Chapter 6 KWA-ZULU NATAL PROVINCE 92.1% 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! KWA-ZULU NATAL Page 151 Blue Drop Provincial Performance Log – Kwa-Zulu Natal Provincial Blue Drop Blue Drop Log Position Score Blue Drop Blue Drop Water Services Authority 2012 Score 2011 Score 2010 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. KWA-ZULU NATAL Page 152 2012 Blue Drop Performance Comparator – Kwa Zulu Natal uThukela Sisonke Uthungulu uMkhanyakude Zululand Amajuba Umgungunlovu Asset Management Management Commitment Ugu DWQ Compliance Process Control Management Water Services Athorities Water Safety Planning uMhlathuze uMzinyathi Msundusi Illembe Newcastle Ethekwini Metro 0.00 20.00 40.00 60.00 80.00 100.00 Municipal Blue Drop Scores as per Performance Areas KWA-ZULU NATAL Page 153 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% (↑) KWA-ZULU NATAL Page 154 Blue Drop Certified Systems Log Blue Drop Certified System Blue Drop Water Services Authority Water Services Status Score Provider 1 eThekwini Main 98.79% eThekwini Metropolitan Umgeni Water Municipality 2 Howick, Camperdown & 98.78% Umgungundlovu District Umgeni Water Mshwathi Municipality 3 Nsezi 98.39% City of uMhlathuze Local uMhlathuze Water Municipality 4 Dolphin Coast 98.30% iLembe District Municipality Umgeni Water 5 Biggarsberg 97.04% Umzinyathi District uThukela Water Municipality 6 Newcastle, Madadeni, 97.00% Newcastle Local Municipality uThukela Water Sizweni & Blauwbosch 7 Ndwedwe 96.72% iLembe District Municipality Umgeni Water 8 Ngwelezane 96.37% City of uMhlathuze Local uMhlathuze Water Municipality 9 Umzinto & Pennington - 96.27% Ugu District Municipality Umgeni Water Scottsborough 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 & 95.22% Ugu District Municipality Umgeni Water Qoloqolo 14 Ixopo 95.13% Sisonke District Municipality Umgeni Water 15 Hattingspruit 95.04% Amajuba Local Municipality uThukela Water 16 Southbroom - Port Edward 95.00% Ugu District Municipality Umgeni Water & Inland KWA-ZULU NATAL Page 155 Amajuba Local Municipality Water Services Authority a Water Services Provider(s) Amajuba Local Municipality; uThukela Water Municipal Blue Drop Score: 83.31% Alcockspruit a Dannhauser a Durnacol Hattingspruit a Systems Performance Area 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 95.43% (↑) 82.97% (↓) 77.42% (↓) 95.04% (↑) Blue Drop Score (2012) 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% a Rural (Buffalo Flats) Utrecht Systems Performance Area 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 92.02% (→) 77.05% (↓) Blue Drop Score 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% KWA-ZULU NATAL Page 156 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: .