89.3 91.4 91.7 87.5

Monitoring performance


27/39


28/39


29/39


30/39

Key Performance

area

KPA

percentages


percentages

4 Management,

Accountability

& LocalRegulation

10 10 15 4.1 Management Commitment 40 40 40

4.2 Publication of Performance 30 30 30

4.3 Service Level Agreements /

Performance Agreements

30 30 30


31/39

Key Performance

area

KPA

percentages


percentages

5 Asset

Management

15 15 15 5.1 Annual Process Audit 20 20 20

5.2 Asset Register 15 15 15

5.3 Availability & Competence ofMaintenance Team 15 15 15

5.4 Operations and Maintenance

Manual

15 15 15

5.5 Maintenance and Operations

Budget and Expenditure

20 20 20

5.6 Design Capacity versus

Operational Capacity

15 15 15


32/39

GDS ASSESSMENT CRITERIA


33/39

ASSESSMENT CRITERIA

BREAKDOWNCriteria 1: Process Control, Maintenance and

Management Skill

Technical and managerial skill

Classification of treatment works and staff Maintenance team available O&Ms, Ops logbooks

Criteria 2: Wastewater Monitoring Programme Operational and Compliance monitoring Laboratory information and credibility


34/39

Criteria 3: Submission of WW Quality Results

Proof of Submission to DWA on the GDS

Criteria 4: Effluent Quality Compliance

90% quality compliance on all 3 Categories(Microbiological; Chemical & Physical)

Copy of Authorisation

Criteria 5: WW Quality Risk Management

Incident Management Protocol WW Risk Abatement Plan


35/39

Criteria 6: Bylaws

Proof and evidence of implementation

Criteria 7: WW Treatment Capacity

Hydraulic and Organic Design Capacities

Medium long term planning of treatment and collectorsystem

Criteria 8: WW Asset Management

Process audit and sewer inspection Infrastructure asset register O&M Budget


36/39


37/39

OUR EXPERIENCE AT GDS 2012


38/39

Requirements

Multi-disciplinary teams

Documented Processes

Records

Finance

Infrastructure

YESbut the key ingredient is .


39/39

BDS for DCI

Documents

Transcript of BDS for DCI