CS64: Mainstreaming WSP Water Projects

7/28/2019 CS64: Mainstreaming WSP Water Projects

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/cs64-mainstreaming-wsp-water-projects 1/42

Application of ADB-WHO WSPguidelines for ADB projects

Experience of the proposed Chongqing

Urban-Rural Infrastructure

Development Demonstration II project

Satoshi Ishii & Dan Deere

EASS/EARD



1

Purpose of WFPF PDA

• WHO developed the “Water SafetyPlan” (WSP)

– A risk management system tool for

producing safe water• Draft ADB Guidance Note on

Mainstreaming Water Safety Plans

in ADB Water Projects

• Pilot Application of the ADB WSPGuidance Note:

– Evaluate feasibility

– Ensure effective delivery of objectives



2

Implementation

• Funding source – WFPF: $50,000

• WSP Consultant

– International (1 PM)

– National (2 PM)

• Duration

– February 2012 – June 2013

• Arrangement

– WSP team engaged in parallel to

the PPTA consulting service



Purpose of today

• Background: What is a WSP?

•Experiences of the WSP pilot

• Lessons/challenges

• Conclusion• Further discussion

3



Overview of WSP



Why WHO promotes WSPs

• Traditional guidelines: water quality testing of product – finds contamination after exposure

– infrequent

• WSP: refocuses testing on processes

– detects failures early and corrects before exposure to contamination

– frequent, often continuous

• Risk-based – identify failure modes that can lead to adverse health outcomes

– implement engineering and management systems to prevent failures

• Locally tailored: respond to factors such as:

– estimated contamination levels and risks for a specific system – expectations of investors and couterparts

– willingness or ability to recover costs from the community

– expectations of water quality standards (health and quality in general)

• In general: improved benefit:cost

5



WHO Water Safety Plan structure

6



Physically, what is a WSP?



A WSP is a document

• Usually many tens of pages long

• The WSP must be ‘living’ and should be:

– followed by the water supplier indefinitely

– an operational document

• frequent monitoring processes must be adhered

• timely corrective actions must be undertaken if

monitoring processes detect problems – subject to periodic review , update & improvement

– amenable to audit and regulatory compliance

8



Illustrative extracts

Practical example:

the Wanzhou case study example



Wanzhou Water Supply Component

• WTP (200,000 m3/day ), Sludge treatment facility, Lab equipment

• Contribution to the water sector reform of Wanzhou district

- 11 small plants 4 centralized plants

- 3 operators 1 operator

• Project management consulting service includes:- National water supply engineer (3 PM)

- International/national water sector specialist (3 PM each)

Serving pop. : 0.73 million (2012)

(a whole system) : 1.5 million (2020)Capacity : 200,000 m3/day (Ph1)

350,000 m3/day (Ph2)

System: : Flocculation-Filtration-

Disinfection

NRW : 12%

Operator : Wanzhou Water Co. Ltd

10



WSP Team

• Usually 5 to 20

persons

• Representation:

– Utility

– PPTA

– WSP facilitator

– ADB

– Counterpart(s)

Name Affiliation Job Title Role in WSP team Attenda nce Contact

Peng Wei

Guang

Yangtze

River

Inspector

at

Head of

Water

Supply

Project

Design

Department

Overall charge of

project design for

Wanzhou Water

Supply

Component

Training 1360 7199

598

Xia

Qingquan

Wanzhou

Water

Co.

Chief

Engineer

Lead

implementation of

the WSP for WWC

Training

System

assessmen

t

137094588

38

Cheung NC AECOM PPTA

Team

Leader

Overall

coordination of

PPTA including

linkage to the

WSP

Training

System

assessmen

t

+852 3105

8627

11



Process flow

diagram

• Often several

are required

• Showing

– Inputs

– Outputs

– Alternative flows

– Key process steps

取水泵房

Water Intake PumpingSta.

预沉池 Pre-sedimentation

二级泵房

Secondary Pump Sta.

机械混合池

Mechanical Mixture

絮凝沉淀池

Flocculation Sedimentation

滤池

Filtration

清水池

Service Reservoir

送水泵房

Pumping Station

干化池

Dewater Unit

加药间

Chemical DosingUnit

加药间

ChemicalDosing Unit

加氯间

Chlorine Dosing Unit

原水

RawWater

预处理厂

Pre-treatment

PA

PAC

Cl2

排泥

Sludge

反冲排水

BackwashDischarge

排泥水处理设施

Sludge Treatment Unit

管网

PipelineNetwork

净水厂

Treatment Plant

12



Process

summary

• Still be

a draft at

PPTA phase

• Includes

– Source

– Treatment

– Distribution

– Standards

Process step Process description

Water catchment Yangtze River, transportation, urban and rural runoff andwastewater pollution, upstream include towns (Chongqing,Zhongxian, Fuling, Changshou) and industry (mining,

pharmaceuticals, chemical, electronic, metal refining).Existing reservoirs have problems with algae.

Water quality Water quality generally meets the standards for surface water.The raw water quality testing report complies with surfacewater quality standards Class II of GB3838-2002 for chemicals and Class III for microbial tests

Water Intake spot Zhuangzi River (to the city’s south, upstream of the city, 14km direct distance from treatment plant, 3.2 km direct distanceupstream from the planned Yangliu stream wastewater discharge spot).

Coagulation andsedimentation

Poly aluminium chloride as the coagulant

Filtration 16 units, total height 4.2 m, filtration area 67.6 m2,

Filtration media, sands, thickness as of 1.2 m, dimension as of 0.9-1.35 mm, K80 < 1.40

Back wash mode: air flush, air-water flush, water flush

Disinfection Chlorination, designed water treatment capacity 16041.7 m3/h,

hence the designed chlorine dosing 0.5-1 mg/l

Vacuum chlorine dosing machine, capacity of 8 kg/h each

Dosing spots are located in the water inlet pipe of treatedwater storage.

Chlorine leakage neutralizer

And so on… And so on…

13



Risk assessment table

• Typically tens, sometimes over 100, risks are

listed for each water supply system

Proces

s step

Hazardou

s event

Hazard

L i k e l i h o o d

S e v e r i t y

R i s k s c o r e

Risk

ratingwith nocontrol

s

Control

measures in place

andproposed

tomanage

significant risks

Validatio

n of control

measures

L i k e l i h o o d

S e v e r i t y

R i s k s c o r e

Risk

ratingpost-contr

ol

Notes Actions

required(investigatio

n or improvedcontrols)

Yangtze River sourcewater

Unplannedchemicalspill eventthatdoesn't

normallyoccur

Chemicalcontaminant - variouspossible

1 5 5 Low Emergency actionplan toadjust thetreatmentprocess

and/or shift to analternative water sourceand shut

the plant

1 3 3 Low Sucheventswould berare infrequencyand

would beexpectedto benotified totherelevant

authorities.

Etc… 14



Risk mitigation table• Approximately 5 to 10 key controls per supply

Process

step

Contr

olmeasure

Hazards

controlled

Monitor

ingparameter

Targe

tcriteria

Critic

allimit

Monitoring Correctiv

e action

Validati

on of controlmeasur e

Follow up

actions

Where When Who How

Pre-sedimentation,coagulatio

n,sedimentation andfiltration

Solidsremoval bythese

processsteps

TurbiditySomemetalsSome

colour SomeorganicsMicrooganisms from thesource

water, suchas bacteria(including E.coli ), virusesandprotozoa

(Cryptospori dium andGiardia)

Turbidity

Turbiditytargetis <

0.5NTU

Turbiditymustbe ≤

0.8NTU

Thesample isdrawn

fromtheoutletof thecombined

filter effluent pond

Continuously

Controlcentreof the

WanzhouWater Co.

Turbidityanalyser

Urgentlyreviewandimprove

pre-sedimentation andsolidsremovalprocesses

to reduceturbidity.

This isthepracticallimit of

achievability of the plantand willallow 1NTU to

beachievedat thepoint of supplyas per

theGB5749-2006standard.

Should theplantachievebest

practice for protozoa(Cryptospori dium andGiardia)control

which haslower turbiditytargets of 0.15 NTU?Responsibi

lity: DesignInstitute.

Etc… 15



Improvement plan

• 25 improvement measures identified, e.g. – Catchment water intake point

– Pre-treatment

– Water transfer channel

– Coagulation-Flocculation- Filtration

– Disinfection

– Storage

– Distribution main

– Consumer connections

• Project investment includes: – Procurement of comprehensive set of laboratory equipment

– International and national water sector sp ecial ists (3 PMeach)

– Community-level water conservation training anddemonstration

16



What do we need for WSP?



WSP and PPTA

ADB Project Process Water Safety Plan Process

PPTA Team

Feasibility, Environment & Social Studies

Review proposed project infrastructure,equipment, software, activities, trainingto better address water safety

Revise design, environment & social plans

Prepare Project Administration Manual

Water Safety Plan Team

Assess hazards & risks to water safety

Share findings and suggest how to reviseproject design, financing, environment & social plans

Prepare water safety plan, set-up watersafety plan team for implementation

18



• WSP activities need not delay projects

• However – WSP is a risk assessment and management plan

– Addressing major risks may delay projects• Revisions to – engineering designs

– project locations

– costs

• Requests for additional – data and information collection

– physical engineering controls

– documentation and management controls

• Due diligence (i.e. economic, financial, community,analysis).

19

Mainstreaming WSPs into ADB Water

Projects – Timelines



• WSP need not – increase capital costs

– significant increase operating cost

• Costs will include

– WSP preparation and implementation (pro ject processing co st ) – Additional personnel costs (WSP technical consultant(s), utility

staff/government officials, PPTA)

• Costs may include capital and/or operating costs associatedwith addressing/mitigating major concerns (project process ing cos t /Project co st ) – Modification of design, feasibility study and locations

– Requests for additional: data collection/ documentation/ monitoringfacilities/ training

– Due diligence (i.e. economic, financial, community, analysis).

– Ensuring proper implementation of WSP during the operationalphase 20


Projects – Resources



Is it worth the additional

investment?



WHO: BCR for WATSAN of 2 to 46 x

Costs Benefits

Hutton G, Haller L, Bartram J. 2007. Global cost-benefit analysis of water supply and sanitation interventions. J Water Health. 2007 Dec;5(4):481-502.

Hutton G. 2013. Global costs and benefits of reaching universal coverage of sanitation and drinking-water supply. J Water Health. Mar;11(1):1-12.Hutton G and Haller L. 2004. Evaluation of the costs and benefits of water and sanitation improvements at the global level. World Health Organization. 22



Lessons learnt




Projects – Lessons learned

1. Select appropriate WSP guidance

document .

– Wide range of WSP (and equivalent) guidance

documents• Various versions from WHO

• Many jurisdictions, counterparts and agencies have

their own

– Clarify what is meant by a WSP for particular

ADB project.

• Essential to permit assessment of what is delivered

24





2. Set a clear target

– Clarify which water quality standards /guidel ines will apply

– Clarify the scope that the WSP will cover • All must cover bacterial aspects

• What about: – Viruses

– Parasites – Chemical

– Physical

– Radiological

– Aesthetic

– Other aspects of consumer acceptability 25



Water and health priorities

Bacteria

• Shigella

• Cholera

• E. coli

Chemicals

• Industrial

• Natural

Protozoa

Viruses

• Cryptosporidium

• Rotavirus

26



Example: Chongquing II WSP pilot

• Bacterial and viral contaminants

– Fully addressed

• Protozoan contaminants

– Adequately addressed

• Chemical contaminants

– Relatively new Chinese DWQ standards

– Inadequate data to assess risk

– To be reviewed in future years

27





3. Early mobilization of WSP specialist(s)

– ADB processing team to introduce and agree

importance of WSP with counterpart at TA fac t-

f ind ing m iss ion (=pre-recon./recon. mission) – Include WSP w ith in pro ject con cept

– Ideally included with in PPTA team

• Mitigates PPTA team having independence and rolethreatened

28



Challenges and issues to

consider




Projects – Challenges and issues

1. New vs Existing

– ADB: new facilities (mostly)

– WSP guidance: exist ing facilities (mostly)

• Speculation is required around

– Risks

– Process performance

30





2. Sustainability of WSP – WSP should be an evolv ing , living management

system, owned, maintained, followed and improved

by counterparts and their stakeholders. – ADB’s role: early start-up phase so challenging to

develop a self-evolving WSP

– Strong ongoing champion (government/regulator)

needed – Assess willingness of EA and local government etc. tolong-term WSP adoption

• Otherwise will the WSP simply become a design-stage riskassessment and management plan?

– Maintaining momentum within ADB 31





3. Uncomfortable truths

– The WSP includes an overt summary of r i sks to

public health

– Some risks remain high , or unmitigated

• rare events

• unaffordable treatment solutions

– Some risks are unknown

– Having risks frankly documented can be

uncomfortable

32



4. WSP Implementation = Duplication?

– Perception and reality: why would a goodPPTA need a WSP anyway?

– Does this add value or does it simply duplicatinginherent due diligence by PPTA teams?

• Communicate that existing or subordinate documents

simply be cross-referenced , e.g. an emergencyresponse plan

• Explain that this is a due diligence process butacknowledge that it won’t always identify a need for

changes 33





5. WSP is “Catchment to consumer” – ADB projects sometime only cover the major

infrastructure, the rest are givens

– What do you do about

• Distribution system, particularly it not continually pressurized• Household connection.

• Plumbing and storage systems within properties

• Carting

• Receptacle, storage and treatment at point of use

6. Cultural and trust considerations – Willingness to pay for “safe” or “safer” water

– Cultural and habitual norms – do consumers wantsafe water…? 34





7. Evaluating WSP

– ADB• Evaluate against what? Design & Monitoring Framework?

• Easy to write a WSP

• Is it technically valid?

• Is it adequate?

• How effective was the WSP?

• How much difference did it make vs not having a WSP?

• There is no obvious point of comparison – Onging

• As above…

• There are various audit and assessment tools, approaches andsystems

• All are somewhat subjective and qualitative 35





Our key conclusions



• Clarity is essential

– The issues discussed here must be documented clarified

• WSP is qualitatively useful and positive

– Benefit:cost not quantitatively assessed• Costs are quite easy to assess

• Benefits may include:

– Improved productive time, reduce health case costs

– Credibility with commercial and industrial users of water

• Sustainability is unknown – Project-level

• ADB role is ≈ 5 years – what about ownership beyond the financinginfluence…?

• WSP is long-term. Sustainability is in the hands of the counterparts

– ADB-level – where does this sit within ADB? 37

Mainstreaming WSPs into ADB WaterProjects – Conclusions



• The need for defensible mechanisms for

evaluation is obvious

– Existing mechanisms in use internationally are

somewhat subjective• External audits

• Internal self-assessment audits

• Capacity building – WHO’s capacity building program proved valuable to

ADB

– Additional is probably needed38

Mainstreaming WSPs into ADB WaterProjects – Conclusions



Questions and comments?



Discussion starters

• What are the first impressions of COP?

• Do we see parallels from other sectors?

• Does ADB play a leading role on WSP in some

areas, or simply utilize the WSP guidance of

the local counterparts, donors and/or WHO?

40



End

CS64: Mainstreaming WSP Water Projects

Documents

Transcript of CS64: Mainstreaming WSP Water Projects