chapter 6 kwa-zulu natal province - dwa.gov.za · chapter 6 kwa-zulu natal province ... ethekwini...

KWA-ZULU NATAL 51

Chapter 6 KWA-ZULU NATAL PROVINCE

Provincial Best Performer

eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality is the best performing municipality in Kwa-Zulu Natal Province

with support from Umgeni Water as their Service Provider. The Municipal Blue Drop Score of 98.77%

was achieved. Congratulations!

92.1%

KWA-ZULU NATAL Page 152

Blue Drop Provincial Performance Log – Kwa-Zulu Natal

Water Services Authority

Provincial Blue Drop

Log Position

Blue Drop Score 2012



eThekwini Metro (+ Umgeni Water) 1 98.77 95.71 96.10

Newcastle LM (+ Uthukela Water) 2 96.50 75.61 74.80

iLembe DM (+ Umgeni Water) 3 95.38 85.54 50.80

Msundusi LM (+ Umgeni Water) 4 95.38 95.60 73.20

uMzinyathi DM (+ Umgeni Water) 5 93.45 70.01 66.00

City of uMhlathuze LM (+WSSA) 6 92.94 89.26 80.40

Ugu DM (+ Umgeni Water) 7 92.55 92.82 87.40

Umgungundlovu DM 8 92.42 56.22 64.70

Amajuba DM 9 83.31 84.43 56.40

Zululand DM 10 83.05 72.13 59.80

uMkhanyakude DM 11 77.77 32.45 22.40

uThungulu DM 12 72.51 71.31 37.20

Sisonke DM 13 69.35 40.09 53.60

uThukela DM 14 57.39 55.29 54.40

Top 3

The Department wishes to acknowledge and congratulate eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality,

together with Umgeni Water Board for achieving Provincial Top Performer in the province of Kwa-Zulu

Natal. This first place is by a significant margin, which is exceptional, but other municipalities are

encouraged to accept the challenge and implement all Blue Drop requirements. Newcastle Local

Municipality, together with uThukela Water Board, came an impressive second (indicating that the

smaller water board can indeed compete with Umgeni Water). iLembe must be one of the biggest water

services authorities in the country and still managed a very good provincial third place in spite of all the

challenges that come with the magnitude of the area to be served.

Most Improved

uMkhanyakude District Municipality is acknowledged for tremendous improvement in performance

over the past 3 years. The municipal score for this water service authority increased from a meagre

22.4% in 2010, to 32.5% and an impressive 77.8% in 2012. This commitment is appreciated.

Lowest Performer(s)

uThukela District Municipality did not perform poorly and therefore cannot justifiably be rated as the

lowest performer. Yet they did not improve as per expectation.


2012 Blue Drop Performance Comparator – Kwa Zulu Natal

0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00

Ethekwini Metro

Newcastle

Illembe

Msundusi

uMzinyathi

uMhlathuze

Ugu

Umgungunlovu

Amajuba

Zululand

uMkhanyakude

Uthungulu

Sisonke

uThukela

Municipal Blue Drop Scores as per Performance Areas

Wat

er

Serv

ice

s A

tho

riti

es

Asset Management

Management Commitment

DWQ Compliance

Process Control Management

Water Safety Planning


Some interesting observations from the KZN performance log:

The DWQ Compliance score noted lower on the comparator for eThekwini, was due to a smaller

system they are responsible for, (which is very small in capacity), but of which actual compliance

can certainly be improved. Due to the nature of the size of this system, it does not affect the

weighted Municipal Blue Drop score as negatively since the implication of this is that the vast

majority of the eThekwini population (Greater Durban) do receive a consistent supply of clean

drinking water. This comparator highlights shortcomings that need attention from the KZN Blue

Drop log leader. The trend of no linkage between technical and financial staff, is also found in this province since

only a few municipalities could provide expenditure information on operations and maintenance.

This implies that this should be regarded as a prominent risk to effective asset management.

BLUE DROP ASSESSMENT ANALYSIS (KWA-ZULU NATAL)

Category 2009 2010 2011 2012 Trend

Number of Municipalities audited 13 14 14 14 (→)

Number of water systems audited 16 173 187 191 (↑)

Number of Blue Drop Awards 2 1 7 16 (↑)

Provincial Blue Drop score 73% 65.91% 80.49% 92.87% (↑)


Blue Drop Certified Systems

Log Status

Blue Drop Certified System Blue Drop Score

Water Services Authority Water Services Provider

1 eThekwini Main 98.79% eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality

Umgeni Water

2 Howick, Camperdown & Mshwathi

98.78% Umgungundlovu District Municipality

Umgeni Water

3 Nsezi 98.39% City of uMhlathuze Local Municipality

uMhlathuze Water

4 Dolphin Coast 98.30% iLembe District Municipality Umgeni Water

5 Biggarsberg 97.04% Umzinyathi District Municipality

uThukela Water

6 Newcastle, Madadeni, Sizweni & Blauwbosch

97.00% Newcastle Local Municipality uThukela Water

7 Ndwedwe 96.72% iLembe District Municipality Umgeni Water

8 Ngwelezane 96.37% City of uMhlathuze Local Municipality

uMhlathuze Water

9 Umzinto & Pennington - Scottsborough

96.27% Ugu District Municipality Umgeni Water

10 Groutville 95.94% iLembe District Municipality Umgeni Water

11 Alcockspruit 95.43% Amajuba Local Municipality uThukela Water

12 Msunduzi 95.38% Msunduzi Local Municipality Umgeni Water

13 Mathulini, Mthwalume & Qoloqolo


14 Ixopo 95.13% Sisonke District Municipality Umgeni Water

15 Hattingspruit 95.04% Amajuba Local Municipality uThukela Water

16 Southbroom - Port Edward & Inland



Water Services Authority Amajuba Local Municipality

Water Services Provider(s) Amajuba Local Municipality; uThukela Water a

Municipal Blue Drop Score: 83.31%

Performance Area

Syst

ems

Alcockspruit a

Dannhauser a

Durnacol

Hattingspruit a

Water Safety Planning (35%) 95 71 71 100 Treatment Process Management (10%)

100 60 15 90

DWQ Compliance (30%) 100 100 100 100

Management, Accountability (10%) 84 84 84 84

Asset Management (15%) 87 65 55 80

Bonus Scores 0.90 3.93 4.46 0.68

Penalties 0 0 0 0

Blue Drop Score (2012) 95.43% (↑) 82.97% (↓) 77.42% (↓) 95.04% (↑)

2011 Blue Drop Score 83.75% 85.55% 82.75% 59.88%

2010 Blue Drop Score Not assessed 71.88% 66.88% 63.88%

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) No information 2 1.7 No information

Operational Capacity (% ito Design) No information 85.00 70.76 No information

Population Served 3 000 14 000 8 754 3 000

Average daily Consumption (l/p/d) 623.33 121.43 137.42 316.67

Microbiological Compliance (%) >99.9% 99.1% >99.9% >99.9%

Chemical Compliance (%) >99.9% >99.9% 99.4% >99.9%

Performance Area

Syst

ems

Rural (Buffalo Flats) a

Utrecht

Water Safety Planning (35%) 95 71 Treatment Process Management (10%)

100 15

DWQ Compliance (30%) 91 100

Management, Accountability (10%) 84 84

Asset Management (15%) 84 52

Bonus Scores 0.65 4.54

Penalties 0 0

Blue Drop Score 92.02% (→) 77.05% (↓)

2011 Score Not assessed 84.33%

2010 Score Not assessed 70.88%

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) No information No information

Operational Capacity (% ito Design) No information No information

Population Served 1 000 23 285

Average daily Consumption (l/p/d) 300.00 197.55

Microbiological Compliance (%) 97.1% 98.6%

Chemical Compliance (%) >99.9% 99.5%


Regulatory Impression

The continued management of drinking water quality by the Amajuba Water Services Authority, is

remarkable - obtaining Blue Drop recognition in 2 systems takes commendable commitment. The

Department, however, notes that the commitment of uThukela Water to maintain excellence in drinking

water quality management from the Ngagane - and Biggarsberg water treatment works, recognised by

Blue Drops in the Newcastle and uMzinyathi municipalities to points of use, in respectively in the Alcock-

and Hattingspruit supply systems, is highly remarkable.

A slight decline was noted in the performance of the Dannhauser, Durnacol and Utrecht supply systems.

While the drinking water remained of excellent quality, and the DWA encourages the WSA / WSP to

maintain the improved monitoring programmes, asset management and water safety planning were

identified as two areas that require attention. DWA noted that the municipality is in process of

developing water safety plans for the latter systems, while efforts continues, the municipality is advised

to not work in isolation but to strengthen relationships with uThukela Water who, as evident from

scores in the Alcock- and Hattingspruit systems, developed and implemented good water safety plans.

Process control staff needs to be shown competent and adequate in terms of numbers against

Regulation 2834 (to be Regulation 17) at the Dannhauser, Durnacol and Ultrech treatment plants. Daily

activities should be recorded in logbooks. It must also be noted that without financial support from

Amajuba District Municipality to maintain their business, uThukela Water might not be in a position to

overcome its shortcomings while striving excellence in all the systems.

Overall drinking water quality management practices were evaluated exceptional within the Rural:

Buffalo Flats supply system. While it is recognised that the system also receives water from the Blue

Drop Ngagane treatment works, the WSA / WSP must still proof through the risk assessment process

that comprehensive chemical quality monitoring of the final water at the treatment plant is sufficient to

confirm that the water at the point of use remained of an excellent quality.

Site Inspection Scores:

Dannhauser: 50%

The Dannhauser WTW was visited to verify the Amajuba District Municipality and uThukela Water Blue

Drop findings. While the water treatment process was relatively well managed, the overall site

inspection impression was not acceptable. Occupational Health and Safety issues need particular

attention.

Areas requiring improvement at the Dannhauser WTW include:

The appearance of the WTW was unacceptable in some areas: access control was compromised

due the poorly maintained fence, the area used by Process Controllers for eating was in a poor

condition; and as a result, the general workplace satisfaction was low; The following critical documents were not present at the Dannhauser WTW:

Maintenance Logbook: No confirmation of regular maintenance could be provided O&M Manual Incident Management Protocol list of emergency contact details

Operational monitoring was not adequately performed:

Chlorine determinations were undertaken with the incorrect sample volume The cells were not cleaned after reading the sample


No floc formation tests were undertaken to optimize flocculant dosing

Occupational Health & Safety issues require further attention:

No records of Occupation Health & Safety contraventions/incidents were being maintained The First Aid box was not up-to-date and no records were kept of usage There were no emergency showers Chemicals were not stored in a bunded area The chlorine room had no signage, the extractor fan was not working and cleaning

equipment was stored in the chlorine room The fire extinguisher was not fitted to the wall and it could not be established when the next

service was due

There was no mechanism to remove debris from the water; There is no standby flocculant dosing pump, putting the chemical dosing at risk; Optimisation of the sedimentation process is recommended:

Desludging was not undertaken according to the original design, but rather using a pump, resulting in a lot of sludge in the system

The effluent weirs were damaged in some areas

Inadequate sludge management was undertaken and the sludge was pumped directly onto the

veld.

Equipment is stored in the chlorine room Well maintained flocculation unit


Water Services Authority City of uMhlathuze

Water Services Provider(s) uMhlathuze Water a

; Water and Sanitation SA (WSSA) b


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Nsezi a

Mzingazi b

Esikhaleni b

Ngwelezane b

Water Safety Planning (35%) 97 90 90 89

Treatment Process Management (10%) 88 88 88 88

DWQ Compliance (30%) 100 68 80 100



Bonus Scores 0.69 3.11 2.06 1.24

Penalties 0 0 0 0

Blue Drop Score (2012) 98.39% (↑) 89.91% (↑) 92.35% (↑) 96.37% (↑)

2011 Blue Drop Score 88.90% 89.28% 90.07% 91.35%

2010 Blue Drop Score Not assessed Not assessed 79.75% 79.75%

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 204 65 36 8

Operational Capacity (% ito Design) 5.39 35.38 83.33 100.00



Microbiological Compliance (%) 99.6% 98.5% 99.5% >99.9%

Chemical Compliance (%) 99.9% 95.2% 95.3% 97.7%


City of uMhlathuze showed outstanding leadership by taking full control of the Blue Water Services

Audits. The City managers, two water service providers, namely uMhlathuze Water and WSSA, took

collective responsibility for providing all the required Blue Water Services documents. The Department

wish to congratulate the municipality / WSP’s for attaining Blue Drop status in two of the four supply

systems - the partners has proven that the size of a municipality is not the determining factor of success

within the Blue Drop Certification programme, dedication to diligently adhere to the stringent criteria

determines to a large extend success.

The WSA and WSP’s on learning and understanding deficiencies in their water safety planning process,

which consequently impacted on compliance monitoring and incident management procedures, swiftly

issued a written commitment to have the deficiencies corrected before completion of the 2011-2012

assessments. The DWA applauds the municipality for responding and correcting all the shortcomings

identified by the DWA Lead Inspector in time to present DWA with updated information at the

confirmation session.

DWA trusts that the authority and service providers will continue their endeavours to further improve

drinking water quality management to ensure Blue Drop status in all the supply systems under

jurisdiction of the municipality. Review of the risk assessment process should be an on-going process,

monitoring programmes also needs to change as required allowing monitoring of new risks. The

Department urges the municipality to also use previous drinking water quality data to confirm

correctness of the current compliance monitoring programmes registered per supply system on the Blue

Drop System – while it is recognised that a full SANS 241 analyses were completed in each of the supply


systems, continued monitoring of health-related chemical risk determinands occurred at a much higher

frequency in both the Empangeni & Nsezi and Ngwelezana as well as the Madlebe North & Madlebe

South water supply systems. The latter two supply systems however house smaller population numbers

than the supply systems of eNseleni & Richards Bay and Esikhaleni where chemical compliance

monitoring appears to be less frequent. Antimony and cadmium failures in the latter two systems also

needs to be quantified with more continuous and failure follow-up sampling.


Water Services Authority eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality

Water Services Provider(s) Umgeni Water a

; Tongaat Hulett b


Performance Area

Syst

ems

eThekwini Main a; b

Ogunjini a

Water Safety Planning (35%) 100 97

Treatment Process Management (10%) 98 75





Penalties 0 0

Blue Drop Score (2012) 98.79% (↑) 77.87% (↓)

2011 Blue Drop Score 96.05% 79.08%

2010 Blue Drop Score 96.08% Not assessed

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 1456.55 1.1

Operational Capacity (% ito Design) 77.68 118.18

Population Served 3 285 026 4 800



Chemical Compliance (%) 98.4% 99.9%


The overall municipal score of 98.8% and Blue Drop status for the eThekwini main water supply system

once again confirms commitment to drinking water quality management by the eThekwini Metropolitan

Municipality, Umgeni Water and Tongaat Hulett. The Department wishes to congratulate the

municipality and in particular Umgeni Water on their performance and justifiable place in the National

Top 10 Blue Drop performers. The 2012 award for Blue Drop status will however not be given to

Tongaat Hulett, the assessment identified a number of issues the WSP first has to address before it can

be justified that Tongaat Hulett should also attain Blue Drop status.

Praise by the Lead Inspector warrants repeating. The WSA / WSP’s is nevertheless advised to give

attention to the recommendations of the inspector regarding further improvements: “The WSA and

Umgeni Water were again well prepared for the assessment. It is clear that the combined team are

committed to the ongoing supply of drinking water of excellent quality. The WSA needs to focus on its

risk assessments and specifically needs to further refine its risk identification methodology, as well as

the way in which it assesses the efficacy of existing control measures. The risk assessments were

evaluated borderline generic and do not focus sufficiently on the specifics of each treatment plant, the

evaluation of risks and mitigation measures are required to be more quantitatively based.”

The Lead Inspector continued to comment that eThekwini needs to pay particular attention to its

disinfection strategies and the monitoring of disinfection residuals. In addition to this, the operations

teams of the WSA and Umgeni Water are encouraged to ensure that initiatives developed to ensure

ongoing water quality excellence are further implemented and developed at all levels of daily plant

operation. These focus areas will refine an otherwise exceptional performance by the combined team.”


As stated in the 2011 Blue Drop report, eThekwini Metro needs to improve drinking water quality

management practices in the Ogunjini supply system. While DWA noted the improved compliance

monitoring programme for the system, data infers that the treatment plant is not providing final water

of a chemical quality compliant with the South African National Standard for Drinking Water (SANS 241).

While monitoring of the risk determinands increase to better quantify the risks, control measures should

be put in place to improve the quality of the drinking water up to the point of consumption.


Amanzimtoti: 79% (Umgeni Water)

Mdloti: 82%

The Amanzimtoti and Mdloti WTWs were visited to verify the eThekwini Metropolitan Municipality Blue

Drop findings. Overall, the site inspection impression at the Amanzimtoti WTW was acceptable, but

some process management and optimisation is recommended. Good drinking water quality

management was undertaken at the Mdloti WTW.

Areas requiring improvement at the Amanzimtoti WTW include:

The overall appearance of the Amanzimtoti WTW was average at the time of the inspection, but

some maintenance work is recommended; Two operational flocculant dosing pumps were available, but no standby. 100% standby was not

also not achieved for the chlorine dosing system; The water treatment process requires optimisation and improved management:

At one of the three clarification units, signs of floc carry over were observed The flow splitting to the filters was generally poor and not well controlled Bubble distribution during backwashing was poor Improvements are recommended for the filter media surface (some mudballs were

observed) General housekeeping in the sand filtration area was average

The sampling position for measurement of free chlorine was not acceptable since the sample is

drawn from the middle of an unbaffled tank; The sludge plant was not operational at the time of the inspection.

Samples used for a Proficiency Testing Scheme to assess the

credibility of operational monitoring at Amanzimtoti WTW

Chlorine gas used at the Amanzimtoti WTW


Areas requiring improvement at the Mdloti WTW include:

No Incident Management Protocols or Emergency Contact Lists were available at the Mdloti WTW

to guide the actions of Process Controllers if a drinking water quality failure occurs; Jar testing is undertaken, but records were not being maintained at the time of the inspection; The chemical feed and dosing conditions at the inlet works of the Mdloti WTW were not

monitored; No inflow measuring device was available, but the outflows from the Mdloti WTW were

monitored; Occupational Health and Safety aspects require attention as no emergency shower or eye wash

was available in the chemical dosing area; The general condition of the flocculation unit was good, but cleaning is recommended; Chlorine was measured directly after treatment, and this is not considered adequate to monitor

the effectiveness of disinfection. Since no on-site storage is available at the Mdloti WTW, the

sample site is recommended to be moved to an off-site reservoir.

Flocculation unit at the Mdloti WTW Housekeeping in the pressure filter room was very good


Water Services Authority iLembe District Municipality

Water Services Provider(s) iLembe DM; Water and Sanitation SA (WSSA) a

; Umgeni Water b

; Siza Water c


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Sundumbili & Mathonsi

a

Dolphin Coast b; c

Groutville b

Ndwedwe b



DWQ Compliance (30%) 100 100 100 100



Bonus Scores 1.65 0.58 1.39 1.12

Penalties 0 0 0 0

Blue Drop Score (2012) 90.67% (↓) 98.30% (↑) 95.94% (↑) 96.72% (↑)

2011 Blue Drop Score 91.54% 97.03% 95.01% 72.41%

2010 Blue Drop Score 70.63% 84.13% 36.13% 72.63%

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 27 No information No information No information

Operational Capacity (% ito Design) 66.67 No information No information No information



Microbiological Compliance (%) 97.5% 98.3% >99.9 97.7%

Chemical Compliance (%) >99.9 >99.9 >99.9 98.9%

Performance Area

Syst

ems

Kwadukuza / Umvoti b

Zinkwazi Beach b

Blythedale Beach b

Driefontein b



DWQ Compliance (30%) 89 86 100 100



Bonus Scores 4.32 7.06 6.54 6.81

Penalties 0 0 -0.77 0

Blue Drop Score 87.39% (↓) 79.38% (↑) 80.12% (↑) 80.11% (↑)

2011 Score 91.44% 78.62% 75.28% 75.70%

2010 Score 54.05% 55.63% 51.13% Not assessed

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 12 0.06 0.06 0.08


Population Served 70 000 5 000 400 10 000


Microbiological Compliance (%) 98.9% 96.7% >99.9 >99.9

Chemical Compliance (%) 96.4% 98.9% 97.5% >99.9


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Madundube b

Montebello

Hospital b

eMayelisweni b

Ntabaskop b



DWQ Compliance (30%) 45 62 45 73



Bonus Scores 11.86 10.81 12.80 9.06

Penalties -2.33 -1.44 -2.13 0

Blue Drop Score 63.03% (↓) 73.33% (↓) 67.99% (↑) 78.87% (↑)

2011 Score 67.42% 76.76% 54.67% 54.67%

2010 Score 43.25% 58.50% 57.25% 39.25%

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 0.004 0.7 0.1 0.15




Microbiological Compliance (%) 91.7% 94.5% 75.8% 95.2%

Chemical Compliance (%) >99.9 >99.9 97.7% >99.9%

Performance Area

Syst

ems

Isiminya b

Esidumbini b

Glendale Heights b

Glendale b



DWQ Compliance (30%) 50 73 100 45



Bonus Scores 12.14 9.60 7.77 13.12

Penalties -2.23 0 0 -2.19

Blue Drop Score 69.45% (↑) 77.61% (↑) 81.86% (↑) 67.21% (↓)

2011 Score 56.87% 54.32% 52.48% 72.77%

2010 Score 38.50% 55.50% 59.50% 60.75%

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 0.2 1 0.03 0.02





Chemical Compliance (%) 95.5% 98.0% >99.9 >99.9

KWA-ZULU NATAL 6

Performance Area

Syst

ems

Kwasathane b

Waterfall b

Masibambisane (&

Mbitane) b

Ngcebo b



DWQ Compliance (30%) 45 28 100 89



Bonus Scores 13.28 15.00 7.56 9.60

Penalties -2.21 -4.00 0 0

Blue Drop Score (2012) 66.81% (↓) 56.46% (↓) 82.35% (↑) 77.59% (↑)

2011 Blue Drop Score 71.10% 63.94% 61.62% 74.73%

2010 Blue Drop Score 59.50% 40.75% 17.56% 07.06%






Chemical Compliance (%) >99.9 94.0% 99.4% 96.3%

Performance Area

Syst

ems

uMphumulo b

Ntunjambili b

Vukile High School b

Isithundu b



DWQ Compliance (30%) 89 100 100 45



Bonus Scores 9.83 8.44 8.67 13.99

Penalties 0 0 0 -2.33

Blue Drop Score 77.07% (↑) 80.31% (↑) 79.77% (↑) 65.03% (↑)

2011 Score 59.58% 74.67% 73.95% 53.37%

2010 Score 32.56 44.06% 35.56% 17.56%

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 0.4 No information 0.25 0.8

Operational Capacity (% ito Design) 100.00 No information 140.00 125.00



Microbiological Compliance (%) >99.9 >99.9 97.1% 84.9%

Chemical Compliance (%) 96.4% >99.9 >99.9 98.5%


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Maqumbi b

Mandeni

Uthukela

Makwanini



DWQ Compliance (30%) 100 100 45 45



Bonus Scores 7.76 3.12 4.64 5.25

Penalties 0 0 -2.21 -2.50

Blue Drop Score 81.89% (↑) 73.44% (↑) 58.23% (↓) 45.45% (↑)

2011 Score 55.76% 61.78% 69.49% 40.63%

2010 Score 54.06% 29.38% 04.50% 15.38%

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) No information 2 2 No information

Operational Capacity (% ito Design) No information 75.00 90.00 No information




Chemical Compliance (%) >99.9 97.0% 97.4% >99.9

Performance Area

Syst

ems

Ifalethu

Ohwebede

Hlanganani

Lambothi






Bonus Scores 5.25 5.25 5.25 5.25

Penalties -2.50 -2.50 -4.00 -4.00

Blue Drop Score (2012) 31.95% (↓) 31.95% (↓) 41.93% (↑) 28.73% (↓)

2011 Blue Drop Score 55.47% 40.63% 39.38% 39.38%

2010 Blue Drop Score 49.63% 19.88% 19.88% 19.88%

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 0.05 0.05 No information No information

Operational Capacity (% ito Design) 320.00 360.00 No information No information




Chemical Compliance (%) 71.9% 83.9% >99.9 91.7%


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Ethembeni

Uthukela Mouth

Mazitapele

Sansouci






Bonus Scores 5.25 5.25 4.50 5.10

Penalties -2.50 -2.50 -1.28 -2.43

Blue Drop Score 31.95% (↓) 45.98% (↓) 60.39% (↑) 54.10% (→)



System Design Capacity (Ml/d) No information No information No information 1

Operational Capacity (% ito Design) No information No information No information 90.00




Chemical Compliance (%) 79.3% 98.6% >99.9 85.1%

Performance Area

Syst

ems

Gogovuma

Mushane

Amatigulu

Water Safety Planning (35%) 48 46 44

Treatment Process Management (10%) 0 0 15

DWQ Compliance (30%) 45 41 45

Management, Accountability (10%) 63 63 78

Asset Management (15%) 40 30 30

Bonus Scores 5.25 5.25 5.25

Penalties -4.00 -4.00 -2.50

Blue Drop Score 43.68% (→) 40.35% (↓) 45.45% (↑)

2011 Score Not assessed 50.50% 40.63%

2010 Score Not assessed 16.31% 19.38%

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 1.2 No information No information

Operational Capacity (% ito Design) 75.00 No information No information

Population Served 8 000 3 000 6 100

Average daily Consumption (l/p/d) 112.50 66.67 65.57

Microbiological Compliance (%) 61.5% 96.6% 87.5%

Chemical Compliance (%) 97.3% 85.6% >99.9


Drinking water quality management within iLembe District Municipality measured against the overall

municipal performance remained more or less the same. On closer inspection, some systems however

showed remarkable improvements. Unfortunately, the significant decline in performance measured in

other systems needs to be closely monitored by the municipality and where applicable, service

providers.

The Department is confident that the iLembe District Municipality, supported by WSSA, Umgeni Water


and Siza Water will put systems in place to prevent further decline in service delivery, and where

needed, will urgently improve the quality of drinking water supplied to residents. The DWA

acknowledges the efforts of the WSA / WSP following the first site-inspection to improve on

shortcomings identified by the inspectors.

iLembe is required to address microbiological water quality issues in particularly the eMayelisweni,

Kwasathane, Isithundu, Uthukela, Makwanini, Ifalethu, Ohwebede, Hlanganani, Lambothi, Ethembeni,

Uthukela Mouth, Gogovuma and Amatigulu supply systems as a priority. Water in the Madundube and

Glendale systems also requires close monitoring to prevent further deterioration in microbiological

quality. The municipality must inform consumers of the risk to their health should data currently show

that the risk still remains.


Hazelmere: 95% (WTW owned and O&M by Umgeni Water)

San Souci: 80%

Sundumbili: 92% (WTW owned by Ilembe, O&M by WSSA)

Mvoti: 72% (WTW owned by Ilembe, O&M by Umgeni Water)

The Hazelmere, San Souci, Blythedale, Sundumbili & Mvoti WTWs were visited to verify the Ilembe

District Municipality Blue Drop findings. The site inspection impressions varied at these WTW, ranging

from excellent for the Hazelmere and Sundumbili WTW (well operated and maintained WTWs with

knowledgeable and dedicated staff) to poor at both Mvoti WTW and Blythedale Boreholes (urgent

attention required for both maintenance and operation).

Areas requiring improvement at the Hazelmere WTW include:

No mechanism was in place to remove solids and debris from the raw water at the inlet works; Only 3 week of chlorine storage capacity was available at the Hazelmere WTW (30 days is

required.

Electronic logsheets were completed at every shift by Process

Controllers

Clean lime storage rooms with bags stored off the floor

Areas requiring improvement at the San Souci WTW include:

The health and hygiene of requirements of workers needs further consideration as there was no

shower, kitchen or change rooms available; There were no entries recorded in the daily Maintenance Logbook; The absence of adequate operational monitoring log sheets and lack of jar tests for the new


treatment plant must be addressed to improve the operation of this WTW (operational since 15-

Dec-2011); Only 15 days storage capacity of flocculant was available onsite, but additional stock was available

at the satellite office; No emergency showers or eye washes were available in the chemical dosing area; Only one blower was available for the pressure filters, no backup system existed; and No sludge treatment was being undertaken at the time of the inspection, but the sludge ponds

are under construction.

Functional inflow measuring device Flocculant dosing pumps in good condition

Areas requiring improvement at the Blythedale Boreholes System include:

The overall appearance of the Blythedale Borehole System was poor at the time of the inspection.

The grass was not cut, there were cracks in the walls of the reservoir, exposed loose wires, open

manholes, broken electrical covers and the disinfection room and MCC panel room was dirty.

Urgent attention must be given to the maintenance and operation of this system. The current state of the reservoir also presents a significant health risk to the community of

Blythesdale. A cover to the reservoir must be installed and all cracks and leaks repaired as a

matter of urgency to prevent contamination of the water source; Significant improvements are required to be made to the disinfection system:

No standby pump was available for the hypochlorite dosing system. The dosing room was very dirty, with no warning signs, emergency showers or eye washes No records were available onsite regarding dosage capacity

The reservoir has no lid. Pipes are permanently fitted to the entrance of the

reservoir for dosing of disinfectant

The hypochlorite dosing room was dirty at the time of

the inspection


Areas requiring improvement at the Sundumbili WTW include:

Dosing was not occurring according to coagulation dosing calculations - jar testing is rarely

undertaken since a Streaming Current Detector is used to adjust coagulant dosage. Process

Controllers perform daily cascade tests; Uneven flow was observed in some of the filter boxes.

A Streaming Current Detector is used change coagulant dose Chlorine safety equipment includes gas mask, warning signs,

ammonia vapour, leak detector and extractor fan

Areas requiring improvement at the Mvoti WTW include:

The Mvoti WTW was in serious need of housekeeping and maintenance at the time of the site

inspection. Workplace satisfaction was also poor; Occupational Health and Safety aspects also require attention as no eyewash or emergency

showers were available, and chemicals were not stored in a bunded area; The leak in the chlorine contact chamber must be addressed as a matter of urgency as they

represent a significant risk of contamination to the final water; Clarifier weirs were dirty and there were plants growing observed growing in the clarifiers. Uneven

overflow was also noted; Improved housekeeping of the filters is required - the walls were dirty and covered in algae.


Plants were observed growing in the clarifier Chlorine contact chamber had a leak and water and chlorine was

leaking out of the chamber


Water Services Authority Msunduzi Local Municipality

Water Services Provider(s) Umgeni Water a


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Msunduzi a

Water Safety Planning (35%) 85

Treatment Process Management (10%) 100

DWQ Compliance (30%) 96

Management, Accountability (10%) 100

Asset Management (15%) 100

Bonus Scores 1.98

Penalties 0

Blue Drop Score (2012) 95.38% (↓)

2011 Blue Drop Score 95.60%

2010 Blue Drop Score 73.19%

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 390

Operational Capacity (% ito Design) 78.21

Population Served 536 613

Average daily Consumption (l/p/d) 568.38

Microbiological Compliance (%) 99.8%

Chemical Compliance (%) 100.0%


Msunduzi Local Municipality and Umgeni Water worked well to maintain Blue Drop status for a second

year. The panel of inspectors were impressed with the level of preparedness shown by both the

municipality and Water Board. The DWA congratulates the WSA and WSP, several opportunities for

improvement were however identified by the Lead Inspector:

As a priority, the WSA needs to take a more quantitative approach to assess its water quality risks

and control measures. The water safety planning process should contain a specific review of the

water quality monitoring plans as a direct link to each identified hazard under evaluation.

A further recommendation would be to continue the review of the performance of the service

providers attending to the analytical work on behalf of the municipality. Previous data records on

the Blue Drop System (BDS) could not be certified and correctly linked to analytical facilities.

The DWA furthermore requires proof that the municipality has confidence that the chemical quality of

the drinking water remains exceptional and compliant with the South African National Standard for

Drinking Water (SANS 241) at the point of use. The same request was voiced in the 2011 Blue Drop

report, the DWA expects that the WSA will comply with this request in 2012 should they wish to retain

Blue Drop status in future. Msunduzi is also advised to refine its relatively generic incident management

protocol to be more in-line with the overall drinking water quality management practices of the

municipality.



DV Harris: 92%

The DV Harris WTW was visited to verify the Msunduzi Local Municipality Blue Drop findings. Overall,

the site inspection impression was very good with suitable drinking water quality management practices

undertaken at the DV Harris WTW.

Areas requiring improvement at the DV Harris WTW include:

Jar testing was not undertaken according to the frequency specified in the Standard Operating

Procedure (last test was in October 2011); The chemical feed and dosing conditions at the inlet works could not be monitored; The condition of the flocculant dosing pumps was deemed average; and Filter media surface was poor in some filters although media was replaced in last 4 years.

Detailed operational monitoring logsheets are completed by the

Process Controllers

Poor filter media surface in some filters


Water Services Authority Newcastle Local Municipality

Water Services Provider(s) uThukela Water a


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Newcastle, Madadeni, Sizweni and Blauwbosch a

Charlestowna

Water Safety Planning (35%) 95 56

Treatment Process Management (10%) 100 40





Penalties 0 0

Blue Drop Score (2012) 97.00% (↑) 60.06% (↑)

2011 Blue Drop Score 75.93% 40.69%

2010 Blue Drop Score 75.00% 53.75%

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 108 No information

Operational Capacity (% ito Design) 88.89 No information

Population Served 311 000 2 000



Chemical Compliance (%) >99.9% >99.9%


Officials and management from both Newcastle Local Municipality and uThukela Water continued to

display exemplary dedication to drinking water quality management. The Department wishes to

congratulate Newcastle Water Services Authority and uThukela Water for achieving Blue Drop

certification in the supply system of Newcastle, Madadeni, Sizweni and Blauwbosch.

The DWA Inspectors were impressed by the technical skills of uThukela Water staff, note was made of

the noteworthy water safety planning process completed for the Newcastle - supply system.

Acknowledgement was also given for the much improved compliance monitoring programme

maintained by the WSA / WSP the last 12 months and the sustained submission of information to the

Department.

An area that remains a significant concern is the limited correspondence between Newcastle, together

with uThukela Water and the Pixley ka Seme Local Municipality. While Newcastle and uThukela Water

still has to complete the water safety planning process in the Charlestown distribution network (which

should include a full SANS 241 analyses of the water at the point of consumption), the Department

requires Newcastle Local Municipality / uThukela Water to commence a working relationship with the

Pixley ka Seme Local Municipality - Newcastle and uThukela Water is challenged to further show their

commitment to excellence drinking water quality management by showing that drinking water quality

management processes in the Charlestown supply system can improve significantly.



Ngagane: 85% (together with uThukela Water)

The Ngagane WTW was visited to verify the Newcastle Local Municipality Blue Drop findings. Overall,

the site inspection impression was good, indicating a well-managed and operated facility, but significant

improvements are required to be made to the chlorine dosing system. An upgrade of the chlorine and

lime dosing facilities is planned.

Areas requiring improvement at the Ngagane WTW include:

A number of aspects of the chlorine dosing facility require attention and will be addressed during

the planned upgrade of this facility:

No standby gas chlorination system was available Chlorine scales were available, but were not operational at the time of the site visit The chlorine alarms were not operational The chlorine room was not locked at the time of the inspection

Some of the hand railings in the flocculation unit require attention; Some signs of flow carry were observed during the clarification process; The sludge dams were well maintained, but the supernatant was allowed to overflow into the

source. Since the dams are flooded when the river comes down, relocation of these dams is

recommended to be considered.

Operational monitoring equipment is in good working order and is

calibrated regularly

Dosing was occurring at the rate determined by the coagulation

dosing calculations

100% standby was available for the flocculant dosing equipment The flow was evenly split between the filters and all filter

controls were operational


Water Services Authority Sisonke District Municipality

Water Services Provider(s) Sisonke District Municipality: Umgeni Water a


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Bulwer

Creighton

Esiqandulweni

Highlands / Washbank






Bonus Scores 0 0 6.00 3.71

Penalties 0 0 -1.50 -1.24

Blue Drop Score (2012) 47.43% (↑) 47.43% (↑) 43.80% (→) 61.20% (↑)

2011 Blue Drop Score 35.55% 38.80% Not assessed 09.63%

2010 Blue Drop Score Not assessed 56.13% Not assessed 22.63%

System Design Capcity (Ml/d) 0.472 1 0.1 0.82




Microbiological Compliance (%) 77.8% 84.2% No information 77.8%

Chemical Compliance (%) No information 93.1% >99.9% >99.9%

Performance Area

Syst

ems

Hlanganani / Polela

Ibisi

Ixopo a

Kokstad



DWQ Compliance (30%) 23 55 100 66



Bonus Scores 0 3.70 1.54 7.10

Penalties -1.49 -1.23 0 0

Blue Drop Score 48.99% (↑) 61.34% (↑) 95.13% (↑) 70.69% (↑)

2011 Score 32.80% 26.99% 77.17% 35.18%

2010 Score 34.13% 30.88% 83.63% 54.13%

System Design Capcity (Ml/d) 0.45 0.9 3.1 18




Microbiological Compliance (%) 86.2% >99.9% 97.7% >99.9%

Chemical Compliance (%) 95.0% 93.3% >99.9% 95.5%


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Mzimkhulu

Nokweja

Riverside

St Apollinaris



DWQ Compliance (30%) 62 45 45 100



Bonus Scores 2.84 2.13 4.50 0

Penalties 0 -1.42 -1.50 0

Blue Drop Score 71.29% (↑) 53.31% (→) 50.63% (↑) 71.43% (↑)

2011 Score 38.68% Not assessed 15.00% 31.65%

2010 Score 35.38% Not assessed Not assessed 34.88%

System Design Capcity (Ml/d) 5 1.8 0.7 1.1






Performance Area

Syst

ems

Underberg






Bonus Scores 0

Penalties 0

Blue Drop Score 58.55% (↑)

2011 Score 33.93%

2010 Score 34.13%

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 3.6





Chemical Compliance (%) >99.9%


Sisonke District Municipality provided the DWA with sufficient reason to believe that the municipality is

striving towards drinking water quality management improvement. While the performance in some

systems still requires considerable attention, the municipality should be encouraged by the Blue Drop

status awarded to the Ixopo water supply system. Systems in place for the latter system, although co-

developed and maintained by Umgeni Water, should be replicated in the remainder of the supply

systems under the jurisdiction of the municipality.


Microbiological compliance remains not up to standard in the Bulwer, Creighton, Esiqandulweni,

Highlands / Washbank, Hlanganani / Polela, Mzimkhulu, Nokweja, Riverside and Underberg water

supply systems. The water is evaluated to pose a significant risk of infection to human health. The

situation demands the urgent attention of the municipal administration and governance.

DWA congratulates the WSA for commencing chemical quality compliance monitoring in almost all the

supply systems, aluminium failures in the Creighton and Ibisi systems appears to be the only significant

concern related to the chemical quality of the water. While it is advised that the municipality asserts

greater effort to improve operational monitoring to confirm that overall treatment is optimised, as

already stated, priority attention should be given to improve disinfection. It will also further benefit the

municipality to improve on compliance monitoring, in particular microbiological monitoring as part of

the risk assessment process.

In conclusion, it has to be said that the Lead Inspector made a note of the active capacity building that

commenced within the municipality the past 12 months. Sisonke is encouraged to continue its effort,

the DWA has to applaud the WSA for ensuring representation of staff on all levels at the assessment and

allowing all to gain from the skills transfer sessions.


Ixopo: 96% (together with Umgeni Water)

Kokstad: 83%

Umzimkhulu: 68%

The WTWs were visited to verify the Sisonke District Municipality Blue Drop findings. Overall, the site

inspection impression of the Ixopo WTW was excellent with good drinking water quality management

undertaken. Site impressions were good for Kokstad, and satisfactory for Umzimkhulu, with

improvements in chemical dosing and asset management recommended at the Umzimkhulu WTW.

Areas requiring improvement at the Ixopo WTW include:

No visual monitoring of the chemical feed and dosing conditions at the inlet works was possible; No emergency shower or eye wash was available in the chemical dosing area.

Areas requiring improvement at the Kokstad WTW include:

Inadequate maintenance was reflected in the Maintenance Logbook; No emergency shower or eye wash was available in the chemical dosing area; Some process management and optimisation is recommended:

There were no mechanisms in place to remove solids and debris from the raw water at the intake works

No visual monitoring of the chemical feed and dosing conditions at the inlet works was possible

Less than the required 30 days storage capacity of chlorine was available at the time of the inspection

Uneven flow splitting over the filters was observed

Areas requiring improvement at the Umzimkhulu WTW include:

The overall appearance of the WTW was reasonable neat, but further attention needs to be

focused on the areas used by Process Controllers for eating and washing;


The inflow measuring device was not operational at the time of the inspection, but was being

repaired; There was no standby dosing system for flocculant, and less than the required 30 days of

flocculant storage capacity; There was also less than 30 days of chlorine gas available, and no system to monitor the amount

of gas remaining in the container was used. Chlorine safety equipment is required to be

upgraded, and no signage was present; Occupational Health and Safety aspects require attention as no emergency shower or eye wash

was available in the chemical dosing area; and Asset management improvements are also recommended:

The overflow plates of the flocculation unit were damaged at the time of the inspection The clarifier weirs were in poor condition


Water Services Authority Ugu District Municipality

Water Services Provider(s) Ugu District Municipality; Umgeni Water a


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Hibberdene to Ramsgate &

Inland

Southbroom to Port Edward &

Inland

Ghost Town to Mazakhele

Kwajali to Mlozane



DWQ Compliance (30%) 100 100 100 45



Bonus Scores 3.26 2.15 2.31 7.16

Penalties 0 0 0 0

Blue Drop Score (2012) 92.40% (↑) 95.00% (↓) 91.31% (↓) 73.08 (↓)

2011 Blue Drop Score 91.24% 96.11% 95.32% 92.66%

2010 Blue Drop Score 89.25% 89.25% 87.00% 77.00%

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 54 20 2.5 3.7




Microbiological Compliance (%) 98.6% 98.0% >99.9% 92.0%

Chemical Compliance (%) 99.9% >99.9% >99.9% >99.9%

Performance Area

Syst

ems

KwaFodo to Esitholweni

KwaMbotho to KwaBhidla

KwaNyusa to Ekuzameni

KwaNyusa to St Martin



DWQ Compliance (30%) 45 100 45 100



Bonus Scores 7.50 3.08 7.39 3.42

Penalties -1.07 0 0 0

Blue Drop Score 70.71% (↓) 88.40% (↑) 72.18% (↓) 87.15% (↓)

2011 Score 82.30% 82.30% 92.05% 92.05%

2010 Score 60.50% 84.00% 85.50% 83.75%






Chemical Compliance (%) >99.9% >99.9% >99.9% >99.9%


Performance Area

Syst

ems

KwaHlongwa

Phungashe & Ndwebu

Mehlomnyama & Oshabeni

Vulamehlo to Jolvet






Bonus Scores 9.28 7.97 9.51 5.58


Blue Drop Score 77.42% (↓) 81.41% (↓) 77.80% (↑) 86.98% (↓)

2011 Score 92.05% 92.05% 75.19% 93.43%

2010 Score 61.50% 87.00% 83.00% 71.50%







Performance Area

Syst

ems

Kwalembe to Dududu

Kwandelu to Morrisons

Mathulini, Mthwalume &

Qoloqolo a

Umzinto and Pennington to

Scottsborough a



DWQ Compliance (30%) 62 86 100 100



Bonus Scores 8.25 3.86 2.05 1.60

Penalties 0 0 0 0

Blue Drop Score 80.74% (↓) 85.46% (↓) 95.22% (↓) 96.27% (↓)

2011 Score 93.43% 90.83% 95.16% 96.61%

2010 Score 84.00% 56.00% 86.00% 87.50%






Chemical Compliance (%) >99.9% 97.2% 99.6% 99.9%


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Hlokozi






Bonus Scores 9.77

Penalties 0

Blue Drop Score (2012) 77.20% (→)

2011 Blue Drop Score Not assessed







Chemical Compliance (%) >99.9%


In spite of the Blue Drop criteria becoming increasingly implementation-focussed, Ugu District

Municipality once again submitted evidence in support of outstanding performance equivalent to Blue

Drop status in 3 supply systems. Special mention has to be made that the performance of Umgeni

Water, directly responsible for treatment in two of the systems, contributed significantly to the ability of

the WSA to maintain Blue Drop status in the two respective supply systems: Mathulini, Mthwalume &

Qoloqolo, and Umzinto & Pennington to Scottsborough.

Excellence drinking water quality was also acknowledged in the Southbroom to Port Edward & Inland

Blue Drop system managed solely by the municipality. Compliance monitoring was however evaluated

not adequate in all but the two supply systems receiving water from the Umgeni treatment plants. As

highlighted in the 2011 Blue Drop report, the municipality is informed that the DWA will not in future

acknowledge drinking water quality of an excellent chemical quality in any of the supply systems

without proof that monitoring for only three chemical health determinands is representative of all the

risks which might be associated with a particular supply system. Information presented on the risk

assessment process currently underway, resulting in the same generic risks being identified in each of

the supply systems, further highlights the need for a full SANS 241 analyses in each of the supply

systems.

Shortcomings related to asset management unfortunately prevented the DWA from also again awarding

the Ghost Town to Mazakhele water supply system with Blue Drop status. Residents within the area is

however assured that measured against the data on BDS, the quality of the drinking water remained at a

quality that can only be classified as excellent against the standard for drinking water in South Africa

(SANS 241).

Drinking water was found to be of such microbiological quality that it presents a potential for infection

in the Weza, Phungashe, KwaLembe and, in particular, the KwaFodo, KwaNyuswa 1, KwaHlongwa and

Assissi supply systems. Disinfection needs to improve immediately to minimise the risk to human health.


The DWA was furthermore discouraged to note that municipal management did not repeat the

commitment prevalent during the 2010-2011 assessment cycles. No progress could be reported against

monitoring initiatives started the previous year, i.e. the installation of in-line monitoring equipment.

Budget constraints was reported the reason for the halt in progress. Municipal management should

again prioritise drinking water quality management if the municipality of Ugu aims to again achieve Blue

Drop status in future. Ageing infrastructure, identified previously as a significant risk, can only be

addressed with the availing of funds.

Lastly, the Department was informed of the KwaQwabe (Umzumbe Local Municipality) and Franklands

(Hibiscus Coast) borehole systems. The WSA is advised, to ensure the measurement of performance

over the entire area of supply, to also present the borehole systems for future evaluations.


Bhoyboyi: 76%

Mthwalume: 95% (together with Umgeni Water)

The Bhoyboyi and Mthwalume WTWs were visited to verify the Ugu District Municipality Blue Drop

findings. Overall, the site inspection impression at the Bhoyboyi WTW indicated that improvements in

drinking water quality management are required. The site inspection impression for Mthwalume WTW

was very good, with suitable drinking water quality management practiced. Some minor process

optimisation was recommended at both sites.

Areas requiring improvement at the Bhoyboyi WTW include:

The overall appearance of the Bhoyboyi WTW was fair, with some long grass and peeling paint,

and the fence requiring some repairs. The WTW Registration Certificate was not displayed at the

Bhoyboyi WTW, but was available in the Supervisor’s office; The Maintenance Logbook did not reflect regular maintenance at the Bhoyboyi WTW; No pH buffers or turbidity standards were available for calibration of the operational monitoring

equipment. Daily verification of monitoring equipment is recommended to ensure the credibility

of the operational monitoring data; No Incident Management Protocol or emergency contact details were available. This protocol is

an essential document to guide Process Controller’s actions when process control is lost and a

drinking water quality failure occurs; The valves at the inlet works of the Bhoyboyi WTW were badly rusted and the valve was jammed

open. As a result Process Controllers have to adjust the flow at the dam, as they are unable to

control the flow at the WTW any longer; No mechanism was in place to remove solids and debris from the raw water at the inlet works; Dosing was not occurring according to coagulation dosing calculations – while a jar stirrer was

available, the Process Controllers at Bhoyboyi WTW did not deem it necessary to use it since they

considered the water to be stable and adjustments were not considered necessary; Only 50% backup capacity existed for the pumps filling the header tank which controls the

backwash frequency; and Occupational Health & Safety issues require attention at the Bhoyboyi WTW:

The chemical storage area was not bunded There were no emergency showers or eye washes The chlorine leak detector indicated increased levels of chlorine at the time of the

inspection, but the detector had not triggered


A mask was available onsite, but it was not in good condition and the seal was broken

There was no sludge treatment and the sludge was gravity fed to the nearby river.

Areas requiring improvement at the Mthwalume WTW include:

While an emergency contacts list was available, no Incident Management Protocol was displayed

at the Mthwalume WTW at the time of the inspection; The required 50% standby capacity in terms of raw water pumps was not available at the time of

the inspection. The smaller pump was out of commission, but Umgeni Water had already

purchased a spare motor and pump in order to resolve this problem; and There was no sludge treatment and the sludge and the backwash water were gravity fed to the

river.


Water Services Authority Umgungundlovu DM

Water Services Provider(s) Umgungundlovu District Municipality; Umgeni Water a


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Appelsbosch

Boreholes (untreated)

Gomane Boreholes

Impendle Spring






Bonus Scores 6.38 9.50 7.58 7.61


Blue Drop Score (2012) 79.41% (↑) 69.90% (→) 75.99% (↑) 75.91% (↑)

2011 Blue Drop Score 54.11% Not assessed 62.71% 52.49%

2010 Blue Drop Score Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed 69.63%

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 1.2 0.268 0.475 No information

Operational Capacity (% ito Design) 81.67 100.00 100.00 No information





Performance Area

Syst

ems

Lidgetton West

Makeni

Mpofane

Mtulwa






Bonus Scores 4.39 10.59 4.78 12.00

Penalties -0.44 -1.32 0 -1.50

Blue Drop Score 74.71% (↑) 65.13% (↑) 72.94% (↑) 60.21% (↑)

2011 Score 66.55% 45.86% 54.99% 53.31%

2010 Score 69.63% Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 0.3 No information 6.4 No information

Operational Capacity (% ito Design) 100.00 No information 96.88 No information




Chemical Compliance (%) >99.9% 94.1% >99.9% 94.1%


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Ntanzi

Nzinga

Richmond

Rosetta



DWQ Compliance (30%) 55 45 100 28



Bonus Scores 7.23 8.48 3.14 5.26


Blue Drop Score 76.19% (↑) 73.14% (↑) 90.05% (↑) 70.18% (↑)

2011 Score 55.28% 51.86% 55.99% 68.51%

2010 Score Not assessed Not assessed 69.93% Not assessed

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) No information 1 1.5 1.2

Operational Capacity (% ito Design) No information 100.00 200.00 25.00



Microbiological Compliance (%) >99.9% 75.0% 98.6% 95.8%

Chemical Compliance (%) No information 98.0% >99.9% 94.1%

Performance Area

Syst

ems

Howick, Camperdown and Mshwathi a






Bonus Scores 0.53

Penalties 0


2011 Score 91.12%

2010 Score 69.63%

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) No information

Operational Capacity (% ito Design) No information






The overall performance of the Umgungunlovu District Municipality reflects noteworthy improvements

in the manner in which the municipality approached drinking water quality management from the

previous assessment cycle. While significant work still remains to be done in the majority of the supply

systems, Blue Drop status awarded to the WSA and Umgeni Water for the “Umgeni Supply-Zone”, which

accounts for most of the population in the municipality, accounted largely for the improved municipal

score. Residents of Howick, Camperdown and Mshwathi are assured of drinking water quality that

meets excellence requirements.


Microbiological failures detected in all the systems except the Mtulwa, Ntanzi, Richmond and obviously

the Blue Drop Umgeni Supply-Zone implies that drinking water poses an infection risk to consumers.

Umgungunlovu must optimise treatment to ensure microbiological safe water; disinfection needs to

improve to ensure residual chlorine at point of use as last barrier against any post treatment

contamination. The problems related to disinfection needs to be addressed as a priority, if required, the

municipality should consider acquiring additional skilled Process Control staff - the number of systems

reported with failures increased significantly from the number reported last year.

DWA congratulates the WSA for a full SANS 241 analyses in more than 90% of the supply systems. In

most cases, the analyses were also repeated more than once. Form a chemical perspective, the water

was mostly evaluated of excellent quality. Aluminium failures in some of the systems, however, further

support the need to improve process control especially if the aluminium had been added to the water

during treatment. The WSA is also reminded that any water being disinfected before distribution to a

community needs to be classified under Regulation 2834 (soon to be Regulation 17).

DWA concludes its regulatory impression by the words of encouragement of the Lead Inspectors: “The

overall impression gained was that the DM is making a concerted effort to acquire Blue Drop status and

this has resulted in a general improvement in their performance compared to last year. If the

municipality finalise the items that they reported during the site inspection will be ready for the

confirmation assessment, the overall municipal improvement will even be much better.”


Mooi River (Mpofane): 83%

The Mooi River WTW was visited to verify the uMgungundlovu District Municipality Blue Drop findings.

Overall, the site inspection impression was good, but some process and management improvements are

required.

Areas requiring improvement at the Mooi River WTW include:

The overall appearance of the WTW was fair, but workplace satisfaction was not good. There

were cooking, toilet and shower facilities and sleeping quarters provided for the Process

Controllers on standby or night shift; While a specific Maintenance Logbook was not kept at the Mooi River WTW, repairs/fault logs,

incident report forms and site completion forms were available; Process Controllers do not calibrate the operational monitoring equipment at the Mooi River

WTW. The equipment is sent for annual calibration at an external laboratory. This calibration

frequency is inadequate to ensure that the operational monitoring equipment is consistently

capable of producing credible data for process control; There was no mechanism in place to remove solids and debris from the raw water; Occupational Health and Safety aspects require improvement:

The coagulant tanks were not bunded and there was no safety equipment such as showers or eyewash facilities nearby

There was no extractor fan in the chlorine dosing facility

Some floc carry over was observed at the clarifier. The floc was fairly small but visible. It was noted

that the exit holes on the clarifier were very small; Chlorine contact time in the reactor was less than the required 30 minutes (approximately 17

minutes); and The sludge was discharged directly to the stormwater system and eventually reaches the river.


Water Services Authority uMkhanyakude District Municipality

Water Services Provider(s) Water and Sanitation SA (WSSA) a


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Block 6 a

Enkanyezini a

Hlabisa a

Hluhluwe Phase1 a



DWQ Compliance (30%) 45 100 100 73



Bonus Scores 2.13 1.14 1.14 4.38

Penalties 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Blue Drop Score (2012) 66.68% (↑) 82.19% (↑) 82.19% (↑) 75.16% (↑)

2011 Blue Drop Score 26.60% 26.34% 28.49% 27.53%

2010 Blue Drop Score 26.75% 16.44% 16.44% Not assessed

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 0.8 0.8 3 4




Microbiological Compliance (%) 93.8% >99.9 >99.9 95.0%

Chemical Compliance (%) >99.9 98.6% 98.7% 97.7%

Performance Area

Syst

ems

Hluhluwe Phase2 a

Ingwavuma a

Jozini (new) a

Jozini (old) a



DWQ Compliance (30%) 73 73 100 45



Bonus Scores 1.71 1.81 0.61 2.46

Penalties 0 0 0 0

Blue Drop Score 73.23% (↑) 71.61% (↑) 80.38% (↑) 61.53% (↑)


2010 Score Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 2.5 0.4 5 3





Chemical Compliance (%) >99.9 >99.9 >99.9 >99.9


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Makhonyeni a

Malobeni a

Manguzi a

Mbazwana a



DWQ Compliance (30%) 73 73 45 100



Bonus Scores 2.91 0 2.14 0

Penalties 0 0 0 0

Blue Drop Score 75.19% (↑) 70.30% (↑) 66.47% (↑) 80.83% (↑)

2011 Score 26.16% 44.31% 29.02% 27.91%

2010 Score 24.75% 24.75% 16.44% 24.75%

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 0.8 0.3 0.8 3




Microbiological Compliance (%) 95.5% 95.5% 80.8% >99.9

Chemical Compliance (%) >99.9 98.7% >99.9 >99.9

Performance Area

Syst

ems

Mjindi Central a

Mkuze a

Mseleni a

Mtubatuba a



DWQ Compliance (30%) 45 45 100 97




Penalties 0 0 0 0

Blue Drop Score 60.90% (↑) 64.55% (↑) 83.89% (↑) 82.30% (↑)

2011 Score 26.81% 28.25% 31.93% 45.82%

2010 Score 24.75% 16.44% 26.75% 27.75%





Microbiological Compliance (%) 90.0% 90.6% >99.9 >99.9

Chemical Compliance (%) 98.6% >99.9 >99.9 >99.9


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Nkolokotho a

Nondubuya a

Othobothini a

Shemula a






Bonus Scores 3.35 1.44 1.77 1.95

Penalties 0 0 0 0

Blue Drop Score (2012) 81.02% (↑) 77.37% (↑) 72.32% (↑) 80.30% (↑)

2011 Blue Drop Score 27.36% 23.28% 40.95% 26.32%

2010 Blue Drop Score Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed 17.44%

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 5 0.8 0.8 7




Microbiological Compliance (%) >99.9 >99.9 95.7% >99.9

Chemical Compliance (%) >99.9 >99.9 99.0% 98.7%

Performance Area

Syst

ems

Borehole cluster a






Bonus Scores 0

Penalties 0

Blue Drop Score (2012) 0% (→)



System Design Capacity (Ml/d) No information

Operational Capacity (% ito Design) No information


Average daily Consumption (l/p/d) No information

Microbiological Compliance (%) No information

Chemical Compliance (%) No information


Overall the Blue Drop performance of uMkhanyakude District Municipality improved significantly. The

Department wishes to salute the commendable dedication by the municipal officials and their service

provider which made enhancement of this kind possible.

Room remains for considerable improvement. Municipal management has to improve support to

facilitate excellence in drinking water quality management procedures, funds needs to be made

available to address non-compliances related to treatment process control, a dedicated effort is also


needed to improve disinfection at a number of the treatment systems. Water to residents within the

Block 6, Jozini (Old), Manguzi, Mjindi Central and Mkuze supply systems were plagued by a significant

number of E. coli failures. The municipality needs to acknowledge the risk posed to the health of the

consumers.

Data furthermore confirmed that the microbiological quality of water in the Hluhluwe Phase1, Hluhluwe

Phase2, Ingwavuma, Makhonyeni, Malobeni and Othobothini supply systems warrants more frequent

monitoring to prevent further microbiological water quality deterioration. Although not all the systems

plagued by E. coli failures showed signs of inadequate residual chlorine levels at the point of use,

disinfection definitely appears to be in need of improvement throughout the municipality.


Jozini Old: 78%

Jozini New: 71%

Mkhuze: 75%

The Jozini Old and New and Mkhuze WTWs were visited to verify the uMkhanyakude District

Municipality Blue Drop findings. Overall, the general site inspection impression was good, with some

drinking water quality management and process improvements recommended.

Areas requiring improvement at the Jozini Old and New WTW include:

Information on the coagulant dosing rate and jar testing results were not available at the time of

inspection; Updating of emergency contact details for the Incident Management Procedure is recommended

for Jozini Old WTW. No emergency contact details were available at the Jozini New WTW; Visual monitoring of the chemical feed and dosing conditions at the inlet works is not possible at

both the Jozini Old and New WTW; Occupational Health and Safety issues require attention since the chemical area was not bunded

and no emergency shower existed; The sludge was disposed of to a bush area outside the perimeter of the WTW.

Specific areas requiring improvement at the Jozini New WTW include:

No Process Controller Registration Certificates were displayed a the Jozini New WTW at the time

of the inspection; The scale to monitor the amount of chlorine gas remaining in the container was not functional; Optimisation of the flocculation, sedimentation and filtration processes is recommended:

Scum was observed in the chambers of the flocculation unit Floc carryover was observed at the clarifier Uneven bubble distribution was observed during backwashing Cracks were observed around the edges of the filter media surface The backwashing frequency per filter is recommended to be increased

Areas requiring improvement at the Mkhuze WTW include:

Neither the WTW nor the Process Controller’s Registration Certificates were displayed at the

Mkhuze WTW; Consideration of the health and hygiene requirements of workers and workplace satisfaction was

rated as fair and would benefit from improvement;


Information on the coagulant doing rate and jar testing results were not available at the time of

inspection; There was no standby flocculant dosing pump or chlorine dosing system available; Occupational Health and Safety issues require attention since the chemical area was not bunded

and no emergency shower existed; Process optimisation and maintenance of the flocculation and sedimentation units is

recommended: these unit processes were observed to be in poor condition, with significant scum

build-up; and Inadequate sludge management was undertaken and the sludge was pumped directly to the river.


Water Services Authority Umzinyathi District Municipality

Water Services Provider(s) uThukela Water a


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Biggarsberg a

Fabeni a

Keat's Drift a

Sampofu a



DWQ Compliance (30%) 100 100 100 100



Bonus Scores 1.23 3.43 3.59 2.57

Penalties 0 0 0 0

Blue Drop Score (2012) 97.04% (↑) 89.65% (↑) 90.37% (↑) 88.98% (↑)

2011 Blue Drop Score 71.40% 65.06% 68.81% 66.51%






Microbiological Compliance (%) 99.6% >99.9% >99.9% >99.9%


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Isandlwana a

Nondweni a

Nqutu - Vant's Drift a

Qudeni a



DWQ Compliance (30%) 100 100 100 100



Bonus Scores 2.69 3.96 3.02 1.82

Penalties 0 0 0 0

Blue Drop Score 91.88% (↑) 84.57% (↑) 92.74% (↑) 90.82% (→)


2010 Score Not assessed 77.00% Not assessed Not assessed

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 0.2 2 6 0.8





Chemical Compliance (%) 98.4% >99.9% 98.7% >99.9%


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Amakhabaleni a

Greytown a

Muden a

Kranskop a



DWQ Compliance (30%) 100 100 100 100



Bonus Scores 0.85 3.03 3.81 2.19

Penalties 0 0 0 0

Blue Drop Score 85.07% (↑) 92.73% (↑) 85.14% (↑) 87.00% (↑)

2011 Score 60.53% 70.86% 66.95% 64.79%

2010 Score Not assessed 67.00% 65.75% 67.00%

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 2 7 1 0.6





Chemical Compliance (%) >99.9% >99.9% >99.9 99.3%


Umzinyathi District Municipality displayed impressive improvement since the previous assessment. The

overall municipal Blue Drop score improved from 70.1% to 93.4%. This is a phenomenal achievement

considering that the performance of the municipality was measured against more stringent criteria and

an increase in supply systems.

Blue Drop status is awarded to the Biggarsberg water supply system. DWA acknowledges the

commitment from both the municipality and uThukela Water Board to ensure excellence in water

services delivery in all the supply systems. With some improvements, and continued municipal

management support as was evident during the 2011 assessment, the WSA and WSP could well be on

their way of achieving Blue Drop status in almost all the supply systems.

Monitoring was commendable in all the systems in 2011. Ample data allowed the DWA to confirm with

confidence drinking water quality of excellence in each of the supply systems. Credit was given for the

risk assessment process which appeared thoroughly done (full SANS 241 analyses at least twice) in all

the supply systems. Similar to the process completed for Biggarsberg, Umzinyathi and uThukela Water

should formalise the process of drafting water safety plans for the remaining supply systems.

Maintaining optimum levels of residual chlorine at the point of use in each of the supply systems,

however, appears to be a challenge. The WSA / WSP should prioritise the risk in the entire area of

supply. Control measures should be put in place to ensure availability of the last barrier against

potential microbial water pollution at the point of use.

Again, in conclusion, DWA noted that a number of treatment plants are operated over-capacity. The

risk should be clearly highlighted in each of the applicable water safety plans, the WSA / WSP is

furthermore advised to keep the DWA Regional Office abreast of the situation and plans to upgrade.

Process Control was also again evaluated non-compliant with the requirements of Regulation 2834

(soon to be Regulation 17) at some treatment plants. While the municipalities served by uThukela

Water note that the Water Board needs support to increase the number of process controllers


employed at each of the treatment systems, the WSP should have plans in place to ensure that the

available staff continuous to operate the plants in such a way as to maintain the excellent drinking water

quality.


Biggarsberg: 90% (together with uThukela Water)

The Biggarsberg WTW was visited to verify the uMzinyathi District Municipality Blue Drop findings.

Overall, the site inspection impression was good, indicating a well operated and managed WTW.

Areas requiring improvement at the Biggarsberg WTW include:

Occupational Health and Safety aspects require attention as no emergency shower or eye wash

was available, and chemicals were not stored in a bunded area. The housekeeping in the lime

dosing room is recommended to be improved as the room was very dusty; Some accumulation of scum, leaves, algae and feathers was observed in the flocculation unit; Sign of cracks and mudballs were observed on the filter media surface; and The capacity of the sludge dams was inadequate to handle the volume of sludge and some of the

dams were overgrown with vegetation. A tender is in progress to upgrade the sludge treatment

capacity.

Acceptable condition of lime dosing equipment Chlorine storage capacity exceeds 30 days

Good housekeeping was observed at the filters Sludge management requires improvement at Biggarsberg WTW


Water Services Authority uThukela District Municipality

Water Services Provider(s) uThukela District Municipality


Performance Area

Syst

ems

EMNAMBITHI / LADYSMITH –

Ladysmith


Ezakheni


Colenso

IMBABAZANE- Loskop






Bonus Scores 1.45 0 0 1.47

Penalties -0.81 -2.50 -2.50 0

Blue Drop Score (2012) 68.37% (↑) 45.93% (↓) 44.80% (↑) 68.81% (↑)

2011 Blue Drop Score 63.01% 51.55% 44.00% 42.10%

2010 Blue Drop Score 67.75% 52.75% 45.75% 37.75%







Performance Area

Syst

ems

INDAKA- Ekuvukeni Township

INDAKA- Tugela Estates

OKHAHLAMBA- Winterton

OKHAHLAMBA- Bergville






Bonus Scores 3.74 1.93 0 0

Penalties 0 -2.15 0 -2.21

Blue Drop Score 62.19% (↑) 56.80% (↑) 56.08% (↑) 53.58% (↓)

2011 Score 58.69% 42.10% 55.40% 56.64%

2010 Score 37.25% 39.75% 39.75% 61.75%






Chemical Compliance (%) 92.5% >99.9 94.6% 96.3%


Performance Area

Syst

ems

OKHAHLAMBA- Langkloof

OKHAHLAMBA- Zwelisha

UMTSHEZI- George Cross

UMTSHEZI- Archie Rodel







Penalties 0 -2.50 0 0

Blue Drop Score 62.24% (↑) 42.04% (↓) 67.72% (↑) 64.29% (↑)

2011 Score 58.81% 59.49% 63.84% 60.54%

2010 Score 37.75% 63.75% Not assessed Not assessed

System Design Capcity (Ml/d) 0.4 4 21 12






Performance Area

Syst

ems

UMTSHEZI- Weenen






Bonus Scores 1.56

Penalties 0


2011 Score 58.25%

2010 Score 57.75%





Microbiological Compliance (%) >99.9%



Drinking Water Quality Management Performance in uThukela District Municipality remained relatively

stagnant since the previous assessment. Management were found not committed to implement the

requirements of the Blue Drop certification programme. Microbiological failures in water supplied to

the Emnambithi/Ladysmith- Ezakheni and Colenso town supply systems, Imbabazane- Loskop, Indaka-

Tugela Estates, the Okhahlamba- Bergville town & surrounding rural areas as well as the

Moyeni/Zwelisha supply system implies that consumers in these areas are exposed to a risk of infection.


The municipality is required to inform the Department’s regional office within 30 days as from the

release of this report on an action plan for urgent improvement of treatment efficiency levels in these

areas.

Municipal management furthermore needs to note that a number of treatment facilities owned by the

municipality are being operated well above the design capacity of the particular treatment works. Final

water from the treatment plants shows turbidity levels in excess of the South African National Standard

for Drinking Water (SAN 241). In areas where disinfection already appears to be a challenge, the

probability for microbiological failures increases exponentially as the turbidity increases.

Sadly the Department has to repeat its statement from the 2011 Blue Drop report: “The Blue Drop

performance of uThukela District Municipality instils no confidence that the responsibility for water

services delivery is executed with a level of efficiency to ensure protection of consumer health within all

the supply systems.” Noting that little has been done to improve the situation since 2010, the DWA will

initiate discussions with municipal management to agree on a way forward.


Ezakheni: 59%

Ladysmith: 76%

The Ezakheni and Ladysmith WTWs were visited to verify the uThukela District Municipality Blue Drop

findings. Overall, the site inspection impression was unsatisfactory at the Ezakheni WTW with a number

of management and process improvements required. Better drinking water quality management was

undertaken at the Ladysmith WTW, where an acceptable site inspection impression was achieved.

Areas requiring improvement at the Ezakheni WTW include:

The overall appearance of the Ezakheni WTW was poor, with broken doors and windows and

evidence of vandalism. Access control was inadequate since the fence was in a state of disrepair

and animals had accessed the WTW facility. The WTW Registration Certificate was also not

displayed; The following critical documents were not present at the Ezakheni WTW:

Maintenance Logbook O&M Manual A comprehensive Drinking water quality Incident Management Protocol and complete list of

emergency contact details

Improved chemical dosing, process management and optimisation is recommended:

Ineffective monitoring of the chlorine gas remaining in the container - the gas container was found empty at the time of the inspection and required switchover

The general condition of the flocculation unit was poor Floc carry over was observed at the clarifiers, and the flow exceeded the design capacity of

the clarifiers The automatic desludging system of the clarifiers was not functional at the time of

inspection General housekeeping of the filters was inadequate

Occupational Health and Safety aspects require attention as the emergency shower and eye wash

were not operational; and Sludge (and backwash water) was discharged directly to river.


Jar testing equipment at the Ezakheni WTW Floc carryover was observed and flow exceeded the design of

the clarifiers

Areas requiring improvement at the Ladysmith WTW include:

The WTW registration certificate was not displayed at the Ladysmith WTW; No flow records were maintained in the operational monitoring logbook; Two raw water pumps were in operation, but no standby was available; There was inadequate consideration of Health & Safety issues:

No emergency showers or eye washes were available in the flocculant dosing area No handrails around the filters

Optimisation of the water treatment process is recommended:

Flocs were not visible at the end of the flocculation unit due to the high flow rate with low turbidity and aluminium sulphate dosing

Mudballs were visible on the filter media surface; and

Sludge (and backwash water) was discharged directly to river.

Operational monitoring equipment Chlorine gas used at the Ladysmith WTW


Water Services Authority uThungulu District Municipality

Water Services Provider(s) uThungulu DM; Water and Sanitation SA (WSSA) a

; City of uMhlathuze LM b


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Eshowe

Nkandla a

Gingindlovu

Mpungose a



DWQ Compliance (30%) 100 100 100 100



Bonus Scores 3.92 2.81 1.92 2.36

Penalties 0 0 0 0

Blue Drop Score (2012) 77.77% (↑) 84.07% (↑) 69.86% (↓) 79.85% (↑)

2011 Blue Drop Score 74.98% 57.63% 75.80% 76.59%


System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 8 2.8 1.5 2




Microbiological Compliance (%) 98.9% >99.9% >99.9% 98.4%


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Mtunzini b

Umlalazi Rudimentary a

Mbonambi (Umfolozi) b

Melmoth






Bonus Scores 3.19 0 4.38 5.61

Penalties 0 0 0 0

Blue Drop Score 81.92% (↑) 33.48% (↓) 75.20% (↑) 68.22% (↓)

2011 Score 70.21% 55.35% 67.78% 77.60%

2010 Score 40.44% Not assessed Not assessed Not assessed

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 3 No information No information 2.7

Operational Capacity (% ito Design) 90.00 No information No information 100.00



Microbiological Compliance (%) >99.9% No information 97.5% 96.9%

Chemical Compliance (%) >99.9% No information >99.9% >99.9%


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Ntambanana a

Mthambanana Rudimentary a

Mthonjaneni Rudimentary a

Nkandla Rudimentary a



DWQ Compliance (30%) 89 100 62 62



Bonus Scores 3.65 0 0 0

Penalties 0 -1.19 0 0

Blue Drop Score 79.35% (↑) 59.03% (→) 52.28% (↓) 52.28% (↓)


2010 Score 40.94% Not assessed Not assessed 41.56%

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) No information No information No information No information

Operational Capacity (% ito Design) No information No information No information No information



Microbiological Compliance (%) 97.9% >99.9% 94.0% 94.1%

Chemical Compliance (%) 96.9% >99.9% >99.9% 99.8%


The performance of uThungulu District Municipality remained more or less the same with an overall

municipal performance of 72.5% calculated for the evaluated 12 supply systems. DWA again

acknowledged the microbiological and chemical compliance monitoring programmes initiated and

maintained by the municipality and WSP’s. A full SANS 241 analyses is however now required in each of

the supply systems as part of the risk assessment process. Information needs to be available at coming

assessments to confirm monitoring of mostly four chemical determinands of health provides sufficient

data to confirm that the drinking water is suitable for lifelong human consumption.

Apart from microbiological failures detected in water of the Mthonjaneni and Nkandla Rudimentary

Schemes, drinking water was evaluated of excellent quality against E. coli, fluoride, iron, manganese and

sulphate data. Process control and disinfection consequently needs to improve as a priority in the

rudimentary supply systems.

Uthungulu, assisted by WSSA, is furthermore advised to improve on the incident management protocol

the two parties presented to the Department. The protocol was found to largely contain information on

roles and responsibilities, as well as the process and routes of communication to be followed to ensure

maintenance. Actual alert levels, more detailed communication procedures at times of emergencies,

actions and response times were identified as some of the areas that needed to be better defined. DWA

was encouraged to note that the WSA / WSP’s showed willingness to address the shortcomings and the

subsequent initiation of a 24 hour call centre.

While it has already been highlighted that the water safety planning process has to continue in each of

the supply systems, the DWA in closure needs to remark on the significant improvement noted in the

water safety plans presented by WSSA during the confirmation session. The risk assessment

methodology was found fairly comprehensive; WSSA should however also indicate timeframes,

responsibilities and budget sign off.



Eshowe: 83%

Nkandla: 86%

The Eshowe and Nkandla WTWs were visited to verify the uThungulu District Municipality Blue Drop

findings. Overall, the site inspection impression was positive with the majority of the requirements for

drinking water quality management in place.

Areas requiring improvement at the Eshowe WTW include:

The overall appearance of the works was not pleasing at the time of the inspection, rubbish was

lying around and the grass was not well cut; No jar testing equipment was available at the Eshowe WTW to optimize coagulant dosing. Floc

formation tests are only undertaken when there is a change in raw water quality; It is recommended that chlorine safety equipment is upgraded to include a detector and alarm;

and Improvements in housekeeping and process optimisation are recommended:

The general condition of the flocculation unit was not acceptable, and the walls were covered with scum

Signs of floc carry over were observed at the clarifier Housekeeping around the sand filters requires attention

Areas requiring improvement at the Nkandla WTW include*:

The O&M Manual was not available onsite at the time of the inspection; No jar testing equipment was available at the Nkandla WTW to optimize coagulant dosing

(equipment is brought onsite when deemed necessary); No mechanism was in place to remove solids and debris from the raw water at the inlet works;

and No standby lime dosing system was available.

* The Nkandla WTW was not operational during the Site Inspection due to an electricity failure, and thus

a detailed assessment of the water treatment process was not possible.


Water Services Authority Zululand District Municipality

Water Services Provider(s) Abaqulusi Local Municipality a

; WSSA b


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Babanango

Belgrade

Ceza

Coronation a



DWQ Compliance (30%) 86 100 36 45



Bonus Scores 4.56 3.42 9.23 5.92


Blue Drop Score (2012) 89.35% (↑) 92.03% (↑) 78.47% (↓) 71.41% (↑)

2011 Blue Drop Score 80.07% 80.07% 80.07% 51.31%

2010 Blue Drop Score 93.00% 69.00% 91.00% 34.55%





Microbiological Compliance (%) 96.2% >99.9% 88.9% 64.3%


Performance Area

Syst

ems

eDumbe

eMakhosini Rudimentary

eMondlo Town a

Enyathi Town



DWQ Compliance (30%) 100 45 45 78



Bonus Scores 1.86 10.74 5.38 7.88

Penalties 0 0 0 0

Blue Drop Score 94.10% (↑) 65.99% (↓) 75.50% (↑) 75.04% (→)



System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 5 0.3 12 1




Microbiological Compliance (%) >99.9% 89.3% 94.3% >99.9%

Chemical Compliance (%) 98.7% >99.9% >99.9% 95.7%


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Enyokeni Palace Rudimentary

Frischgewaagd Bilanyoni

Hlobane a

Itshelejuba Rudimentary



DWQ Compliance (30%) 55 89 100 100



Bonus Scores 5.99 2.68 8.54 2.18

Penalties 0 0 0 0

Blue Drop Score 66.03% (↓) 91.52% (↑) 80.09% (↑) 87.64% (↑)

2011 Score 71.41% 78.93% 66.78% 84.08%

2010 Score 86.00% 88.00% 36.63% 84.00%



Population Served 787 47 838 2 257 376


Microbiological Compliance (%) >99.9% 99.3% >99.9% >99.9%

Chemical Compliance (%) 93.1% 96.9% >99.9% >99.9%

Performance Area

Syst

ems

Khambi

Khangela Palace

Khiphunyawo b

Kombuzi






Bonus Scores 2.78 6.49 1.62 1.80

Penalties 0 0 0 0

Blue Drop Score 84.24% (↑) 63.21% (↓) 74.58% (↑) 71.86% (↓)

2011 Score 83.76% 80.33% 60.76% 80.80%

2010 Score 78.50% 91.00% 58.43% 81.43%








Performance Area

Syst

ems

Louwsberg a

Mandlakazi b

Mountain View

b

Mpungamhlope

b



DWQ Compliance (30%) 45 100 100 100



Bonus Scores 7.15 2.81 3.20 2.68


Blue Drop Score (2012) 66.84% (↑) 84.05% (↑) 81.88% (↑) 84.84% (↑)

2011 Blue Drop Score 63.73% 80.33% 75.16% 82.20%

2010 Blue Drop Score 39.80% 91.00% 66.50% 91.00%



Population Served 5 227 1 562 No information 7 991

Average daily Consumption (l/p/d) 53.57 621.00 No information 73.83



Performance Area

Syst

ems

Msibi b

Mvuzini b

Nkonjeni b

Nkosentsha b



DWQ Compliance (30%) 100 100 89 45



Bonus Scores 3.49 2.69 3.65 5.62

Penalties 0 0 -0.73 -2.43

Blue Drop Score 80.21% (↑) 84.75% (↑) 78.61% (↓) 65.74% (↑)

2011 Score 73.28% 75.16% 81.56% 60.59%

2010 Score 81.43% 83.43% 87.00% 78.43%








Performance Area

Syst

ems

Nongoma b

Ophuzane b

Osingisingini b

Pongola b



DWQ Compliance (30%) 100 86 45 100



Bonus Scores 2.05 3.41 7.55 2.05

Penalties 0 0 0 0

Blue Drop Score 93.50% (↑) 80.65% (↑) 76.11% (↑) 93.50% (↑)

2011 Score 81.32% 68.06% 75.12% 80.33%

2010 Score 91.00% 78.50% 83.43% 86.00%

System Design Capacity (Ml/d) 5 0.5 0.06 6.5





Chemical Compliance (%) 99.0% 99.9% 97.9% >99.9%

Performance Area

Syst

ems

Purim b

Sidinsi: Nongoma b

Spekboom: Pongola b

Tholakele b



DWQ Compliance (30%) 78 100 100 23



Bonus Scores 6.29 2.59 3.26 9.36

Penalties 0 0 -0.33 0

Blue Drop Score 80.10% (↑) 85.35% (↑) 81.22% (↑) 70.37% (↑)

2011 Score 76.91% 68.23% 72.13% 68.02%

2010 Score 78.00% 77.43% 73.00% 78.50%





Microbiological Compliance (%) >99.9% >99.9% >99.9% 82.8%

Chemical Compliance (%) 95.8% 97.5% >99.9% 95.7%


Performance Area

Syst

ems

Thulasizwe: Ulundi b

Ulundi b

Vryheid: Abaqulusi a

Masokaneni: Nongoma b



DWQ Compliance (30%) 100 73 73 23



Bonus Scores 4.64 3.83 5.41 10.94


Blue Drop Score (2012) 85.30% (↑) 87.88% (↑) 75.37% (↑) 61.71% (↓)

2011 Blue Drop Score 79.61% 81.25% 67.45% 81.32%

2010 Blue Drop Score 86.50% 85.00% 30.36% 91.00%






Chemical Compliance (%) >99.9% 97.4% >99.9% 95.5%


The Department commends Zululand District Municipality during this Blue Drop assessment period.

Supported by Abaqulusi Local Municipality and WSSA, DWA found the municipal officials well prepared

and eager to improve drinking water quality management within the 37 supply systems again presented

for evaluation. Continued improvements and address of the shortcomings identified during the

assessment cycle will soon result in the municipality achieving Blue Drop status.

Zululand presented evidence that the water safety planning process has commenced in most of the

supply systems. While the municipality continues the process of defining specific hazards and not just

hazardous events per supply system, the DWA also wants to encourage the WSA and WSP’s to ensure a

full SANS 241 analyses in each of the supply systems. Data available to the Department suggests that

different determinands might threaten the suitability for use of the drinking water in the various supply

systems. While the complete SANS 241 analyses again has to be repeated at least once this year in all

the supply systems, the WSA should also use the current information to improve and revise site-specific

compliance monitoring programmes. Monitoring should however increase without delay for

determinands identified during the risk assessment process, also found to exceed the standard for

drinking water.

Management support is required to address asset management deficiencies identified in some of the

systems, funds also needs to be available to address reasons for process control deficiencies in

particularly the systems discussed below where data infers that drinking water poses a risk to human

health.

Disinfection needs to improve as a priority to limit microbiological failures detected in the Ceza,

Coronation, eMakhosini, eMondlo Town, Khangela Palace, Louwsberg, Nkosentsha, Ophuzane,

Osingisingini, Tholakele, Ulundi Nkonjeni, Vryheid and Masokaneni supply systems. Arsenic and mercury

potentially poses a problem in water supplied to Enyathi Town, cadmium and mercury poses similar


risks to the water of Khambi, Kombuzi and Purim Rural. Fluoride exceeded limits for drinking water as

per the South African standard (SANS 241) in the Enyokeni Palace and Masokaneni supply systems,

while the analytical laboratory employed by the municipality detected increased levels of antimony,

phenols and selenium in water of Khangela Palace. In Addition antimony and phenols were detected in

the water supplied to Tholakele.

chapter 6 kwa-zulu natal province - dwa.gov.za · chapter 6 kwa-zulu natal province ... ethekwini...

Documents