Environmental Engineering Reference
In-Depth Information
population; (c) morbidity in large population; (d) morbidity in small population;
and (e) no detectable adverse effect.
The evaluation of the population impact was based on the degree of the threats
and how many people would be impacted. Additionally, a function was created to
evaluate the probability of risk and the extent of impact for each inspection point in
the WSP. The project also contributed to monitoring and veri
cation within the
Kampala water supply system (Tibatemwa et al. 2004 , p. 641). For each inspection
point, preventative measures were conducted to assure that the targets would be
achieved (Tibatemwa et al. 2004 ).
However, due to the fact that people outside the water utility of Kampala had no
knowledge of WSP, the external audit failed to be productive (Gunnarsd
ó
ttir 2012 ).
Moreover, the major barrier to implementing a WSP was a shortage of
finance. This
showed the need for a separate budget for the WSP. Furthermore, some inade-
quacies also existed in the process, which included (a) lack of involvement of the
stakeholders and communities, (b) remaining risk for water quality, (c) high turn-
over rate of employees and inef
cient training system, and (d) incomplete and poor
documentation (Gunnarsd
ttir 2012 ).
The general conclusion was that while a WSP approach can be applied in a
developing country, in the case of Uganda, a more cost-effective approach was
needed to develop risk assessment for water supplies (Godfrey et al. 2002 ). In 2008,
an external audit of Kampala ' s WSP was carried out by the National Water and
Sewage Corporation. Their results indicated that the distribution network system
had expanded since implementation of the WSP; however, there did not seem to be
any plan for continuous improvement built into the WSP. There was also no sys-
tematic documentation on incidents available for inspection when asked for, and
there was no summary of incidents or deviation for each year. Finally, there was
only a partly implemented training plan in place in Kampala. As a result, the staff
were unable to carry out regular monitoring and bring valid results to the quality
department (Gunnarsd
ó
ttir et al. 2012 ).
It seems that the potential bene
ó
ts of a WSP were not realized due to lack of
finance, lack of training, and inadequate record keeping. One is inevitably led to the
conclusion that the preconditions for the successful application of a WSP did not
exist in Uganda. This may be a lesson for other developing countries: the simple
fact that there is a WSP does not ensure water will be free of pathogens.
6.4.3 Iceland
As one of the countries with the largest freshwater resources and highest quality
groundwater in the world, Iceland
'
ed in legislation
as a food to ensure the safety of drinking water since 1995 (Gunnarsd
s drinking water has been classi
ó
ttir 2012 ).
Subsequently, in 1996, the Association of Icelandic Waterworks, Samorka, pro-
moted the implementation of Water Safety Plans and created guidelines using the
principles of HACCP (Gunnarsd
ó
ttir 2012 ). With the guidelines of the HACCP
Search WWH ::




Custom Search