Water Safety Plan Quality Assurance Tool
Contents
1. questions raw score Table 3 WSP team 5 20 0 20 0 Table 4 System description 2 8 0 8 0 Table 5 Hazard identification and risk assessment 7 100 0 100 0 Table 6 Control measures and validation 5 68 0 68 0 Table 7 Improvement plan 3 48 0 48 0 Table 8 Operational monitoring 4 64 0 64 0 Table 9 Verification 8 32 0 32 0 Table 10 Management procedures 3 36 0 36 0 Table Supporting programmes 8 0 8 0 Table 12 Review of the WSP 5 56 0 56 0 Total 44 440 0 440 0 Quantitative information No of stakeholder groups identified No of stakeholder groups contacted No of hazardous events identified No of controls identified that are in place No of controls identified that are needed No of controls validated as effective No of improvement programmes developed No of improvement programmes being implemented No of controls subject to operational monitoring No of micro tests water required or planned w in past year on source water No of micro tests carried out w in past year on source water No of micro tests carried out w in past year on source water that met supplier s defined limits No of physical chemical and radiological tests required or planned w in past year on source water No of physical chemical and radiological tests carried out w in past year on source water No of physical chemic2. User Manual Water Safety Plan Quality Assurance Tool FN World Health TA international Ey Organization AY Water Association u CONTENTS Why use this Tool To increase confidence that safe water is consistently being delivered to consumers by ensuring that key elements in the WSP process are not overlooked and that the WSP remains up to date and is effective Who should use this Tool The WSP team set up by the water supplier or similar entity managing organized drinking water supplies When should the Tool be used The Tool is likely to be of most benefit when applied at intervals dictated by the pace of WSP implementation At a minimum it should be used once per year How long does the Tool take to complete The Tool should not take more than a day to complete but it could well take longer if the supplier has several water supply systems and until the WSP team has become more experienced in its use SECTION A ABOUT THE TOOL 8 ABOOUTTHETOCIE Introduction Since the launch of the 3 edition of the WHO Guidelines for Drinking water Quality and the IWA Bonn Charter for Safe Drinking Water in 2004 which both advocated the implementation of Water Safety Plans WSPs there has been a global shift in how water supplies are managed WSPs provide a risk based preventative approach to managing drinking water safety from catchment to consumer Effective
3. Madar a ee TE En AA re Teig E Few uci Pup ee Lip eng imc Fer Wd Tu TI ami E A LR pma Pepa WEP Quality Assurance WS Quality Assurance Tozi User Manwal Lid ware a be EA 774 Mi uie thee EF Cual durante Toci Tee fal CL mer a a bang sang umma oy ar ega T LII p A CU LT aa a S ne i Whe gule uis Tha WP Gualty toed d i rk x kac at Dy le de AO PECES PEA me u When erowid the WEP Ere unat fus Thu TB ty as M P RA pace e T ts 3 Enter Assessment Page At the top of the screen you will see the twelve tables listed see field in figure 2 Each table can be viewed once selected and accordingly can be updated with your assessment information see field 2 in figure 4 SECTION 13 gt de Neil ASCO NINE As noted in the WSP Manual there is no one way to undertake the WSP approach Therefore the questions specific to WSP development and implementation in Tables three to twelve do not specify how a water supplier should operate The WSP Manual should be referred to for examples on some practices that have been found effective for some water suppliers It is important that all questions are reviewed in even though that particular action
4. feedback during development and piloting of the Tool Stephanie Adrian EPA USA Roger Aertgeerts WHO European Centre for Environment and Health Italy Lisa Barrott MWH United Kingdom Rafael Bastos University of Vicosa Brazil Maria Joao Benoliel EPAL Portugal Robert Bos WHO Switzerland Claudia Castell Exner DVBW Germany Jeni Colbourne DWI United Kingdom Tim Darlow MWH United Kingdom Charlotte Frambgl DANVA Danish Water and Wastewater Association Denmark Michael Frobel IM System Germany Dominique Gatel EUREAU Belgium Rick Gelting CDC USA Han Heijnen WHO SEARO Nepal Jean Francois Loret Lyonnais des Eaux France Adam Lovell WSAA Australia Marta Ganzer Mart AGBAR Spain Bonifacio Magtibay WHO Philippines Country Office Wolf Merkel Germany Carla Morais guas do C vado Portugal Yvonne Nijdam Waternet the Netherlands Simon Ou Public Health South New Zealand James Pratt Veolia Water Central United Kingdom Chris Rockey South West Water United Kingdom Andre Luis Gois Rodrigues SABESP Brazil Rui Sancho Aguas do Algarve Portugal Oliver Schmoll UBA Germany Kari Sholtes CDC USA Steve Smith Source 2 Tap United Kingdom Jaffarran Suhaimi Ranhill Utilities Malaysia Corinna Summerill Cranfield University United Kingdom Katsunori Suzuki TMWW Japan Terry Thompson WHO WPRO Philippines Sinead Tuite Health Canada Canada Jose Vieira Univer
5. has not yet been started Additionally in line with the WSP Manual approach the questions are in sequence and a previous step may need to be completed before the next step can also be completed An obvious example of this is that risk assessment cannot be marked as fully completed until hazard identification and control identification and validation have been fully completed Responses to the questions in Tables three to twelve are generally in a drop down list format with a zero to four grading scale It is important that a water supplier s responses are an honest and self critical appraisal of the progress it has made A score of zero should be given to steps that have not been started One point should be given to steps which have just started Two points should be given to steps that have been partially completed and documented Three points should be given where the step has been substantially completed and documented and Four points should be given where the step has been fully completed and documented and evidence of this is readily available Guidance is given for each question on what would merit a score of four points Not started and just started should be self explanatory but it will be for the water supplier to decide if a score of two points or three points is merited In some cases these general definitions do not apply and therefore more specific guidance has been provided for those questions Additionally whe
6. of the Tool 23 DISCEAIMERS World Health Organization 2010 All rights reserved Publications of the World Health Organization can be obtained from WHO Press World Health Organization 20 Avenue Appia 1211 Geneva 27 Switzerland tel 41 22 791 3264 fax 41 22 791 4857 e mail bookorders who int Requests for permission to reproduce or translate WHO publications whether for sale or for noncommercial distribution should beaddressed to WHO Press at the above address fax 41 22 791 4806 e mail permissions who int The designations employed and the presentation of the material in this publication do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the World Health Organization concerning the legal status of any country territory city or area or of its authorities or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries Dotted lines on maps represent approximate border lines for which there may not yet be full agreement The mention of specific companies or of certain manufacturers products does not imply that they are endorsed or recommended by the World Health Organization in preference to others of a similar nature that are not mentioned Errors and omissions excepted the names of proprietary products are distinguished by initial capital letters All reasonable precautions have been taken by the World Health Organization to verify the information contained in this publication However the
7. ESOURCES Water Safety Plan Manual Step by step risk management for drinking water suppliers http wwwwho int water_sanitation_health publication_9789241562638 en index html WHO Lexicon http apps who int thelexicon entry php WHO Guidelines for Drinking water Quality http www who intAwater sanitation health dwa gdwa3rev en index html Water Safety Portal www wsportal org ACKNOY REDGEMENTS The WSP Quality Assurance tool has been developed over a period of two years with contributions from a large group of international experts Extensive piloting of the tool in a range of geographies supplier sizes and institutional settings has facilitated the production of a reliable universally applicable tool to help water suppliers continue to safeguard public health through the provision of safe drinking water The development and production of the Tool was generously supported by the following organizations AusAID Drinking Water Inspectorate United Kingdom National Institute for Public Health Japan Department for International Development United Kingdom United States Department of State NSF International USA Health Canada Ministry of Health Labour and Welfare Japan Ministry of Environment and Water Resources Singapore MWH United Kingdom European Federation of National Associations of Water and Wastewater Services Water Services Association of Australia The following individuals provided invaluable support and
8. R USING THE TOOL SECTION A CASE STUDY FOR USING THE TOOL SECTION During the piloting stage of the Tool a number of water suppliers tested its usability and usefulness The feedback B from this piloting was used by the developers to refine and improve the Tool The piloting was also useful to understand how the Tool was being used by WSP teams The case study below provided by the National Water and Sewerage Corporation INWSC of Uganda may assist WSP teams on how the Tool can be applied SECTION i j 2 The Self Assessment Exercise Facilitator introduced the Tool and purpose that it applies at any stage of WSP development assessment is done by a selected team not an individual Facilitator displayed the tool on overhead systematically went through lay out of the tables Rapporteour was selected reading the questions loudly and members volunteered answers Members made calls to colleagues for data appreciated the purpose of the Tool identify gaps assess progress exercise became a training session Correctness of the answers confirmed with documented reports Observations The guidance column very handy in case of misunderstanding the questions Biggerbranch Kampala Water needed more time to complete the assessment than smaller one Entebbe Area By end of the exercise members appreciated the Tool and the systematic WSP development process agreed to do the assessment periodically 21 gt Poe NA R
9. able 7 Improvement Plan Table 8 Operational Monitoring Table 9 Verification Table 10 Management Procedures Table II Supporting Programmes Table 12 Review of the WSP including periodic reviews and following incidents SECTION SECTION COS 5 Using the Tool to Support Implementation The scoring is a simple system of five points 0 4 where a step can be described from being not started to fully completed this range is described in more detail in section B It is not the intention to put too much emphasis on the exact scores obtained Where the scoring should be helpful is to point to areas where improvement should be made and where priorities should be directed and with regular use of the Tool to show the water supplier and others involved with the WSP process that progress is being made with WSP implementation over time It also allows for easy reporting of progress to all within the water supply including senior management The Tool allows a water supplier to assess multiple water supply systems and therefore it enables direct comparison of results in easy to view table and graphical formats It also allows for direct comparison of WSP implementation over time between systems and within a system These summary tables and graphs will assist the water supplier in gaining an understanding of their overall performance against each WSP step The WSP team may also find these results a useful resourc
10. al and radiological tests on source water carried out w in past year on source water that met supplier s defined limits No of micro verification monitoring tests required or planned w in past year No of micro verification monitoring tests carried out w in past year No of micro verification monitoring tests carried out w in past year that met water quality targets No of physical chemical and radiological verification monitoring tests required or planned w in past year No of physical chemical and radiological verification monitoring tests carried out w in past year No of physical chemical and radiological verification monitoring tests carried out w in past year that met water quality targets SN o NEM NEM NECEM C NEM Bem O NEM NEM NM O NEM O NS Quantitative information Stakeholders contacted Controls validated as effective Improvement programmes being implemented Controls subject to operational monitoring Micro tests on source water that met monitoring freq targets w in past yr Micro tests on source water that met supplier s defined limits w in past yr Physical chemical and radiological tests on source water that met monitoring freq targets w in past yr Physical chemical and radiological tests on source water that met supplier s defined limits w in past yr Micro tests met verification monitoring freq targets w in past
11. amim 4 ler pirr Taie Cpa cma Honor 12 Mars Table 3 WSP Tes Caen diner Le jod ac de A Ta am Euren hy rer wed RT Tha Dee ri a Pe eher compendia ete furs BCP alor Comm te grt grey ca wy Da cr ew gems Dune elgasesamant deem Tem Pa rer en et EN W r qu ber seen Field 4 Creating a new question Field 3 Cumulative score for table Field 2 Insert assessment response Field 7 Insert comments 5 Saving and updating Whilst using the Tool it is highly recommended that you save at regular intervals If the Tool is obtained from the CD ROM the excel file should be saved on your hard drive and not on the CD ROM The Tool will be of most benefit when used periodically over time to track progress improvements and areas of concern You can create a new assessment for each table by clicking on the Create New button under the Assessment heading see field 5 in figure 4 This feature enables the user to conduct assessments and compare performance over time and also compare performance between different water supply systems over a similar time period In the latter case the tables that are general to the water supplier one three ten and eleven only need to be assessed once However in order to compare these systems in the summaries it is advised that each table is s
12. chart format where the results can be viewed by WSP step and by water supply component The user may wish to refer to the summary tables for further details on how these graphs were derived Summary tables and graphs for completed assessment General water supplier information Number of water supply systems Population obtaining water from supplier Water supply systems covered by a WSP that is being developed and or implemented Water supply systems covered by a WSP that has been fully implemented Population obtaining water covered by a WSP that is being developed and or implemented Population obtaining water covered by a WSP that has been fully implemented Consumers obtaining water covered by a WSP that is being developed and or implemented Consumers obtaining water covered by a WSP that has been fully implemented Staff involved in WSP development and implementation Supply specific information Responsibility for catchment Responsibility for raw water sources Responsibility for treatment Responsibility for distribution Responsibility for consumer premises Number of incidents that have occurred in the past year Water loss within the distribution system in the past year 76 Population obtaining water from system SECTION 17 gt S Overall progress with WSPs Tables 3 12 No of Total possible
13. ctive Fig l Application and Usefulness of the Tool at Various Stages of WSP Implementation Development of WSP Implementation of WSP Ongoing review of WSP Ensure essential elements of WSPs are not overlooked Monitor progress amp identify areas for improvement Monitor progress amp areas for further improvement Helps to ensure that the WSP remains up to date Evaluate effectiveness of WSP Time WSP maturity 4 Structure of the Tool For clarity and ease of use the Tool has been divided into two sections split into twelve tables Each table consists of a series of questions Each question includes some guidance on how to answer it with further guidance available in the WSP Manual and other references Part I consists of two tables Table General information on the water supplier Table 2 General information on water supply system Part 2 consists of ten tables related to the WSP approach For ease of use these tables are structured around the steps identified in the WHO IWA WSP Manual Bartram et al 2009 http www who int water sanitation health publication 9789241562638 en index html and knowledge and understanding of this Manual are essential prerequisites for proper application of the Tool Table 3 WSP Team Table 4 System Description Table 5 Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment Table 6 Control Measures and Validation including reassessment and prioritization of risks T
14. e when communicating to senior management for example to indicate where further resources are needed and to demonstrate that progress with water safety planning is being made It should be stressed that the WSP Tool will not determine what appropriate actions should be taken The Tool will point to areas that need improvement but it is up to the water supplier to determine how best to achieve the step gt LT i Ls E a s s AE a USING THE TOOL k RSS Tae Prerequisites The scope and layout of the Tool is closely aligned to the WSP it is therefore essential that the WSP concepts described in the Manual are understood before application of the Tool Furthermore it is recommended that the following are also considered before its use Ensure that management is supportive and has allowed resources to be freed up for the duration of the assessment exercise 2 Gather together the team that is responsible for overseeing WSP implementation including external expertise representatives of external stakeholders and other bodies For some questions other individuals who are not part of the WSP team but influence the WSP process may need to assist the team but only if this is a role they have already undertaken as part of the WSP development It is recognized that not all members of the WSP team may be needed to complete each table and it may help to identify only the relevant member
15. he Tool is completed m The comment fields should also be utilized when a score of partially completed or substantially completed entered These scores are more subjective and the comments can facilitate consistency in the scoring approach during future assessments Guidance and references Because each step comes from the recommendations in the WSP Manual further details on each step listed in the Tool can be found in the WSP Manual and other references To ease use of the Tool some guidance which is located in the pop up note that accompanies each question has also been included These guidance notes may include Further explanation of the question Definitions of terms Rationale for the importance of each step Some details of the WSP step References to where further information can be found including the location within the WSP Manual second tab within the pop up note SECTION 15 Fig 3 Overview of Assessment Tool Fields Field 6 View output charts and tables Field 1 Select table to complete Field 5 Start new assessment enatis __ Pira heim balas the talle qe wesuld Ee ta wab Tae erkranken ani ol Turis arite anc een d s Qr ein miim 2 k Tagen E Corte Besson aan Taber 10 krmen Procedures Pur 11 T
16. he definitions for these scores should be placed in the comment fields and the scoring for these new questions will be accounted for in a row below the total score Any guidance that is needed for these questions should also be entered in the comment fields To differentiate between these new questions and the existing questions within the Tool the text of the new questions will be listed in a different colored font Quantitative questions The response to some questions is in the form of outputs for example number of stakeholders identified number of hazards identified and number of operational tests carried out These questions are optional and are not scored However the information provided will help the water supplier to further measure its progress with WSP implementation over time since it allows for the assessment of various parameters and should be a means of demonstrating improvements linked to WSP implementation such as an increase in the number of controls validated a reduction in the number of incidents and fewer quality results outside of operational limits Also this will enable senior management or an external assessor to gain insight into the magnitude and complexity of each WSP Within Tables 1 12 the WSP QA Tool uses the following colors to distinguish the different types of information Light orange cells indicate fields that need to be filled in based on the question in the cell to the left Light grey cells shou
17. implementation of WSPs can contribute to safeguarding public health improving regulatory compliance operational efficiency gains and bettertargeted investments Such benefits are only realized through sustained efforts and continuous improvements of the WSP To this end there is a need to develop mechanisms whereby a water supplier can objectively assess WSP implementation and identify areas of progress and areas for improvement The WSP Quality Assurance Tool aims to meet this need and support WSP teams to develop implement and assess WSPs The major benefits for water suppliers in applying the Tool will be the systematic highlighting of Areas where progress is being made and Opportunities for improvements Other benefits of using the Tool include Application as a guidance tool when initially developing and implementing a WSP Protecting against complacency after WSP initially implemented Facilitating reporting both internally and externally Tool generates summary reports Identification of problems due to staff turnover and loss of institutional memory Highlights and helps to prioritize areas of concern that need improvement Helps to monitor progress over time of previously highlighted areas of concern Helps to justify areas where investment may be required to make improvements 2 Who Should Use the Tool The Tool should be used by the WSP team set up by the water supplier to oversee its WSP implementatio
18. ion of the tool you will see the main page as shown in Figure 2 From here you can navigate directly to the tool or select other useful references Macros Please note that the Tool contains macros If macros are disabled a warning note will appear on the menu page of the Tool To enable macros when using Excel 2003 version Go to the Menu Bar and select Tools 2 Move the cursor over Macro and select Security 3 From the options select Medium and then select 4 Close the file and re open it You will receive a security warning Select Enable Macros This will allow all the features of the Tool to be fully active To enable macros when using Excel 2007 2010 version Go to the Round Office button in the top left corner 2 Select Excel Options 3 Select Trust Center and then Trust Center Settings 4 Select Disable all macros with notification and click Ok twice Fig 2 CD ROM Main Page ette Dr cs PC Taba er tet IntradueBon tha WSP Quality Assurance Teal Anat CNE TOC T Pep PA ini Lt piir CE Es Haaa Pas Ea Demi Vote A p ky Pah urna sereine Mare Dani Parcs nue eee Roco act PA ei ne anm Per E r FEA EFA CG ped Pro mt Fe HEP Marea PAE A Ep De TERR ROI PUPA TQ op rl tmc m Ware Lam II IU ELLE EP ILIE 3 Lite bay Basses ee
19. ld be used to enter comments You may wish to use this space to explain why a particular answer has been given or to act as an aide memoire for the next time the assessment is completed It may be helpful to enter the names and job titles of the persons entering comments especially if they differ from those completing the Tool Light blue cells include calculations based on the answers provided in the light orange cells The information in these cells cannot be changed Dark grey cells indicate that an assessment for that particular question is not needed The question is currently not applicable based on answers provided in previous dependent questions To obtain maximum benefit from the Tool it is suggested that these questions are also reviewed Red cells indicate that the assessment conflicts with an answer provided in previous dependent questions Please read the associated comment and update your assessment accordingly Comment fields It is important that full use is made of the comment fields see field 7 figure 2 when answering the questions in the Tool These can be used to justify a score when the water supplier is not completely sure of which score to award to explain a supplier s interpretation of a question where it is unsure of the meaning or terminology to explain why a question has not been completed to document the evidence used to justify a score etc This will enable the comments to act as an aide memoire for the next time t
20. n If this team includes external expertise representatives of other stakeholders or other parties these should be included The Tool can also be used by senior management and internal assessors as a means of monitoring WSP activities of the water supplier Where a water supplier is only responsible for part of a water supply system for example abstraction and treatment or distribution or it receives a bulk supply from another supplier its WSP team should work with the teams from the other water suppliers so that the Tool is completed from catchment to point of use for each water supply system This will allow for greater understanding of the complete system and how each entity operates and also ensures that hazards are identified at entity boundaries that could otherwise be missed or not understood 3 When Should the Tool be Used The Tool is universally applicable in a range of circumstances for water suppliers beginning to implement WSPs to those who have had WSPs in place for some time The Tool is likely to be of most use when utilized at intervals dictated by the pace of WSP implementation When applied at the early stages of WSP development the Tool will guide and assess implementation It will assist in identifying areas of weakness and highlight where efforts need to be targeted For those suppliers that have already implemented a WSP this Tool will also help to challenge complacency to ensure that the WSP remains up to date and is effe
21. published material is being distributed without warranty of any kind either expressed or implied The responsibility for the interpretation and use of the material lies with the reader In no event shall the World Health Organization be liable for damages arising from its use International Water Association IWA The International Water Association is a global reference point for water professionals spanning the continuum between research and practice and covering all facets of the water cycle Through its network of members and experts in research practice regulation industry consulting and manufacturing IWA is in a better position than any other organisation to help water professionals create innovative pragmatic and sustainable solutions to challenging global needs The strength of IWA lies in the professional and geographic diversity of its membership a global mosaic of national corporate and individual member communities IWA is a company registered in England No 3597005 Registered Charity England No 076690 Design amp Layout paprika annecy com Photo credit Okea Fotolia p1 Artida Fotolia p3 Purestockx pp4 6 8 10 11 12 13 19 21 22 25 27 29 30 32 NOTES PAGES 27 gt Water Association
22. re applicable some questions also have a not applicable INA rating in addition to scores A cumulative total for each table is given at the bottom of the table see field 3 in figure 4 However It is not the intention to put too much emphasis on the exact scores obtained In fact it is unlikely that many questions will merit four points until WSP implementation has been in place for some time Even in these cases there should generally be room for improvement and therefore it is likely that the top score will not be achieved for all questions If the total scores are very high the water supplier may find it helpful to arrange for an independent external evaluation with the Tool Furthermore as water safety planning is an iterative process obtaining top scores is not an end in itself and it s imperative that the WSP is continually reviewed and assessed to ensure that the WSP remains up to date and effective The Tool can be adapted to suit your particular needs in particular new questions can be added to the Tool by use of the Create a New Question button see field 4 in figure 2 There are two types of questions that can be generated one is a general question which is not scored and the other is an assessment type question which will be added to your cumulative score for that table For assessment type questions created in tables three to twelve the scoring is restricted to zero to four for consistency with the rest of the tables T
23. s to evaluate each table of the Tool if there is a time constraint Drawing up a schedule or agenda will assist with efficiency 3 Identify and gather the necessary resources to complete the evaluation This includes having copies available ofthe WSP Manual and the Tool It is also recommended that an assessment coordinator and rapporteur s are designated The coordinator would be responsible for leading the above prerequisite activities as well as facilitating discussions as the Tool is being applied Rapporteur s would be responsible for filling in the Tool during the assessment period Note that resourcing for each assessment will depend on the extent and complexity of the water supply system or systems being covered and the depth of assessment required It is anticipated that the Tool should not take more than a day to complete but it could well take longer if the supplier has several water supply systems and until the WSP team has become more experienced in its use It is not necessary for the WSP team filling out the Tool to go through the supporting information in the form of records diagrams documents electronic databases etc if they can answer the questions without them However the information should be available or easily accessible and the team may wish to refer to this information especially when the team cannot easily answer a question or agree upon an answer 2 Starting the Application If you are using the CD ROM vers
24. sity of Minho Portugal Chris Viljoen Rand Water South Africa Richard Walker Water Corporation Australia Stewart Webster MWH New Zealand The following water suppliers provided invaluable support and feedback during the piloting of the Tool Dunedin City Council Mount Grand Supply New Zealand Waitaki District Council New Zealand South Staffordshire Water United Kingdom EPAL Portugal Veolia Water Central United Kingdom Tokyo Metropolitan Waterworks Japan Shenzhen Merchants Water Company China Public Authority for Electricity and Water Oman Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply amp Sewerage Board India Yarra Valley Water Australia Melbourne Water Australia National Water and Sewerage Corporation Kampala Water and Entebbe Uganda Public Utilities Board Singapore This Tool would not have been possible without significant contributions from the following individuals David Drury United Kingdom Asoka Jayaratne Yarra Valley Water Australia Koji Kosaka National Institute of Public Health Japan Annabelle May Drinking Water Inspectorate United Kingdom Annette Davison and Dan Deere Water Futures Australia Bruce Gordon and Jennifer De France World Health Organization Switzerland Jamie Bartram University of North Carolina USA Tom Williams and Sarah Tibatemwa International Water Association the Netherlands and Kenya Jennifer De France and Tom Williams coordinated the development
25. till filled out by copying the answer from the first assessment 6 Summary Tables and Graphs Once you have finished completing the assessment you can click on the View Results button see field 6 on figure 4 which will automatically generate summary tables and graphs for your assessment These summary tables and graphs will assist the water supplier in easily identifying where efforts should be targeted and where progress has been made The WSP team may also find these results a useful resource when communicating to senior management for example to indicate where further resources are needed and to demonstrate that progress with water safety planning is being made The summary tables display the information included in tables one to twelve in a numerical format This includes the answers provided for both the scoring and quantitative type questions These tables have been organized by general information derived from tables one to two by WSP step derived from tables three to twelve and by water supply component derived from tables three to twelve For the latter two summaries the tables also include information on the number of questions within each summary the total possible points as well as the actual score achieved These summaries do not reflect the additional questions and corresponding scores that may be added by the water supplier The summary graphs display the scoring type information included in tables three to twelve in a
26. yr Micro tests met water quality targets w in past yr Physical chemical and radiological tests met verification monitoring freq targets w in past yr Physical chemical and radiological tests met water quality targets w in past yr Exporting Assessment Reports The reports can be generated in both Microsoft Word and PowerPoint format The results can also be exported into a separate Excel file Unlike the reports within the Tool the data within the exported Excel file can be reformatted and therefore customized to meet individual water supplier needs The user may also wish to generate the results in Word so that comments can be entered easily below each summary chart or graph Lastly the export to PowerPoint feature allows the water supplier to kick start development of a presentation if that is desired Hasard identification and Risk Assessment 10026 90 9 80 70 o 609 E 50 Se 40 gt 30 o o 209 Jg W 10 0 Stakeholder Hasard Risks Identification Identification Assessment Overall progress with WSPs 100 D 90 5 80 70 60 50 se 40 5 5 20 Jg 10 0 7 Em WSP System Hazard Control Improvement Operational Verification Management Supporting Review Team description identification measures plan monitoring procedures programmes ofthe WSP and risk and validation SECTION 19 gt SECTION CASE STUDY FO
Download Pdf Manuals
Related Search