Portfolio Committee on
Water and Environment
Affairs
Regulation of South African
Water Services
(with a focus on Blue Drop and
Green Drop Certification)
16 April 2013
26 to
Why Water Services Regulation
• Constitution: Bill of Rights
• Water Services Act (Act 108 of 1997): Section 62 (1)
“The Minister and any relevant Province must monitor
protect the performance of every water service
institutions in order to ensure (a) Compliance with all applicable national standards
prescribed under this Act…”
2
Approaches
• Punitive Regulation
– Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement
– Regulatory Performance Measurement (RPMS)
Tariff determination + Contract Regulation
• fair to all citizens (equitable)
• affordable (viable; ensure economically effective & efficient use of
resources)
• allow for continuity of service (sustainability)
3
Approaches
• Incentive-Based Regulation
– Blue Drop Certification and Green Drop Certification
Rewards system to encourage performance excellence and
continuous improvement - innovative performance rating system
built around legal requirements and local / international good
practices as it applies respectively to the management of
drinking water and wastewater
4
Approaches
• Punitive Regulation
• Incentive-Based Regulation
• Targeted Risk-based Regulation
– W2RAP Process for wastewater (as approach of water safety plans for
drinking water supply systems)
An approach that allows institutions to identify and prioritise critical
risks within the supply of drinking water and treatment of wastewater
and to take corrective measures to abate these risks. Risk analysis is
used by the Regulator to identify, quantify and manage the
corresponding risks according to their potential impact on the water
resource (and human health) and to ensure prioritised and targeted
regulation of Institutions
5
DWQ Compliance (30%)
To obtain certification
A score of 95% is required;
DWQ Data Submission (5%)
Includes more than just 99% for
drinking water quality compliance
Analysis Credibility (5%)
DWQ data -
Monitoring Programme (15%)
Microbiological
quality
Health
Chemical quality
Health
Water Safety Planning &
Incident Response Management (15%)
Aesthetic quality
Acceptability
Process
Controlling (10%)
DWQM Publication (5%)
DWQ Asset
Management (15%)
Financial sustainability
HOLISTIC APPROACH
6
The evaluation criteria
To obtain certification
A score of 90% is
required;
Blue Drop 2011 Requirements
This would include a 90% quality
compliance on all 3 Categories
(Microbiological; Chemical& Physical)
WW Treatment
Capacity (10%)
WWQ Compliance (30%)
Monitoring
Programme (10%)
Process
Controlling (10%)
Analysis
Credibility (5%)
Bylaws (5%)
WWQ Data
Submission (5%)
WWQ Asset
Management (10%)
WWQ Failures Response
Management (10%)
7
Incentive Based Regulation
Taking Stock
Where were we, Where are we now?
• The innovative form of regulation continues to “entice”
increased interest in Drinking Water Quality & Wastewater
Services Management:
– The regulatory databases continues to show increased activity as
members form municipalities load information, (the Blue Drop
System (BDS) already had some time ago more than 2 million
“hits”.
– The 3rd Municipal Water Quality Conference attracted 870
delegates in comparison to 350 in 2007 and 550 in 2009
8
Incentive Based Regulation
Taking Stock - Where were we, Where are we now?
• In preparation of the upcoming 2012/13 Green Drop / RPMS /
Blue Drop Assessments, approximately 500 Officials attended the
country-wide symposia
o Changing assessment criteria means that no-one can be complacent, not
even the most experienced
• Linked to this, with Green Drop assessments commencing this
week, activity on the Green Drop continues to increase weekly
o Will be quantified at the end of the assessment cycle against data
submission
o “Insistence of the private sector to be assessed”
9
Blue Drop 2012 Performance
Blue Drop Assessment Analyses (National)
Category
2009
2010
2011
2012
Trend
Nr Municipalities Audited
107
153
162
153
↓
Nr Water Systems Audited
402
787
914
931
↑
Nr Blue Drop Awards
25
38
66
98
↑
51.4%
67.2%
72.9%
87.6%
↑
National Blue Drop Score
10
Incentive Based Regulation
Taking Stock: Where were we, Where are we now?
• Data shows that the microbiological compliance of drinking water
determined for the country improved from 93.3% (2009) to 97.3%
(2012) (measured against SANS 241: 2006)
— Noting the increase in both microbiological and chemical data
submission and credibility of information
• In 2011, 154 systems were reported to have Water Safety Plans, in
2012, 579 systems had Water Safety Plans of which 269 were
complying with international standards
— Systems in place to identify risks, systems in place to ensure optimum
monitoring (the latter includes looking at the determinands of concern in the
system)
11
Incentive Based Regulation
Taking Stock: Where were we, Where are we now?
• Data shows that the microbiological compliance of drinking water
determined for the country improved from 93.3% (2009) to 97.3%
(2012) (measured against SANS 241: 2006)
— Noting the increase in both microbiological and chemical data
submission and credibility of information
• In 2011, 154 systems were reported to have Water Safety Plans, in
2012, 579 systems had Water Safety Plans of which 269 were
complying with international standards
— Systems in place to identify risks, systems in place to ensure optimum
monitoring (the latter includes looking at the determinands of concern in the
system)
BDS Data Submission - Meaningful data
• 2005 – 4 700
2009 – 1 200 000
• 2007 – 6100
2010 – 1.7 mil
12
Incentive Based Regulation
Taking Stock: Where were we, Where are we now?
• Data shows that the microbiological compliance of drinking water
determined for the country improved from 93.3% (2009) to 97.3%
(2012) (measured against SANS 241: 2006)
— Noting the increase in both microbiological and chemical data
submission and credibility of information
• In 2011, 154 systems were reported to have Water Safety Plans, in
2012, 579 systems had Water Safety Plans of which 269 were
complying with international standards
— Systems in place to identify risks, systems in place to ensure optimum
monitoring (the latter includes looking at the determinants of concern in
the system)
The “tightening” of SANS 241
requirements might have an
affect on the compliance
figures which will be
reported13
in 2014
DWQ Information Availability
• All DWQ information is available on the Blue
Drop System:
– www.dwa.gov.za/bluedrop
– Or on the Mobi site: my-water.mobi
– The site had more than 2 million visitors
The Blue Drop Report provides credible information
on municipal specific performance and indentified
risks. Copies available at www.dwa.gov.za/bluedrop,
under “News”
14
Victor Khanye LM
From Diarrhoea Outbreak to 80% Blue Drop Score
2012; Most
improved WSA
award
2007 & 2009;
major diarrhoea
and typhoid
outbreaks
2011; <20 % Blue Drop
Score Obtained
15
Wastewater
Management
Risk-based Targeted Regulation
• The aim of the approach is to assess risks and
prioritise appropriately.
• To address aspects of public health and environmental
integrity in a sustainable manner.
• Intervention according to Cumulative Risk Rating
• Cumulative risk rating considers :
 A = design capacity
 B = receiving flow
 C = Number of non-compliance in terms of
effluent quality
 D = Technical skills compliance
 CRR=(A*B+C+D)
Weighting factors used to establish CRR
2012 Progress Assessment Tool Cycle
• 153 municipalities (total 831 plants assessed),
treating 5 374 Ml wastewater per day or 1 961 510
Ml/year
• Department of Public Works, total of 11 regional
offices and 117 plants assessed with these plants
receiving 15 Ml/day
• Privately owned plants - 4x
19
100.0
90.0
80.0
88.2
88.2
88.2
80.7
74.0
73.5
68.4
30.0
67.4
40.0
61.8
50.0
78.8
60.0
96.1
70.0
60.0
Risk Profile - % CRR/CRRmax
DPW Plants - NATIONAL RISK LOG
66%
20.0
10.0
0.0
DPW RISK INDICATOR:
4 11
CUMULATIVE RISK COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS
Performance Category
2008
2009
2011
2012
Risk Trend
[2011-2012]
Highest CRR
25
29
32
28
↓
Average CRR
13.5
13.3
13.6
12.3
↓
Lowest CRR
5
4
3
Average Design Rating (A)
2.5
1.4
1.4
2
1.4
↓
→
Average Capacity Exceedance
Rating (B)
3.3
3.7
4.1
3.8
↓
Average Effluent Failure Rating
(C)
3.2
5.7
5.7
4.7
↓
Average Technical Skills Rating
(D)
1.7
2.4
2.6
2.5
↓
AVERAGE % DEVIATION FROM
maximum-CRR
67.0
66.8
69.2
66.0
↓
2012 Green Drop Progress Performance
• Assessed 831 wastewater systems in comparison with
821 in 2011
• 68 plants maintained their 2011 Green status , 323
plants digressed (increased risk ratios) and 440 plants
showed progress by having lower risk ratios
22
What do we (DWA) want
• 100% assessment of all municipalities
• 100% compliance of all municipalities
– Private institutions
23
Way Forward Initiatives
DWQ & Wastewater Services
• Water Services = Municipal Workplan
– To address the Presidential Targets by means of the Blue
Drop and Green Drop principles
• Objective: Target 2014 – 99% DWQ Compliance and 80% WWQ
Challenge:
compliance
Capacitated Stakeholders
• 50% reduction of water losses
Strengthen role of Civil Society
• Wastewater Risk Abatement Planning
– Reducing wastewater risks in a strategic manner to facilitate
Challenge:
sustainable turn around
Ones we know the specific risks,
solutions needs to be find
24
Way Forward Initiatives (2)
• Municipal Water Quality Capacity Building
– Cross-Pollination Programme (Twinning)
– Multi Sector Support Programmes
– Monitoring rectification and abatement of critical risk
elements
– Gauge GDS and RPMS activity
– To expand Green Drop Audits to include privately owned
plants discharging into environment
– Expand targeted risk based regulation to other quaternary
catchments
25
Way Forward Initiatives (3)
• Implementing Enforcement Protocol
– Where Sections 41(3) and 154(1) of the Constitution is honoured (Build
Capacity of Local Government, as per previous slide)
• To implement Section 73 of the Water Services Act
– i.e. To obtain agreement with WSA that they are unable to manage
water services as per set Norms & Standards, and then to get an
external institution to render services on behalf of the WSA
• To ensure improvement of Water & Wastewater Services
Management by means of Economic Regulation principles:
– In terms of cost reflective tariff determination and
– Infrastructure Investment (Asset Management)
26
Way Forward Initiative (4)
Key Risk Areas for 2013
Blue Drop Progress Reporting
1. The status of Water Safety Planning
– The existence of an acceptable process
2. Skills compliance to Reg 17
3. Actual Compliance
— Compliance of DWQ (as well as Risk Index)
27
Challenges
• Drinking water supply systems - assessments
– Changing numbers of water supply systems presented for
assessment
• Borehole systems
– Staff turn-around within municipalities (skills)
• Shortages staff within DWA to do assessments
28
Challenges
• Wastewater Treatment Works
– Treatment Plants functioning above design capacity
– Operation and Maintenance neglected (poor planning)
– Applications for water-use licences not received
– Applications for water-use licences received, but with not all the
required information attached to process the application
29
Registration is now open - weblink:
http://www.dwa.gov.za/projects/4thMWQC/default.aspx
30
Thank you
www.dwa.gov.za/bluedrop; www.dwa.gov.za/greendrop
31