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

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

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

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

CONTENT INTRODUCTION HISTORY THE PRESENT SITUATION FUTURE SCENARIOS CONCLUSION

DIAGRAMME OF THE WATER SUPPLY CHAIN INTRODUCTION DIAGRAMME OF THE WATER SUPPLY CHAIN

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

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

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

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

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

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

DIAGRAMME OF THE WATER SUPPLY CHAIN INTRODUCTION DIAGRAMME OF THE WATER SUPPLY CHAIN

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

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

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

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

CURRENT MONITORING / REPORTING SITUATION

CURRENT MONITORING / REPORTING SITUATION

CURRENT MONITORING / REPORTING SITUATION

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?

SANS 241: 2015 Monitoring requirements 18 April 2018 Mariette Swart

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

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 241-1 limits

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

(2) Routine monitoring programme (2.1) Prescribed monitoring prg (Table 1 determinands + Table 1+2 frequencies) Risk assessment full SANS 241-1 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

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)

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 – 100 000 1 per 5000 head + 1 additional 100 000 – 500 000 1 per 10 000 head + 11 additional > 500 000 1 per 20 000 head + 36 additional where & when: 80% coverage of network / representative points (spatial / temporal risks; control points & high usage points)

Distribution system (critical distribution system points) risk defined monitoring prg Determinands exceeding SANS 241-1 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

Opportunity and benefits for integration discussion Who (WSA: municipalities vs. Rand Water) needs to do monitoring what: To ensure SANS 241-2 compliance (Table 2) Determinands to include under risk monitoring programme Opportunity and benefits for integration

THANK YOU