REGIONAL OFFICE FOR THE WESTERN PACIFIC · PDF fileREGIONAL OFFICE FOR THE WESTERN PACIFIC...

W O R L D H E A L T H ORGANIZATION

ORGANISATION MONDIALE DE LA SANTE

REGIONAL OFFICE FOR THE WESTERN PACIFIC BUREAU REGIONAL DU PACIFIQUE OCCIDENTAL

MISSION REPORT

(FINAL DRAFT 14 APRIL 2006)

Subject Places visited Dates of mission Author and designation Title of project Participating agencies Source of funds

: : : : : : :

WHO Water Sanitation and Health Training Viet Nam, Lao PDR, Philippines 18th February to 11th March 2006 WHO consultants: Dr. Daniel Deere, Water Futures, Australia Mr Bonifacio B. Magtibay, Dept Health, Philippines Mr Shaful Gafur Mahmud, ITN-BUET, Bangladesh Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality Dissemination Water Safety Plans Training World Health Organization Viet Nam: Hai Duong Water Supply Company Ministry of Health Lao PDR: Vientiane and Champasak WASA Ministry of Health Ministry of Construction Philippines: Department of Health Maynilad Water Services, Inc. AusAID Water, Sanitation and Health Project

Key words

English only

WORLD HEALTH ORGANIZATION REGIONAL OFFICE FOR THE WESTERN PACIFIC

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF MISSION REPORT

Dr. Daniel Deere, Mr Bonifacio B. Magtibay and Mr Shamsul Gafur Mahmud, Viet Nam, Lao PDR, Philippines,18th February to 11th March 2006 During February and March 2006 a mission was undertaken by the World Health Organization (WHO). The training mission included two components: ‘Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality 3rd Edition (2004) (GDWQ) Dissemination’ and ‘Water Safety Plan (WSP) Training’. The GDWQ Dissemination and WSP Training Workshops were nominally of two and three days duration respectively and took place twice and thrice respectively. Three venues generously hosted the training including Hai Duong in Viet Nam, Thalad in Lao PDR and Manila in Philippines. At each workshop there were around 25 participants. The objectives of the training were to provide practical training and advice to water supply and health sector professionals to help them improve water safety as well as to help WHO identify improvement opportunities for the rolling revision process of the GDWQ and its supporting training material. The GDWQ Dissemination Workshops involved lectures describing each chapter of the GDWQ followed by a question and answer session to explain the concepts in more detail. A summary of the discussions was captured along with a shortlist of key issues of interest to the WHO rolling revision process. The WSP Training Workshops involved an active learning process. Firstly, brief presentations were given to explain each concept, supported upfront by an overview of a completed WSP for Chapai Nawabgonj Pourashava, Bangladesh. After a presentation on each concept, the workshop participants identified and captured an interpretation of that concept for their chosen case study water supply system. By the end of the three-day workshop, an illustrative example of the beginnings of a WSP had been created and a program for implementing WSPs locally and nationally was proposed. The key recommendations of relevance to the WHO rolling revision process were:

• The Chemical Aspects working group could identify and propose indicator chemicals that can be readily monitored in the same way as faecal indicators are used. Examples might include ammonia as an indicator of agricultural pollution as a conservative indicator for pesticide contamination.

• The Chemical Aspects working group coud provide default provisional guidelines for some of the chemicals, such as iodine and silver, that are mentioned but for which no guideline is yet provided.

• A chorine maxima of 0.5 mg/L was fouund in some national standards due to concerns about aesthetics and by-products of disinfection (DBPs). The Control working group could provide practical advice on maintaining disinfection without causing aesthetic and DBP problems.

The key recommendations related to WHO GDWQ Dissemination and WSP training materials were: • The worksheets used in the WSP training needed to be simpler and there needed to be fewer of

them. Exemplar simplified worksheets are included in this report. These were prepared in Viet Nam and used thereafter on this mission and should appear in future training material.

• Translation of texts was found to be easier if texts were translated in one piece rather than line-by-line due to font restrictions in computer software. Future material should be prepared for complete translation in one piece rather than line-by-line.

The key recommendations in relation to the implementation of WSPs in the region are as follows: • Outline WSP implementation plans have been developed for each country at the workshops and

are included in the body of this report. These plans should be used as a basis for monitoring implementation. If delays arise, these need to be noted and root cause identified.

• There is experience with Food Safety Plans (FSPs) in many countries in the region. This may be a source of expertise to help local development of WSPs. FSPs and WSPs both involve protection of public health, primarily from microbial hazards, and both are based around HACCP and preventive quality management system concepts.

CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..........................................................................................................................5

VIET NAM ....................................................................................................................................................5 LAO PDR .....................................................................................................................................................5 PHILIPPINES..................................................................................................................................................5

INTRODUCTION .........................................................................................................................................6

BACKGROUND..............................................................................................................................................6 STRUCTURE OF TRAINING.............................................................................................................................6 DETAILS OF TRAINING...................................................................................................................................7

VIET NAM.....................................................................................................................................................8

INTRODUCTION.............................................................................................................................................8 WSP TRAINING ............................................................................................................................................8

Group exercise 1. Assembling a team using Exercise Form 1 ................................................................8 Group exercise 2. Description of the system using Exercise Form 2 .....................................................9 Group exercise 3. Flow diagram using Exercise Form 3........................................................................9 Group exercise 4: Identification of hazards and risk analysis using Exercise Form 4 ...........................9 Group exercise 5: Control points and monitoring using Exercise Form 5 .............................................9 Group exercise 6: Verification using Exercise Form 6 .........................................................................10 Group Exercise 8: WSP Action Plan using Exercise Form 8................................................................10

IMPLEMENTING WSPS ACROSS VIET NAM .................................................................................................10 KEY RECOMMENDATIONS ARISING.............................................................................................................11

LAO PDR .....................................................................................................................................................12

INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................................12 GDWQ DISSEMINATION.............................................................................................................................12 WSP TRAINING ..........................................................................................................................................13

Group exercise 1. Assembling a team using Exercise Form 1 ..............................................................13 Group exercise 2 and 3. System Descriptions and Flow Diagrams using Exercise Forms 2 and 3.....14 Group exercise 4: Identification of hazards and risk analysis using Exercise Form 4 .........................15 Group exercise 5: Control points and monitoring using Exercise Form 5 ...........................................16 Group exercise 6: Verification using Exercise Form 6 .........................................................................17 Group Exercise 8: WSP Action Plan using Exercise Form 8................................................................17

IMPLEMENTING WSPS ACROSS LAO PDR ..................................................................................................17 KEY RECOMMENDATIONS ARISING.............................................................................................................18

PHILIPPINES..............................................................................................................................................19

INTRODUCTION...........................................................................................................................................19 GDWQ DISSEMINATION.............................................................................................................................20 WSP TRAINING ..........................................................................................................................................23

Group exercise 1. Assembling a team using Exercise Form 1 ..............................................................23 Group exercise 2. Description of the system using Exercise Form 2 ...................................................24 Group exercise 3. Flow diagram using Exercise Form 3......................................................................25 Group exercise 4: Identification of hazards and risk analysis using Exercise Form 4 .........................26

Group exercise 5: Control points and monitoring using Exercise Form 5 ...........................................28 Group exercise 6: Verification using Exercise Form 6 .........................................................................30 Group exercise 7: Gap analysis using Exercise Form 7. ......................................................................31 Group Exercise 8: WSP Action Plan using Exercise Form 8................................................................32

IMPLEMENTING WSPS ACROSS THE PHILIPPINES........................................................................................33 KEY RECOMMENDATIONS ARISING.............................................................................................................34

ITINERARIES.............................................................................................................................................34

SUMMARY ..................................................................................................................................................34 LAO PDR ...................................................................................................................................................36

GDWQ Dissemination and WSP Training.............................................................................................36 PHILIPPINES................................................................................................................................................39

GDWQ Dissemination ...........................................................................................................................39 WSP Training ........................................................................................................................................41

EXAMPLES OF EXERCISE FORMS......................................................................................................43

EXERCISE FORM 1: WATER SAFETY PLAN CORE TEAM..............................................................................43 EXERCISE FORM 2: PRODUCT AND PROCESS DESCRIPTIONS........................................................................44 EXERCISE FORM 3: FLOW DIAGRAM ...........................................................................................................45 EXERCISE FORM 4: HAZARD ANALYSIS ......................................................................................................47 EXERCISE FORM 5: CONTROL POINTS AND MONITORING............................................................................48 EXERCISE FORM 6: VERIFICATION..............................................................................................................49 EXERCISE FORM 7: GAP ANALYSIS OF DOCUMENTATION REQUIRED FOR A WSP .......................................50 EXERCISE FORM 8: IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ..............................................................................................53

Acknowledgements The authors wish to gratefully acknowledge the support of WHO and counterpart agencies in each country. Particular mention is made of the following:

Viet Nam • Hai Guong Water Supply Company in particular the Director and Vice Directors both for

their support for the training and for providing the venue and translation support through Ms Trang.

• Ministry of Health in particular the Preventative Medicine Centre and Institute of Environmental Hygiene for providing medical and hygiene expertise to the workshop.

• WHO WPRO in particular Mr Terrence Thompson for providing leadership to the project overall and assisting with disussions on future WSP activities in Viet Nam.

• WHO-Viet Nam in particular Ms Thuy for providing translation support both before and during the event and for organising much of the event.

Lao PDR • Ministry of Health in particular Dr Tayphasavanh of the Department of Hygiene and

Prevention, Environmental Health Division for logistical, technical and continuous translation support.

• Champasak WASA and Vientiane WASA for providing trainees and the excellent training venue in Thalad.

• Thalad training centre staff for providing excellent support services so that the training progressed smoothly.

• WHO regional office in particular Dr Moh Nasir Hassan for providing leadership during the event.

• WHO Lao PDR in particular Dr Kongeo for taking part in the training and for supporting the event both logistically and by translating presentation material.

Philippines • Department of Health (DOH) in particular Dr. Roberto Sadang and Engr. Joselito Riego

De Dios of the Environmental and Occupational Health Office for helping to organise the event and for presenting on the National Standards for Drinking Water. The same with Engr. Victor Sabandeja, DOH Consultant, for presenting the updates in the Revision of National Standards for Drinking Water

• Maynilad Water Services Incorporated (MWSI) in particular Engr. Franklin Arellano and his staff Ms. Ana Liza Porciuncula for providing an excellent venue and facilities as well as a large group of motivated trainees.

• Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA) in particular Engr. Virgilio Bombeta and Ms. Jessielen Catapang for providing technical advice in the workshops.

• WHO WPRO in particular Ms. Elvie Arciaga and Mr Terrence Thompson for local organisation and leadership of the event.

• WHO-Philippines in particular Dr. Ma. Nerissa Dominguez and Ms Angcao for providing local context in the workshops.

Introduction

Background WHO and AusAID forged a partnership on water, sanitation and health in support to the attainment of the seventh item in the Millenium Development Goals (MDG) highlighting the targets to be achieved on safe water and sanitation, such as to halve by 2015, the proportion of people without sustainable access to safe drinking water and basic sanitation. The 3rd Edition of the World Health Organization (WHO) Guidelines for Drinking-water Quality (GDWQ) was published in 2004 and provides a contemporary definition of what safe water is and how to reliably provide it. Drinking water is globally recognized as an important component of health protection, particularly in countries where water quality - related diseases are prevalent, such as in the Asia-Pacific region. This concern motivated WHO and AusAID to develop a project with the following objectives:

• develop national capacities on assessing water, sanitation and health priorities; • develop and maintain guidance on good practice and normative guidelines; • support settings-based programs; and • increase awareness of, access to, and dissemination of high quality and up-to-date information on

water, sanitation and hygiene and health. Selected countries including China, Viet Nam and Lao PDR, were included in a work plan which over two years would include many activities including the dissemination of the GDWQ. A number of important changes took place in revising the GDWQ from the 2nd Edition. WHO has an extensive programme of training and communication to help support the implementation of the revised GDWQ. The communication strategy includes the use of internet and hard copy published information as well as hosted discussion forums and networks. Another part of the WHO strategy for communicating the GDWQ involves training workshops. Training workshops provide an opportunity for water sector professionals to receive practical guidance in the implementation of the GDWQ and to ask questions about implementation in the local context. WHO is currently rolling out GDWQ training missions worldwide including throughout the Western Pacific region. This report summarises the three-week training mission for Viet Nam, Lao PDR and Philippines.

Structure of training There were two major training components related to the GDWQ: • The first component involved dissemination of the GDWQ more broadly and consisted of modules

matched to the GDWQ chapters. This ‘GDWQ Dissemination’ training was aimed at the broader water sector including health, natural resource and infrastructure ministries as well as water supply organisations and research institutes. Each training workshop was of between one-and-a-half to two days duration and involved lectures followed by question and answer sessions going through one GDWQ chapter at a time. A key feature of the workshops was to consider the relevance of the GDWQ to the national and local guidelines and standards for water supply. At the end of the workshops, issues were captured to assist WHO with revising the GDWQ into the future .

• The second component involved Water Safety Plan (WSP) training. One major new feature of the 3rd Edition of the GDWQ was the inclusion of a Water Safety Framework which had at its centre a risk-based approach to the management of water safety. The development of a systematic ‘catchment to consumer’ WSP was promoted which for urban water supplies is likely to be led by the principal organisation operating each water supply system. Therefore, this ‘WSP Training’ was aimed primarily at operational water supply organisations. Each training workshop was between three and five days in duration and involved brief presentations on each concept followed by group workshops to create exemplar WSP components for a case study system. An example of a completed WSP for Chapai Nawabgong Pourashava, Bangladesh, was given near the start of the WSP Training Workshops to help show upfront how a full WSP comes together. During the workshops material generated during the

training was captured to provide examples of WSP components for the chosen system to form the start point for developing a full WSP. At the end of the workshops a forward plan for local and national WSP implementation was developed.

Details of training In outline, the training mission consisted of visiting three venues and giving workshops in each on GDWQ Dissemination and WSP Training. During January and February 2006 training materials were prepared in Word™ and Powerpoint™ format in English and these materials were translated into Vietnamese and Laotian. The agenda were prepared in consultation with WHO and local counterparts and training materials were printed out locally. The GDWQ Dissemination training was given to water quality and surveillance administrative representatives. The WSP training was given to water supply organisations along with representatives of key water quality management stakeholders. The objectives of the training were four-fold: • to provide practical training and advice to water sector professionals to help them improve water safety

using the guidance in the 3rd Edition of the GDWQ; • to provide an opportunity for water sector professionals to get first hand answers to their questions about

the GDWQ from WHO and consultants involved with GDWQ development; • to enable WHO to identify any implications of GDWQ implementation within these countries as a

means of capturing improvement opportunities for the rolling revision process; and • to enable WHO to identify any opportunities for improving the training material and approach to help

with future training missions. This report provides a record of some of the outcomes of the training as well as a summary of the key findings from the WHO perspective.

Viet Nam

Introduction Previously, WHO held a GDWQ Dissemination workshop in Viet Nam so for this component of the mission only WSP Training was required. The Hai Duong Water Supply Company (HDWSC) was selected as the case study for developing the pilot WSP for Viet Nam. The training took place from 20th to 24th February 2006 and included 20 participants from HDWSC, Ho Chi Min City Water Supply Company (HCMCWSC), the National Training Centre (NTC), the Ministry of Health (MOH) and WHO (Table 1).

Table 1. Summary of workshop participants

Job Title of Participant Agency 1. Director HDWSC

2. Economic Director HDWSC

3. Economic Director HDWSC

4. Distribution System Operator HDWSC

5. Distribution System Operator HDWSC

6. Water Supply Engineer HDWSC

7. Chemist HDWSC

8. Machine Engineer HDWSC

9. Machine Engineer HDWSC

10. Construction Engineer HDWSC

11. Civil Engineer HDWSC

12. Technical Manager HDWSC

13. Technician HDWSC

14. Technician HDWSC

15. Medical Doctor, Preventative Medicine MOH

16. Scientist, Environmental Hygiene MOH

17. Environmental Health Officer WHO

18. Management Systems Consultant. NTC

19. Management Systems Consultant NTC

20. Chemical Engineer HCMCWSC

WSP Training The WSP training started on 20 February 2006 with a tour of the surface water treatment plant and ground water treatment plant. The surface water treatment plant was selected. The participants worked as one group and focused on the Hai Duong surface water supply system. From the presentation of concepts and the conduct of group exercises, the following summarises the information generated by the groups.

Group exercise 1. Assembling a team using Exercise Form 1 The HDWSC had already identified a WSP team with eight members and had allocated resources to support developmet of a WSP.

Table 2. Summary of workshop output: Assembling a team.

Component Group output

Scope

Surface water treatment plant and supply system

Timelines

Next 12 months

Objectives

WSP with ISO 9001 system

Outputs

Pilot WSP for Viet Nam

Roles of team members

• Leadership (Director) • Treatment • Chemist • Distribution • Medical doctor

• Management Systems Consultant as Facilitator (four days per month allocated)

Group exercise 2. Description of the system using Exercise Form 2 It was noted that in a ‘real WSP’ there would be inclusion of details of system construction and operation, not just a table.

Table 3. Summary of workshop output: Description of the system.

Component Group output

Process steps described by group • Source • Transportation • Storage • Specification • Product Description • Intended users

Notes Need to think about sensitive users and whether or not people are expected to boil their water before consumption. Need to inform the community if they are expected to boil their water before consumption.

Group exercise 3. Flow diagram using Exercise Form 3 The flow diagram was simple for this system.

Table 4. Summary of workshop output: Flow diagram process steps shown.

Component Group Ouptut

Process steps described by group • Catchment – not controlled • River – not controlled • Intake - controlled • Pump - controlled • PAC chemical dosing - controlled • Coagulation - controlled • Sedimentation - controlled • Filtration - controlled • Chlorination - controlled • Reservoir - controlled • Pump - controlled • Network - controlled • Underground Reservoir – not controlled • Rooftop Reservoir – not controlled • Taps – not controlled • Sludge separation and disposal - controlled

Notes Probably worth adding the illegal connections as a symbol. It’s good to include control.

Group exercise 4: Identification of hazards and risk analysis using Exercise Form 4 This was completed one process step at a time to allow for at least four process step types (source, treatment, distribution and community). The nature of risks are different for each. The output was not fully documented in English in this case although worksheets were left with participants in Vietnamese. Discussion was held on examples such as pathogens being introduced by consumers dipping hands in containers, leakage in pipelines and reservoirs being uncovered.

Group exercise 5: Control points and monitoring using Exercise Form 5 Once again, this was completed one process step at a time to allow for at least four process step types (source, treatment, distribution and community). The nature of risk management is different for each. The output was not fully documneted in English in this case although worksheets in Vietnamese were left with participants. Existing monitoring was described with particular attention being given to pH, turbidity and microbial indicators. Many parameters were monitoring thrice daily at the laboratory on site.

Figure 1. From top left clockwise: Mr Mahmud, ITN-BUET and WHO Consultant with Director, HDWSC developing WSP examples; Ms Trang, HDWSC, providing translation support; Participants developing example WSP material; Participants discussing WSP outputs.

Group exercise 6: Verification using Exercise Form 6 Verification was described for both water quality monitoring and auditing. For water quality monitoring, twice weekly monitoring at consumer taps was described and considered adequate and focused on bacterial indicators, turbidity, pH and iron. Auditing was also undertaken as were consumer satisfaction assessments. The validation of the system was primarily based on the National Standards and included turbidity limits of 2 NTU and chlorine limits of 0.5 mg/L.

Group Exercise 8: WSP Action Plan using Exercise Form 8 The group found it hard to agree in the group environment to a WSP Action Plan so a smaller group worked on this to one side of the main group. The plan was to implement the WSP month by month working with the NTC consultant and in liaison with the ISO 9000 system. Key actions and dates suggested for developing the HHDWSC pilot WSP were as follows:

• HDWSC resource commitment and team formation January 2006 (complete) • Flow diagram and system description March 2006 • Hazard analysis and risk characterisation April 2006 • Control measures and operational monitoring May 2006 • Verification June 2006 • Documentation July to August 2006 • Improvement action plan Ongoing basis • Implementation of WSP September to October 2006

Implementing WSPs across Viet Nam

The main HDWSC surface water supply system was considered an ideal pilot for Viet Nam since it was sufficiently developed that WSP could be credible but was not so advanced that others be put off. The main ground water system run by HDWSC was probably too advanced to be an ideal model for Viet Nam. Once the model WSP is complete for Hai Duong, further WSP development is expected to take place using the HDWSC pilot as an example and using the support of the NTC consultants used by the HDWSCC in developing its WSP. The participants from Ho Chi Min City expressed a particular interest in developing a WSP next.

Key recommendations arising For WHO

• There is a dislike of high levels of chlorine in water supplies which leads to a strong pressure to reduce these levels. WHO needs to talk more in its guidelines about how to provide chlorination, or some other disinfection, without impacting aesthetics. Examples of how to do this might include better organics removal, use of booster stations, improved communication with consumers and use of alternative disinfectants.

• The training material needs to be further simplified since there are many words in English that do not have a Vietnamese equivalent. It may be better to have fewer, simpler exercise forms. Furthermore, the ISO 9001 system has a glossary of terms that are already translated into most languages and WSP material can draw more from these to aid local translation.

For DOH

• There needs to be much clearer distinction in the standards between health and aesthetic targets to avoid under-treatment of water (e.g. to reduce chlorine levels) or focus on minor issues at the expense of attention on major issues.

Lao PDR

Introduction Both GDWQ Dissemination and WSP Training workshops were held in Lao PDR. Champasak WASA (CWASA) was selected as the case study for developing the pilot WSP for Lao PDR. The training took place from 27th February to 3rd March 2006 and included 16 participants. The main trainees were Vientiane WASA (VWASA) and Champasak WASA (CWASA) with five participants from each organisation being represnted. In addition, a representative from Ministry of Construction and five representatives from Ministy of Health were in attendance as well as a number of WHO representatives. The workshop was opened by WHO regional representative Dr Hassan and addresses were made by representatives from the Ministry of Health Department of Hygiene and Prevention, National Centre for Environmental Health and Water Suppply, and Vientiane WASA of the Ministry of Construction. Importantly, the workshop was promoted as the start of a process whereby WSPs wouuld be developed and implemented for Lao PDR.

Figure 2. From top left clockwise: Dr Maniphhousay, MOH, introducing the meeting; Mr Mahmud ITN-BUET and WHO Consultant providing training with Dr Tayphasavanh, MOH providing translation and technical interpretation; Participants developing example WSP material in working groups; Participants with Dr Kongkeo from WHO Lao PDR preparing presentation material.

GDWQ Dissemination The GDWQ Dissemination training was held 27th to 28th February 2006. The new Lao PDR Drinking Water Standards (2005) were presented and shown to be very consistent with the latest WHO GDWQ. For example, in addition to providing standards for chemical and microbial parameters in water, the guidelines promoted the Water Safety Plan approach through the inclusion of the Hazard Analysis and Critical Control

Point (HACCP) approach. There were no major discrepancies between the WHO and Lao PDR standards and no major issues emerged for WHO or MOH to need to consider further.

WSP Training The WSP training took place during 1st to 3rd March 2006. The surface water treatment plant and system at Champasak was selected for the WSP program. This system was considered reasonably representative of the urban water supply systems in Lao PDR. The plant draws from the major water supply for Lao PDR (the Mekong). Further more, the system is considered to be capable of providing safe water making the development of a WSP credible whilst not being overly developed and automated making the pilot WSP suitable for adaption to many other systems, not just state of the art systems. From the presentation of concepts and the conduct of group exercises, the following summarises the information generated by the groups which was captured pictorially rather than in text. Both CWASA and VWASA completed the WSP training exercises separately and then shared their examples with one another to exchange ideas and help reinforce concepts. The WHO, MOC and MOH participants and the training consultants worked in with the groups to provide support and mutual learning. The documented outputs from the workshop were retained by CWASA and VWASA to provide a start point for their own WSPs. In this report the photographic images obtained from the training workshops are used to show the output as the material was only partially documented during the Workshops. The images shown are at low resolution whereas the original photos are at high resolution and are fully legible, providing an extra record of the workshop outputs.

Group exercise 1. Assembling a team using Exercise Form 1

Group exercise 2 and 3. System Descriptions and Flow Diagrams using Exercise Forms 2 and 3

Group exercise 4: Identification of hazards and risk analysis using Exercise Form 4

Group exercise 5: Control points and monitoring using Exercise Form 5

Group exercise 6: Verification using Exercise Form 6

Group Exercise 8: WSP Action Plan using Exercise Form 8 The group were able to agree a WSP Action Plan at two levels. One was a national level action plan and the other an action plan for CWASA. Key actions and dates suggested for developing the National WSP Action Plan were as follows:

• VWASA to write to MOC seeking endorsement of WSP March 2006 • MOC to write to VWASA to agree to support WSPs April 2006 • VWASA to write to CWASA to seek their agreement to be pilot April 2006 • CWASA to agree to complete pilot WSP April 2006 • VWASA to seek support from WHO and MOH for CWASA April 2006 • WHO and MOH to offer suport for CWASA April 2006

Key actions and dates suggested for developing the CWASA WSP were as follows:

• Flow diagram and system description May 2006 • Hazard analysis and risk characterisation June 2006 • Control measures and operational monitoring July 2006 • Verification August 2006 • Documentation September 2006 • Improvement action plan Ongoing basis • Implementation of WSP October 2006

Implementing WSPs across Lao PDR VWASA and other MOH and MOC personnel will need to work with CWASA to assist in the development of the CWASA pilot WSP. VWASA and MOC have relevant technical expertise in engineering and water quality aspects. The MOH has very relevant health-related expertise as well as HACCP skills and experiences within its Food Control Division of the Food and Drug Department through Mrs Sivilay and Vienxay who work with Dr Tay. Therefore, if supported by these national agencies, it is considered that CWASA should be able to develop a sound model WSP for Lao PDR within six to nine months. Once the

model WSP is developed, MOH and MOC can work together to promote WSPs for other urban systems and then start to work on rural system WSPs models.


• Providing training material for line by line translation is difficult because it is easier for translators to simply change the font in a whole document or presentation rather than edit English language text. In future, it would be better to simply translate the whole presentation and text rather than to undertake line-by-line translation.

Philippines

Introduction Being aware of the WHO initiatives in WPRO, the Government of the Philippines requested WHO to provide assistance in the form of resource persons and training materials in conducting activities including dissemination of GDWQ and WSP training. The timing of the training was fortuitous as Philippines is currently revising its national drinking water standards. The Department of Health (DOH) of the Philippines and a private water company, Maynilad Water Services Incorporated (MWSI) collaborated by signing a Memorandum of Understanding indicating their partnership as organizers of the activity and providing counterpart resources. The Secretariat assigned by MWSI was highly efficient in providing support in terms of reproducing workshop materials and copies of the group reports, arranging desktop computer and LCD projector, providing overhead projector, transparency sheets, flipcharts and other requirements. The activity was composed of two parts: GDWQ Dissemination (6-7 March 2006) and WSP Training (8-10 March 2006). There were 31 participants present representing 9 agencies for the GDWQ dissemination workshop and 21 participants representing 4 agencies for the WSP training (Table 5).

Table 5. Summary of workshop participants

Name of Participant Agency GDWQ WSP 1. Cruz, Luis DOH √ √ 2. Riego de Dios, Joselito DOH √ √ 3. Baetiong, Leonita EMB √ X

4. Bombeta, Virgilio LWUA √ √ 5. Catapang, Jessielen LWUA √ √ 6. Mateo, Gloria MWCI √ X

7. Sevilleno, Elizabeth MWCI √ X

8. Acio, Alicia MWSI √ √ 9. Calderero, Anita MWSI √ √ 10. De Villa, Romeo MWSI √ √ 11. Dela Cruz, Gloria MWSI √ √ 12. Dibaratun, Ariraya MWSI √ √ 13. Gabriel, Sylvia MWSI √ √

14. Gonzales, Casiano Jr. MWSI √ √ 15. Labaro, Helen MWSI √ √ 16. Loria, Renato MWSI √ X

17. Mati, Edgar MWSI √ √ 18. Rodil, Mark Erwin MWSI √ √ 19. Tandoc, Julius MWSI √ √ 20. Tria, Ma. Ana MWSI √ √ 21. Vicente, Eriberto MWSI √ √ 22. Xavier, Rise Anne MWSI √ √ 23. Agustin, Evelyn MWSS √ X

24. Bagaporo, Isabel MWSS √ X

25. Baluca, Baluca MWSS √ X

26. De Vera, Rebecca MWSS √ X

27. Abas, Taha Jr. NAPC-WASCO √ X

28 Fuentes, Lucila NPC √ √ 29. Recaido, David NPC √ √ 30. Beltran, Jose NWRB √ X

31. Rongavilla, Luis NWRB √ X

32. Rogacion, Rodel MWSI X √

Figure 3. From top left clockwise: Mr Terrence Thompson, Regional Adviser on Environmental Health, WHO-WPRO introducing participants; Mr Magtibay, Department of Health and WHO Consultant, assisting working groups; Participants presenting their working group outputs; Mr Terrence Thompson and Engr. Franklin Arellano, Sr. Asst. Vice President or MSWI presenting certificates at the close of the meeting.

GDWQ Dissemination The GDWQ Dissemination training was held 6-7 March 2006. There were 31 participants including:

1. Department of Health (DOH) – 2 2. Environmental Management Bureau (EMB) – 1 3. Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA) – 2 4. Manila Water Company Incorporated (MWCI) – 2 5. Maynilad Water Services Incorporated (MWSI) – 15 6. Metropolitan Waterworks and Sewerage System (MWSS) - 4 7. National Power Corporation (NPC) – 2 8. National Anti-Poverty Commission – Water and Sanitation Coordinating Office (NAPC-WASCO) – 1 9. National Water Resources Board (NWRB) - 2

The GDWQ dissemination activity was opened by Engr. Francisco Arellano, Senior Assistant Vice President, Environment Management Department and Corp Communications, MWSI. Dr. Roberto Sadang of DOH delivered a message citing the importance of drinking water quality and WSP in curbing waterborne diseases. Dr. Nerissa Dominguez of the WHO Country Office delivered also a message informing the group that WHO has similar activities in other Asian countries and expressed that WHO will continue its support to the activities initiated in the Philippines. Mr. Terrence Thompson, Regional Adviser on Environmental Health highlighted that WSP is a new concept which can be piloted in the Philippines. WHO agreed to support the piloting of WSP to MWSI where its success is expected to be replicated in other water utilities around the country.

The first day was devoted to the presentation of all the chapters of the GDWQ by Dr. Deere and Mr. Magtibay. The second day involved a discussion on the implications for the Philippine National Standards for Drinking Water which was led by Engr. Joselito Riego de Dios of DOH and Engr. Victor Sabandeja, DOH Consultant. The GDWQ dissemination activity was closed on 7 March 2006 by Dr. Roberto Sadang of DOH emphasizing that the comments generated for the national standards will be considered in the ongoing revision and recognized that GDWQ can be a good reference for it. The following concerns were raised during the GDWQ Dissemination training that relate to the utility of the GDWQ:

• Chemicals with no guideline values. There is a concern on what to do for chemicals that have no guideline value yet (e.g. iodine and silver) but which are of concern in some parts of Philippines.

• Indicator parameters. Can e.g. phosphates or nitrates be used as an indicator parameters in screening for the possible presence of chemical pesticides?

• Radiological test. How often should radiological tests be conducted? WHO has no guideline on the frequency of radiological testing.

• Impurities in chemicals used for water treatment. Can the impurities in the chemicals used for water treatment be considered as priority chemicals? There are reports that disinfectants or coagulants used in treating water (e.g. chlorine granules) have impurities (e.g. arsenic) that are not regularly monitored. GDWQ could provide a guideline on how to screen and analyze the composition of chemicals used in water treatment.

• Biological indicators. The Philippine National Standards for Drinking Water has a parameter for biological indicators that is not included in the GDWQ. Is it advisable to include this in the revision of the national standards and/or revised GDWQ?

The following concerns were raised during the discussion on the National Standards:

• Laboratory capability to test parameters. In the revision of the national standards for drinking water, how does the government include a parameter if there is no current laboratory capability to test it?

• Portable test kits. Can the government use the portable test kit equipment in testing required parameters and then officialy publish the results? Is there a guideline on verifying the appropriateness of portable test kits?

• National guideline vs. national standards. DOH is contemplating on using national guideline instead of national standards for drinking water quality considering that each area of the country has unique physico-chemical characteristics. Is this approach considered sensible by WHO?

• Boil water advisory. Is it advisable to boil drinking water if it contains nitrate or nitrite? There was a concern that nitrate or nitrite is not removed upon boiling but that it may in fact become more concentrated. A comment on the effect of boiling water on chemicals should be included in the GDWQ.

• Disposal of chlorinated water from disinfection. Is there any procedure on disposing chlorinated water to bodies of water as part of disinfection considering that it would cause environmental impact? In the Philippines, a disinfected water with chlorine dosage of about 25 ppm is being disposed of indiscriminately in the drainage that eventually goes to bodies of water.

• Policy on the use of portable test kits. Would it be allowable to use portable test kits for parameters that should be measured on-site (e.g. pH). Can this be considered in the revised national standards. Is there any procedure of the government on the certification of portable test kits?

• Water laboratories: o Accreditation of water laboratories. Is there any update on the DOH policies for

accrediting water laboratories from the previous Administrative Order of 1979? What minimum number of parameters to be tested is required for accreditation? There is a need to disseminate information for the revised A.O., if there is any.

o Lengthy process of accreditation at DOH. Accreditation at DOH is a lengthy process due to lack of manpower to validate application for accreditation and renewal of accreditation. At present, one person is assigned to attend to accreditation function at DOH.

o Proficiency program. There is no proficiency program for water laboratories. This item should be considered in the revision of national standards to ensure efficient performance of laboratories.

o Categories of parameters in the national standards. In the existing standards, there is no distinction for parameters with aesthetic values and with health concerns. The writers suggested that the distinction be considered in the revised standards.

• Philippine standard values vs. WHO guidelines o Philippine standard values that are stricter than WHO guidelines. Should the government

maintain the values of some parameters that are stricter than WHO guidelines (e.g. Chlorite: Phil-0.2 ppm, WHO – 0.7 ppm; Colour: Phil-5 HU, WHO-15 HU; Cu: Phil-1 mg/L. WHO-2 mg/L; Chlorine: Phil-0.5 mg/L, WHO-5 mg/L)?

o Parameters not recommended by WHO guidelines. Should the government maintain the use of parameters that are not recommended in the WHO guidelines (e.g. biological indicators and total coliforms)?

• No guidelines available. o Should the government include standard values for desalinated water, and water for

emergencies and disaster in the revised standards? o Should the government consider the preparation of a guideline on the use of chlorine vs.

chlorine dioxide as a disinfectant in the revised standards? o WSP as a regulatory tool. Should the government include WSP as a regulatory tool in the

revised standards?

WSP Training The WSP training was held 8-10 March 2006. There were 21 participants including:

1. Department of Health (DOH) – 2 2. Local Water Utilities Administration (LWUA) – 2 3. Maynilad Water Services Incorporated (MWSI) – 15 4. National Power Corporation (NPC) – 2

The WSP training started on 8 March 2006 where the mechanics and approach of the training was described by Dr. Deere. The participants were divided into 4 groups representing major components of a water supply system, such as: Surface water (5 members); Water treatment (6 members); Groundwater (5 members); and Distribution network (5 members). Engr. Casiano Gonzales, Jr of MWSI took the presentation of the water sources of MWSI . There were about 7 group exercises conducted. A prototype action plan in preparing a WSP was also discussed as the last topic. The activity was closed on 10 March 2006 by Engr. Arellano with a message from Mr. Thompson. Engr. Arellano informed the group that MWSI is willing to start the preparation of WSP in the coming weeks with an Order having been drafted organizing a team for WSP. Mr. Thompson reported that WSP training in other WPRO countries has led to good feedback. WSP is seen as a systematic approach, practical and useful for improving water quality. After the closing of the WSP training, another meeting was conducted in the afternoon of 10 March 2006 with the MWSI President, key officials of Local Water Utilities Administration of the Philippines and representatives of the Philippine Waterworks Association and Department of Health to give feedback on the results of the training and discuss future prospects of WSP across Philippines. It was found that the participants were not asking many questions so the trainers changed to have Boni do more facilitation. This worked better as participants could then talk in their first language. More questions and discussions followed. This was an important observation for future workshops. Clearly the group can understand training provided in English and can communicate in English. But for more relaxed, general communication, they are more comfortable having local language chair and discussion. In practice the discussions were in mixed language so it was generally possible to follow the thread of the discussion even for English-only speakers. Therefore, Mr. Magtibay served as the facilitator of the training (doing daily recaps, giving clarifications on some instructions, and moderating discussions) while Dr. Deere provided the lectures and technical comments on the outputs of each group exercise. From the presentation of concepts and the conduct of group exercises, the following summarises the information generated by the groups.

Group exercise 1. Assembling a team using Exercise Form 1 Dr. Deere identified the items not indicated in the reporting of each group, such as the inclusion of other professional groups that can help in WSP (e.g. plumbing association), the need for a team coordinator, and a person in-charge of safety of chemicals. He emphasized the ideal composition of a WSP Team which are the following: Team Leader, Coordinator, Technical Expertise (science, environment, health), Operational Expertise (e.g. field workers) and External Representatives (e.g. plumbing engineers).

Table 6. Summary of workshop output: Assembling a team.

Component Group 1: Surface Water

Group 2: Water Treatment

Group 3: Groundwater

Group 4: Distribution

Scope

All dams and pipe aqueducts up to treatment plants

Water treatment plants (LP1 and 2)

South manila A small area in the distribution network (for exercise purposes only) LaMEsa Plant 2 to la mesa dam (North A distribution system – lagro-quirino)

Timelines

1 year June-December one month

Objectives

WSP in source

WSP To come up with WSP

Outputs

Draft WSP WSP for management approval

Roles of team members

• Dam safety engineer • Earthquake engineer

• Overseer and Coordinator

• Process Quality • Chemical Treatment • Chemical Treatment • Sr. Chemist • Plant Operation • Advisors:

• Hydrologists • Chemists • Microbiologist • Financial analysts

Issues Need for coordinator. Common Purpose Facilities as Coordinator

Need for safety of chemicals. This is the function of MWSI over-all safety department.

Inclusion of plumbing association and consumer group for complaints

Group exercise 2. Description of the system using Exercise Form 2 Dr. Deere commented on the following: illegal connections should be considered also as customers, names of chemicals as inputs to the water system must be specified, materials that affect risks must be adequately described (e.g. reservoir that is made of cement, type of pipe material).

Table 7. Summary of workshop output: Description of the system.





Process steps described by group

• Surveillance and monitoring of watershed area

• Transmission of raw water from Angat/Ipo Dams to La Mesa Portals

• Turbidity monitoring • Flow splitting of raw

water to concessionaires

• Monitoring and maintenance of appurtenances

• Screening • Pre-chlorination • Coagulation • Flocculation • Sedimentation • Intermediate

Chlorination • Filtration • Post-chlorination

• Blow-off • Meter- reading • On-line

distribution • Disinfection,

Chlorine solution • Preparation of

chlorine solution (granules)

• Cleaning of water storage tanks

• Water level monitoring

• Random chlorine residual monitoring

• Pumping • Storage • Distribution • Water quality

monitoring

Issues Illegal connection is also a customer (that will benefit on water safety)

All chemical inputs (names of specific chemicals) must be

Need to describe materials (pipes, reservoir as cement);

included things that affect risks; backflow preventers

Group exercise 3. Flow diagram using Exercise Form 3 Process steps were captured in flow diagrams. In general this was done very well by all groups. May be worth in future asking participants to create the main stem of the flow diagram first and then add the oddities such as bypass options, return flows and chemical inputs.

Table 8. Summary of workshop output: Flow diagram process steps shown.






• Catchment NPC, DENR, MWSS, NIA, NWRB

• Natural activities (wildlife, fires, flood, mudslide) DENR, NPC, MWSS, NWRB

• Human activities (settlers) DENR, NPC, MWSS, NWRB

• Primary storage MWSS, MWSI, MWCI, CPF

• Transport by gravity in aqueducts CPF

• Splitting of flow MWSI-WPT

• Transport to LP1 and LP2

• pH adjustment • Permanganate dosing • Screening • Catchment chamber • Pre chlorination

(liquid chlorine) • Alum addition • Coagulation • Polymer addition

(cationic) • Flocculation • Sedimentation • Intermediate

chlorination (liquid chlorine)

• Filtration • Post chlorination

(liquid chlorine) • Treated water

reservoir. • Backwash • Sludge lagoon • Wet well • Recovered washwater

return to catchment chamber

• System control check up

• Blow-off • Meter reading • Preparation of

chlorine solution • On line • Disinfection • Dosing • Adjust dose • Distribution

• Pumping • Reservoir • Distribution • Line repair and

maintenance • Valve • Blow-off • Air valve • District meter • Water quality

monitoring

Issues Probably worth adding the illegal connections as a symbol.

Very thorough process diagram. Mixers were shown as were on line monitoring points. Only omissions seemed to be the input process step (where did the water come from?) and any bypass options.

This diagram included both core water processes and supporting operational processes, such as dose checking. It went beyond the minimum requirements and was good, demonstrating the conceptual understanding of the team. in the WSP.

Illegal connections needed to be added. Any connections to consumers prior to the first water storage reservoir needed to be shown.

There was a debate about whether or not to dechlorinate disinfected water following line disinfection and tank disinfection. 25 ppm chlorine was used which may be environmental impact. It was considered that in Manila the ambient water quality was so poor that there was no point being concerned about a little chlorinated water getting into the local water body. It was noted that this issue was within the scope of the WSP because any WSP operation needed to be permitted to go ahead. Therefore, as part of the WSP permissions to discharge contaminated water and chlorinated water needed to be gained and clear procedures developed.

Concerns were expressed about cost savings being made to buy cheaper rather than better pumps as well as concerns about there being only one staff member per ten pumps. It was noted that these issues could be addressed as part of the Improvement Action Plan.

Group exercise 4: Identification of hazards and risk analysis using Exercise Form 4 The following items were not always clearly understood as reflected in the group reports: computation of risk value, identification of hazards and hazardous events, monitoring activities and corrective actions. The trainers pointed out the errors and the correct inputs. Specific quantitative values should be indicated in the critical limits and not just qualitative. Vague words, such as “desired flow” for critical limits or “as the need arises” for the frequency of monitoring should be avoided.

Table 9. Summary of workshop output: Surface water group risks for catchment process step.

Event Hazard Control measure Likelihood Severity Risk La Nina Physical Reforestation 3 5 1 Landslide Physical Reforestation 3 5 1 Clogging of tunnel Supply shortage Reforestation 3 5 1 El Nino Supply shortage Reforestation 3 5 1 Manganese Manganese Install Mn removal

process 3 3 1

Forest fire Physical (color, turbidity, odor)

Security, LGUs, DENR

3 5 1

Illegal logging Physical (turbidity) Vigilant monitoring and control DENR

4 3 3

Human access Microbial and turbidity

Education, security 5 2 2

Sabotage Chemical Security 1 1 5

Trainer comments:

• There was some confusion with the ‘risk’ column here which did not multiply the scores through but used a rating scale/priority scale. This was OK but was risky as different groups may use different approaches. The need to get this clarified was highlighted by the trainers.

• Downstream control measures were not included, such as filtration/chlorination, only the control measures at the process step were included. The trainers emphasized the benefit of downstream control measures being included too so as to emphasize their importance.

• Some ‘additional control measures’ were mentioned that were later noted as useful by the trainers but it was suggested that these be listed separately.

Table 10. Summary of workshop output: Treatment group risks for inlet structure process step.

Event Hazard Control measure Likelihood Severity Risk Uncontrolled water quality due to natural disaster like flash flooding run off from provinces like Quezon

Forest logs and other debris caused by water, agricultural waste, pathogens from animals and humans, naturally occurring substances like Mn and organic hazards like humic acids from decaying materials

Reinforce screens Reduce rate of production to a manageable level through radial gate adjustments Close monitoring of raw water quality like pH, turbidity, and chlorine demand

5 4 20

Table 11. Summary of workshop output: Ground water group risks for well process step.

Event Hazard Control measure Likelihood Severity Risk Handling of pumping set

Iron bacteria getting in

Regular cleaning and inspection of well at least every 5 years as follows: • Pull butt of pump

set • Down the hole

camera (optional) • Pull out • Cleaning of the

well • Pump out of the

well water to waste

• Clear the pipe and pump set

• Install the and pipe and pump set

• Blow-off

4 3 12

Trainer comments: • The hazard identified was not the real hazard. The iron bacteria were not the hazard; the hazard was the

iron. The trainer explained this difference.

Table 12. Summary of workshop output: Distribution group risks for distribution pipe process step.

Event Hazard Control measure Likelihood Severity Risk Illegal tapping Microbial • Increase

monitoring/security of pipeline

• Community information

5 4 20

Intrusion of contaminants to leaking pipes

Microbial Physical (sediments)

• Regular monitoring and maintenance of pipeline monitoring including pressure, flow control

5 4 20

Contamination by low water pressure supply

Microbial • Maintaining pipeline water pressure

• Advising when to draw water

• Advising on the use of water pumps

•

3 4 12

Busted pipe Microbial Physical (sediments)

• Regulator monitoring/ maintenance of appurtences

• Coordination with contracts that may affect pipelines

2 4 8

Intrusion of contaminants through exposed pipes

Microbial • Regular PM of approved pipe with replacement pipe material also noted for the location of pipe.

2 3 6

Trainer comments:

• Some ‘monitoring’ and ‘corrective actions’ appear to have crept in rather than control measures. The trainer discussed this with the group and noted that corrective actions and monitoring were to be discussed later on.

Group exercise 5: Control points and monitoring using Exercise Form 5

Table 13. Summary of workshop output: Surface water group controls for transport process steps.

What Limits Where How When Who Corrective action

Ipo elevation 100.30 plus/minus 0.2

Ipo Dam Level sticks/indicator Hourly Operator on duty

Request for additional or reduction in gate opening at Angat

Turbidity

Turbidity > 30 NTU

Ipo Dam Turbidimiter Hourly Operator on duty

Immediate info to LP1 and 2 by radio. To give engineer 4 to 5 hours response time

Trainer comments: • The group originally put the process step in the ‘what’ column. This is not a big issue, pedantics only,

but was pointed out and is corrected in the above table.

Table 14. Summary of workshop output: Treatment group controls for various process steps.


Settling tank: Settled water turbidity

4 to 7 NTU Field bed influent

Turbidimiter Every two hours

Lab analyst • Adjust alum/polumer application.

• Adjust actual raw water inflow rate.

Flocculation: flocculator speed

60/30/15 RPM

• Adjust flocculators to ensure no settling

Sedimentation: Sludge level

1.5 m (max) • Adjust sludge level

Filtration: filtered water turbidity

1 NTU and below

Filter bed effluent

Turbidimeter Loss of head Length of run

Every two hours

Lab analyst • Backwashing • Replace filter

media Chlorination: Residual chlorine

0.5 to 0.7 As above Colorimeter DPD

Every two hours

Lab analyst • Increase pre-chlorination dose

Trainer comments: • There was some use of word ‘check’ rather than ‘adjusted’. This was changed in the above table after

the discussion. • The need to have a basis for all values used was pointed out, such as the monitoring frequency and the

critical limit values chosen. It was noted that this would again be covered in validation.

Table 15. Summary of workshop output: Groundwater controls for transport process step.

What Limits Where How When Who Corrective action Sediments/ suspended matter

Presence or absence Critical limits: - after 30 mins blow off Service: - Marked increase in quantity of sediment and longer time for blow-off

Blow off point

Visual Daily Pump operator

• Continuous blow off until clear water comes out

• Shock chlorination

• Microbial analysis of water with sediment

• Rehabilitation of well

Flow water rate Chlorine residual

Plus/ minus - normal rated capacity

At flow meter gauging point

Flow meter, visual reading

Hourly Pump operator

• Immediate: Adjust chlorinator feed rate

• Medium term: Provision of fully automated chlorine meters

Trainer comments: • The group originally put the process step in the ‘what’ column. This is not a big issue, just a pedantic

one, was pointed out and is corrected in the above table. • The use of ‘plus/minus normal rated capacity’ was noted as being a reference to some other document

that stated the ‘normal rated capacity’ which is OK. There are benefits from avoiding duplication. However, it’s important that in a real WSP this is explicit.

Table 16. Summary of workshop output: Distribution system group controls for pipeline process step, controlling risk of intrusion of contaminants to leaking pipes.


Pressure Desired pressure in the area of 15 to 20 PSI

Gauging points, available appurtenances F.H/A.M

Pressure gauge Hourly Network hydraulics

• Isolation of value

• Repair line • Flushing • System

adjustment • On line

chlorination Flow

Desired flow 50 to 80 MLD

Gauging point Full bore flow meter

Hourly Network hydtraulics/ telemetry

As above

Res Cl2 0.2 to 1.1 mg/L

Taps Colorimeter DPD Daily Quality inspector As above

Inspection of pipe

Presence and absence of

Access manhole • Using camera CCTV

• Leak detectors

As the need arises

Telemetry and metering

Immediate leak repair

Trainer comments: • Use of ‘desired’ and ‘in the area of’ was considered not ideal. Use of ‘as the need arises’ not ideal. This

was pointed out. Otherwise, no problems.

Group exercise 6: Verification using Exercise Form 6 There was confusion in relation to the first and third columns of the worksheet. Probably need to improve these by changing the ‘Verification activity’ column to ‘describe the specific activity to be undertaken’ and the ‘verification type’ column to ‘what type of verification is this? Auditing? Water quality testing? Consumer satisfaction assessment?’. We know people may take some time to get across the concepts but we don’t want them to waste time trying to understand the forms. The key point was to emphasise that there are several types of verification and that surveillance is the verification undertaken by independent third parties, usually health authorities. Examples of verification activities noted were

• Water quality monitoring (at the tap, internal, or external surveillance); • Internal and external auditing; • Internal auditing (water supply supervisors at least monthly); • External auditing (once a year, by health agencies: surveillance); • Consumer satisfaction (number and type of complaints); and • Validation (whether the WSP is being implemented as planned, if parameters are being met.

Table 17. Summary of workshop output: Surface water group verification.

Activity Location Type Frequency Who Raw water quality monitoring (radiological sampling)

Angat Dam Testing Annually Phil. Nuclear Research Institute.

Audit/ verification of the 60/40 split of water

La Mesa portal Checking validation of the flow meter used Using another method/ installed in service

Annually Third party UP Institute of Hydraulics.

Trainer comments: • The 40/60 split was less obviously verification but is on OK example.

Table 18. Summary of workshop output: Treatment group verification.

Activity Location Type Frequency Who Water potabilitiy Treated water tasted

insidete lab WQ testing for phys, chem., bacto

Weekly for bacto, daily for phys/chem.

Regulatory arrfair Cetnral lab

Equipment calibtation pH Spec

WTP lab Internal audit Monthly for WQ and production

Dept head/supervisors

Aesthetic quality Odor Taste Colour

Consumer taps Internal audit Daibly Cetntral lab

Trainer comments: • Aesthetic testing was a good system.

Table 19. Summary of workshop output: Ground water group verification.

Activity Location Type Frequency Who Checking of chlorine solution injected

Pump house Sampling points

Auditing Weekly Pumping plant operation Dept and QC

Checking records of chlorine residual

Pump house Sampling points

Auditing Weekly MWSS RO

Checking for records of Call center Consumer Monthly Business center

complaints including nature, numbers time

satisfaction assessment

MWSS RO

Trainer comments: • These were excellent examples of verification.

Table 20. Summary of workshop output: Distribution system group verification.

Activity Location Type Frequency Who Water quality testing Customer taps Water quality

testing, E. coli, Chlorine residual, phys, chem.

Daily Central lab

Customer survey Call center Complaints monitoring

Daily complaints monitoring system

Customer care business center, zone

Extneral audit Consumers taps Water quality testing, daily

Daily MWSS RO, LGU

Internal audit Respective department Instrument calibration

Per schedule Accredited supplies (to ISO standard)

Group exercise 7: Gap analysis using Exercise Form 7. The purpose of this exercise was to establish the difference between current practices in MWSI and the standard of practice required to have a good WSP in place. The group wanted clarification regarding what was meant by existing documentation and should it be cross-referenced. The trainers identified that the document should be as specifically referenced as possible. It was noted that there was considered to be no need to do excessive documentation and that in many WSPs documentation is quite brief. However, for the MWSI WSP this is a special case because we need the WSP to be useful as a pilot. It wsa noted that there were differences between each group’s perspective on the presence/absence of documentation and its adequacy.

Table 21. Summary of workshop output: Gap analysis.






• Surveillance and monitoring of watershed area

• Transmission of raw water from Angat/Ipo Dams to La Mesa Portals

• Turbidity monitoring • Flow splitting of raw

water to concessionaires

• Monitoring and maintenance of appurtenances

• WTP 1 and 2 • Just focus on

bacteriological contaminants initially.

• Eng Samia would be the coordinator.

• There would be several teams, one overall team and a subteam for each of LP1 and LP2.

• Chemists, Chem eng, Civ eng, Sanitary eng and other engineering fields were to be included in the teams.

• Water was potable from Class A raw waer source. Chemicals included alum, permanganate, sodium hydroxide, chlorine, polymer

• • Existing SOPs and MSDS were considered.

• A previous flow diagram was

• This group just considered Angat – Ipo - La Mesa system.

• Both health and aesthetic issues were considered, but just for raw water.

• One team only was required, no sub-teams.

• SOPs were often missing but some were already present at LP1 and LP2 to cover some issues.

• The Central Lab was repeatedly identified as the main repository of existing information for many areas of the WSP.

• The PNDWS were considered the main source of

• Focus on one distribution system initially, for the Business Center Resorts.

• Just deal with illegal tappings initially.

• Key contact would be Dept Head.

• There would be several teams, one per water supply zone, the Dept Head would select the team members.

• Once again the Central Lab figured very strongly. But in this case the Business Center was more commonly identified as being the key repository.





considered adequate for the purpose of the WSP.

• The PNSDW and test results were noted as useful evidence of hazards.

• Contingency plans were developed and considered to represent control measures. This may be an area of confusion. They were mentioned again more correctly under corrective actions. A sabotage plan was mentioned as an example of an emergency plan.

• SOPs were in place that mentioned the critical limits and monitoring procedures.

• here were many gaps in records but there was monitoring of treatment plant records.

• PPE was cited for the hygienic working practices.

information for defining critical limits and for meeting regulatory requirements.

• Vermin control is already practiced through the hiring of vermin control companies.

• Ground water system.

• Health and aesthetic issues.

• Key contact would be Dept Head.

• There would be several teams, one per geographic area.

• Most of the documentation was not yet existing.

• There seemed to be quite good coverage of the Supporting Programs for this area.

Issues • Clarified that contingency plans might be more relevant to emergency response rather than corrections used at corrective actions, but that it depends on what is in them.

• Clarified that PPE was only relevant here in the context of protecting water quality, not staff safety. Staff safety is just as important but is not covered in a WSP.

• The need to maximize the linkages between ISO 9001 and existing systems was emphasized.

• The need to develop operational-level SOPs was noted, not just to use the Central Lab.

• The overlap between worker safety and water safety came across once again for example in the good practices areas and the hygienic working practices area. This was clarified.

Group Exercise 8: WSP Action Plan using Exercise Form 8 The group completed a WSP Action Plan and agreed to a number of key milestones. These included the start/finish of WSP activities. It was noted that MWSI had started the WSP process, including the risk assessment, at the WSP workshop. It was also noted that there is an ongoing ISO 9000 certification activity for the treatment plants component.

The importance of making early decisions such as on the table of contents and document design for the WSP was noted. In addition, resources needed to b e committed by management including staff time and allowance for logistics. The participants were concerned about the need to develop a lot of documentation. The trainers explained that in other WSPs, documentation is rather brief. But since MWSI is a pilot, providing adequate documents including cross-references would be useful to help others. MWSI immediately drafted an Office Order for the preparation of a WSP after the closing of the workshop to demonstrate its commitment to the process. Key actions and dates suggested for developing the MWSI pilot WSP were as follows:

• MWSI resource commitment and team formation March 2006 • Flow diagram and system description April 2006 • Hazard analysis and risk characterisation May 2006 • Control measures and operational monitoring June 2006 • Verification July 2006 • Documentation August to September 2006 • Improvement action plan Ongoing basis • Implementation of WSP October to December 2006

Implementing WSPs across the Philippines All attendees to the meeting finished with a positive perspective on WSPs and were looking forward to some future WSP training activities in June or September 2006 for others in Philippines. A meeting at the end involved DOH, LWUA and PWWA agreeing to coordinate preparatory activities and would inform WHO in the coming months on how the next WSP training should be conducted.

Table 22. Summary of officers discussing future activities in Philippines.

Name Designation Agency

Mr. Fiorello Estuar President MWSI

Engr. Franklin Arellano Sr. Asst. Vice President MWSI

Dr. Roberto Sadang Officer-in-Charge Environmental and Occupational Health Office, DOH

Engr. Joselito Riego de Dios Chief Health Program Officer Environmental and Occupational Health Office, DOH

Engr. Victor Sabandeja Consultant Environmental and Occupational Health Office, DOH

Ms. Lilian Asprer Officer-in-Charge Local Water Utilities Administration

Mr. Mario Quitoriano Department Manager Local Water Utilities Administration

Engr. Taruc General Manager Tagaytay Water District and representative of PWWA

Dr. Ma. Nerissa Dominguez Programme Officer WHO Country Office

Mr. Terrence Thompson Regional Adviser on Environmental Health

WPRO

MWSI were not in agreement with imposing WSP as a requirement for water utilities in the national standards. Stakeholder consultation should be pursued prior to the finalization of the revised standards. However, it was noted that there were around 410 water supplies in relatively remote and regional areas so it was important to find a way of ensuring WSPs would be implemented across these systems. Dr Deere suggested they first divide these supplies into water supply system types, then develop pilot WSPs with some of the water supplies as case studies for each designated water supply system type, then, finally use the pilot WSPs as examples of the WSPs they expect to see in place. Placing obligations on each stakeholder to undertake their aspects of the WSP might help promote their implementation and use.


• Forward the issues identified by the workshop participants to the task force in-charge of updating or revising the GDWQ for their consideration and resolution.

• Continue its support to the Philippines by providing technical assistance in the form of reviewing the progress of Water Safety Planning of MWSI until it is completed and in the conduct of subsequent trainings.

• To minimize confusion in interpreting terminologies that are substantially used, the training materials should include definition of terms and more examples.

For DOH

• Take the lead in coordinating the planned WSP training this year and inform WHO on how the training would be conducted. DOH should develop a Memorandum of Understanding with LWUA and PWWA to sustain the momentum generated by the pilot training.

• Consider in the revision of national standards of drinking water comments of workshop participants that tackle the issues on laboratories, portable test kits, guideline values, and the use of WSP as a regulatory tool.

• As a long-term strategy for addressing the future demands for WSP training, a pool of WSP trainers should be organized in the Philippines.

Itineraries

Summary 18 – 19 February 2006

Travel to Viet Nam

20 - 24 February 2006

Viet Nam WSP Training, Hai Duong Water Supply Company, Hai Duong

25 – 26 February 2006

Travel to Lao PDR

27 – 28 February 2006

Lao PDR GDWQ Dissemination Workshop, Thalad. Lao PDR National Drinking Water Standards (2005) Workshop

1 - 3 March 2006

Lao PDR WSP Training, Thalad.

4 to 5 March 2006

Travel to Philippines

6 March 2006

Meeting MWSI President Briefing with Mr. Terrence Thompson

6 – 7 March 2006

Philippines GDWQ Dissemination Workshop Philippines National Standards Workshop (1993, under revision)

8 – 10 March 2006

Philippines WSP Training, Manila, MWSI Compound, Quezon City

10 March 2006

Meeting MWSI President and representatives of LWUA, DOH and PWWA Debriefing with Mr. Terrence Thompson

11 March 2006

Travel from Philippines

Lao PDR

GDWQ Dissemination and WSP Training Guidelines on Drinking Water Quality Dissemination and WSP Training at Thalad, Vientiane Province, Lao PDR, 27th February to 3rd March 2006 Time Program

Responsible

Day 1 Session 1

8:00-8:30 Registration

MoH

8.30-9:30 Opening ceremony: Remarks by WHO Remark by WASA Opening remarks by MoH Group photos

Laos WHO Director of WASA Director of DHP

9:30-10.00 Coffe break

10:00-10.15 - Introduction of Participants, logistics - Objectives of the Seminar -Workshop

MoH

Session 2

10.15-10.30 Water and Health links MoH

10:30-11:00 Intro to 3rd Edition of GDWQ. Ch 1 & 2. Roles & Principles. Dr Daniel Deere

11:00-11:30 GDWQ presentation. Chapter 3 & 4 - Health-based Targets, Water Safety Planning (WSP)

Dr Daniel Deere

11:30-12:00 Open Forum Facilitator

12:00 Lunch

Session 3

1:30-2:00 GDWQ presentation. Chapter 5 & 6 – Surveillance, Application

Mahmud

2:00-2:30 GDWQ presentation. Chapters 7 & 11 - Microbial aspects. Dr. Daniel Deere


3:00-3:30 Coffee Break

Session 4

3:30-4:00 GDWQ presentation. Chapters 8 & 12 - Chemical aspects Dr. Daniel Deere

4.00-4.30 Open Forum Facilitator

Day 2

Session 5

8:00-8:25 GDWQ presentation. Chapters 9 & 10 - radio & acceptability. Dr. Daniel Deere


Time Program

Responsible

Session 6

9:00-10:30 Workshop on Lao Drinking Water Quality Standards and Guidelines MoH

10:00-10:30 Coffee Break

10:30-11:30 Workshop on Lao Drinking Water Quality Standards and Guidelines MoH

11:30-12.00 Next steps Facilitator

12:00 Lunch

1.30-2.00 - Training Overview and Mechanics Dr Daniel Deere, WHO Consultant

Session 7

2:00-2:30 Local water supply case study system description Local water supply authority

2:30-3:00 Overview of WSPs -Framework of Safe Drinking Water -Foundations of Water Safety Plan Implementation

Dr Daniel Deere, WHO Consultant

3.00-3.30 Coffee break

3:30-4.00 Overview of System Assessment Dr Daniel Deere, WHO Consultant

4.00-4:30 Open Forum Facilitator

Day 3

Session 8

8.00-9:30

Workshop 1: Assembling a Team, Describing the System and Constructing a Flow Diagram

-By group -Facilitator

9:30-10.00 Reporting of Workshop 1 Outputs -By group -Facilitator


10.30-11.00 Overview of Hazard Identification and Risk Analysis Dr Daniel Deere, WHO Consultant

11.00-11.30 Open Forum Facilitator

11.30-1.30 Lunch

1:30 -2:30 Workshop 2: Identification of hazards and risks analysis -By group -Facilitator

2.30-3.00 Reporting of Workshop 2 Outputs -By group -Facilitator

3:00-3:30 Coffee break

Session 9

Time Program

Responsible

3.30-4:00 Overview of control measures Dr Daniel Deere, WHO Consultant

4:00-4:30 Overview of operational monitoring, emergency planning, corrective actions and critical limits


Day 4

8.00-9.00 Workshop 3: Identification of control measures -By group -Facilitator

9.00-9:30 Reporting of Workshop 3 Outputs -By group -Facilitator

9.30-10:00 Coffee Break

10.00-11:00 Workshop 4: Operational monitoring strategies -By group -Facilitator

11:00-11:30 Reporting of workshop 4 results -By group -Facilitator

11.30-1.30 Lunch

Session 10

1.00-2.00 Overview of internal auditing, verification and validation Dr. Daniel Deere, WHO Consultant

2.00-2.30 Overview of management planning and support program Dr. Daniel Deere, WHO Consultant

2.30-3.00

Open forum Facilitator


3.30-4:30

Workshop 5: Development of a management plan -By group -Facilitator

Day 5

8.00-8.30

Reporting of workshop 5 outputs -By group -Facilitator

Session 11

8:30-9:00

Organizing the Parts of a Water Safety Plan Dr. Daniel Deere, WHO Consultant

9:00-10:00

Workshop 6: Completing the parts of a water safety plan -By group -Facilitator

10:30-11:00

Reporting workshop 6 outputs -By group -Facilitator

11:00 -11:30

Next steps Facilitator

11:30-12:00

Closing ceremony Local official

Philippines

GDWQ Dissemination Guidelines on Drinking Water Quality Dissemination Seminar-Workshop at Maynilad Human Resource Seminar Room, MWSS Compound, Balara, Quezon City, Philippines, March 6-7, 2006

Time Program

Responsible

Day 1

8:00 Registration

Session 1

Opening Ceremony

9:00-9:10 Welcome Remarks

MWSI Official

9:10-9:20 Opening Statement

DOH Official

9:30-9:40 Message of WHO

Dr. Nerisse Dominguez, WHO

9:40-9:50 Introduction of Participants Facilitator

9:50-10:00 Objectives of the Seminar -Workshop Engr. Lito Riego de Dios, DOH

10:00-10:10 Group Photo

10:10-10:30 Morning Break

Session 2

10:30-11:00 Intro to 3rd Edition of GDWQ. Ch 1 & 2. Roles & Principles. Dr Daniel Deere, WHO Consultant

11:00-11:30 GDWQ presentation. Chapter 3 & 4 - Health-based Targets, Water Safety Planning (WSP)



12:00 Lunch

Session 3

1:30-2:00 GDWQ presentation. Chapter 5 & 6 – Surveillance, Application

Engr. Boni Magtibay, WHO Consultant

2:00-2:30 GDWQ presentation. Chapters 7 & 11 - Microbial aspects. Dr. Daniel Deere, WHO Consultant


3:00-3:30 Afternoon Break

Session 4

3:30-4:00 GDWQ presentation. Chapters 8 & 12 - Chemical aspects Dr. Daniel Deere, WHO Consultant

4:00-4:25 GDWQ presentation. Chapters 9 & 10 - radio & acceptability. Dr. Daniel Deere, WHO Consultant


Time Program

Responsible

4:50-5:00 Summary of the Day’s Activities Facilitator

Day 2

Session 5

8:30-8:40 Recap of previous day’s activities Facilitator

8:40-9:30 Presentation of the Philippine National Standards of Drinking Water Engr. Lito Riego de Dios, DOH

9:30-10:00 Updating the Philippine National Standards of Drinking Water and its Interface with the GDWQ

Engr. Victor Sabandeja, DOH Consultant

10:00-10:30 Morning Break

10:30-11:30 Discussion of issues and concerns in implementing the Philippine National Standards for Drinking Water

Facilitator

11:30-11:45 Next steps Facilitator

11:45-12:00 Closing Ceremony -Workshop Summary -Closing Remarks

DOH

12:00 Lunch

WSP Training Water Safety Plan Training Agenda for MWSI, Philippines Maynilad Seminar Room, MWSS Compound, Balara, Quezon City, Philippines 8-10 March 2006.

Time Program Responsible

Day 1

8:30

Registration

Session 1

9:00-9:45

- Opening Statement DOH

- Message MWSI Official

- Training Overview and Mechanics Dr Daniel Deere, WHO Consultant

- Leveling of expectations Facilitator

9:45-10:00

Morning Break

Session 2

10:00-10:30 MWSI Situationer MWSI

10:30-11:00 Overview of WSPs -Framework of Safe Drinking Water -Foundations of Water Safety Plan Implementation


11:00-11:30 Overview of System Assessment Dr Daniel Deere, WHO Consultant


12:00-1:00 Lunch

Session 3

1:30-2:30

Workshop 1: Assembling a Team, Describing the System and Constructing a Flow Diagram

-By group -Facilitator

2:30-3:30 Reporting of Workshop 1 Outputs -By group -Facilitator

3:00-3:30 Afternoon Working Break

3:30- 4:15 Overview of Hazard Identification and Risk Analysis


4:00-4:50 Open forum

Facilitator

Day 2

Session 4

8:30-8:40 Recap of previous day’s activities Facilitator

8:40 -10:00 Workshop 2: Identification of hazards and risks analysis -By group -Facilitator

10:00-10:30 Morning working break


Time Program Responsible

Session 5

11:00-11:30 Overview of control measures Dr Daniel Deere, WHO Consultant

11:30-12:00 Overview of operational monitoring, emergency planning, corrective actions and critical limits


12:00-1:00 Lunch

1:30-2:30 Workshop 3: Identification of control measures -By group -Facilitator


3:00-3:30 Afternoon Working Break

3:30-4:00 Workshop 4: Operational monitoring strategies -By group -Facilitator

4:00-4:50 Reporting of workshop 4 results -By group -Facilitator

4:50-5:00 Summary of Day’s Activities Facilitator

Day 3

Session 6

8:30-9:00 Overview of internal auditing, verification and validation Dr. Daniel Deere, WHO Consultant

9:00-9:30 Overview of management planning and support program Dr. Daniel Deere, WHO Consultant

9:30-10:00

Open forum Facilitator

10:00-10:15 Morning Working Break

10:00-11:00

Workshop 5: Development of a management plan -By group -Facilitator

11:00-12:00

Reporting of workshop 5 outputs -By group -Facilitator

12:00-1:00

Lunch

Session 7

1:30-2:00

Organizing the Parts of a Water Safety Plan Dr. Daniel Deere, WHO Consultant

2:00-3:00

Workshop 6: Completing the parts of a water safety plan -By group -Facilitator

3:00-4:00

Reporting workshop 6 outputs -By group -Facilitator

3:00-3:30

Afternoon working break

4:00 -4:30

Next steps Facilitator

4:30-4:45

Summary of day’s activities Facilitator

4:45-5:00

Closing ceremony DOH/MWSI

Examples of Exercise Forms.

Exercise Form 1: Water Safety Plan Core Team Terms of reference: Scope (geographical coverage, system coverage and subject coverage) Timelines (start, finish, interim milestones) Objectives (WSP? HACCP? ISO 9001? Certification? Prototype? Pilot? Final? Demonstration?) Outputs (Draft? Complete? Implemented? Maintain? the WSP) Roles What role would you play in a WSP team? Team details Name Organization/

Department Job title Role of person in

WSP team Contact details

Exercise Form 2: Product and process descriptions Process step Inputs Description Catchment, watershed or recharge area

Nature of the consumers of water

How the consumers will use the water

Exercise Form 3: Flow diagram

Process step name Symbol Organization / department responsible

Key

Operation �� Storage �� Transport ��

47

Exercise Form 4: Hazard analysis Process step: Hazardous event (cause of contamination) Hazard (contaminant of concern) Control measure

(to prevent contamination or remove it) Likelihood (frequency)

Severity (consequence)

Risk

48

Exercise Form 5: Control points and monitoring Process step: Process monitoring parameter (that will confirm that the process is working as intended)

Operational range and critical limits (outside critical limits, corrective action is required)

Where to monitor (be specific)

How to monitor (be specific)

Frequency of monitoring (be specific)

Who will monitor (be specific)

Corrective action (immediate correction and longer-term follow up in response to nonconformance)

49

Exercise Form 6: Verification Verification activity Location of activity Type of activity

(auditing, water quality testing, consumer assessment)

Frequency of activity Which organization/ department will undertake activity

50

Exercise Form 7: Gap Analysis of documentation required for a WSP Item that needs to be documented Existing documentation

Scope

State which systems and sites are to be covered in the WSP

State which issues are to be considered (just one hazard? All health? Health and aesthetic?)

Name the key contact person that is to be coordinating the WSP team(s)

Decide if you’ll have just one team or several WSP sub-teams.

Identify who is on the team and their skills and roles including any external people.

Product and use

Identify water types provided (potable water? raw water?).

Describe how the water is sources, treated, maintained, distributed and how consumers access the product.

Identify all chemicals added including their form, type and source and any standards that they must conform with.

Identify all materials that are used in the water supply assets, what is the source and what standards must they conform with?

What is the water to be used for, by whom and will high risk groups be included (new-borns, old people, AIDS patients etc)

Flow diagram Show main catchments, raw water storages, point of interface with raw water, any major storages, process steps (or rolled up process steps e.g. ‘coag/floc/sed’), point where it becomes finished water then storage and distribution steps.

Hazard analysis Consider hazards arising in the raw water, from each chemical input, at each process step and during distribution and storage. Include cause and hazard type. At least at the level of Micro, Phys, Chem, ideally more specifically.

Risks should be assessed in terms of probability of occurrence and severity with at least 1 to 3 scale for each and the overall risk is rated, at least as Low, Med, High.

Make sure the control measures are identified for each step.

Identify the main control measures at which monitoring will take place for operational control.

Document the operational

51

Item that needs to be documented Existing documentation procedures for the main control measures. Critical limits Identify the limiting operational values, at least identify the critical limits that must not be exceeded. Ideally identify other limits such as action, optimal operation or target levels too.

Monitoring Identify how the main control measures will be monitored including What Where When (including frequency) How Who.

Document the monitoring procedures to be used for the monitoring of the main control measures.

Corrective action Document the immediate correction to be used to provide the immediate fix or response if a critical limit is exceeded as detected by monitoring of each main control measure.

Identify how water that may have become contaminated will be disposed of.

Develop and test an emergency response procedure to handle water quality contamination incidents as efficiently as possible.

Identify how alternative water will be supplied or provided in the event of a major failure.

Record keeping Develop a systematic and searchable way of identifying the WSP records as distinct from general records.

Assign accountability for accurate completion of all important WSP records.

Ensure records are kept for the monitoring of all the main control measures.

Ensure records are kept of the calibration and maintenance of equipment that is used to monitor the main control measures and key assets relevant to water quality protection.

Ensure records are kept of any corrective actions taken including a root cause analysis before close out.

Verification Document the validation of the critical limits at the main control measures.

Have a regular audit of record keeping activities and other

52

Item that needs to be documented Existing documentation activities taking place at main control measures. Undertake water quality monitoring to verify the water being supplied.

Audit the records of the corrective actions taken in response to nonconformances at the main control measures.

Supporting Programs Implement a pest control program to keep vermin out of all facilities.

Develop and comply with standard operating procedures for all working practices that involve working on the water supply system to ensure that hygienic work practices are adopted.

Develop a quality assurance/quality control program for all inputs to the system such as chemicals and materials.

Undertake a calibration and preventive maintenance program for equipment used to monitoring the main control measures and for the operational equipment used at the main control measures.

Undertake regular staff training to ensure they are skilled to do their jobs and understand the risks associated with water quality.

Ensure an awareness of regulatory issues related to water quality.

Strive for compliance with good industry working practices and best practices in all issues related to water quality.

Develop and use standard operating procedures for issues critically related to quality.

53

Exercise Form 8: Implementation Plan Task Start End Prog-ress

% Responsible Comments/ Actions

Scoping Undertake practical training in WSPs Feb-March

2006 Feb-March 100 WSP WHO Workshops

Make a clear commitment to completing a WSP

Commit the time of key staff to developing, implementing and maintaining the WSP

Commit any additional resources, if needed, for the WSP

Form WSP team which might be one team or a core team with sub-teams

Confirm the scope of the WSP (which system(s), what issue(s))

Develop project plan (this document) with key target dates

Feb-March 2006

Process was started at the WSP Workshop

Undertake day to day coordination of the project

Ongoing

Provide a weekly progress report on the WSP

Each week

Develop a draft table of contents and document design for the WSP

Undertake a gap analysis of existing systems, processes and documentation against the requirement of the WSP

Process was started at the WSP Workshop

Identify which of the WSP requirements will be picked up within existing systems – avoid duplication

Update the project plan to include more explicit completion milestones for the WSP

Document and describe the system: Describe the types of water produced and the water supply system to be covered in the WSP

Identify the intended use and users Develop simple flow diagram(s) to conceptually describe the system

Verify the accuracy of the flow diagrams through site inspections

Core WSP activity: Undertake risk assessment workshop(s) to identify risks to water quality and the control measures

Document, organise and prioritize the risks to water quality identified at the workshop

Identify the most important, main control measures or process steps in the overall process

Undertake workshop(s) to identify how to reliably monitor the main control measures and the critical limits to apply

Devise corrective action procedures if monitoring detects a possible loss of control

Develop a water quality incident and emergency response protocol to apply if problems arise that cannot be corrected so that contamination might reach consumers

Establish a verification system to

54

audit compliance with the WSP Undertake water quality monitoring to verify water quality

Undertake a process to capture and respond to customer complaints about water quality

Document the validation of the technical basis for the WSP, especially the critical limits and monitoring selected for the main control measures

Develop documentation and record keeping as required

Maintain an improvement action plan to identify improvements that can be made and knowledge gaps that need to be filled

Develop supporting programs: Develop QA/QC procedures for treatment chemicals

Develop QA/QC procedures for raw waters feeding into the system

Develop QA/QC procedures for materials used in the system

Develop calibration and maintenance schedules for equipment required to maintain water quality and monitor system processes

Develop SOPs for main control measures including operation, monitoring and corrective action

Develop hygienic working practices for operations that could affect water quality

Provide training (including induction and refresher training) for staff in how to do their jobs and in water quality awareness

Undertake active pest control at facilities that could be contaminated

REGIONAL OFFICE FOR THE WESTERN PACIFIC · PDF fileREGIONAL OFFICE FOR THE WESTERN PACIFIC...

Documents

Transcript of REGIONAL OFFICE FOR THE WESTERN PACIFIC · PDF fileREGIONAL OFFICE FOR THE WESTERN PACIFIC...