The document presents a risk management plan for a drinking water system where local drinking water does not meet Canadian standards. It outlines the following steps:
1) Initiation including defining the problem of substandard water quality, establishing a risk management team of local stakeholders, and identifying potential hazards.
2) Preliminary analysis identifying biological (E. coli) and chemical hazards and potential health and economic consequences like illness, hospitalization, and lost income.
3) Risk estimation to determine frequency of hazards and consequences.
4) Risk evaluation including stakeholder perceptions of risk and cost-benefit analysis of options.
5) Risk control by selecting options from table of potential controls.
6) Implementation and
3. 3
Introduction
In 2015, the local public received a notice that their town water supply does not meet the Canadian drinking water standards. There
are rumors that several people have fallen ill and many residents bought out water bottle supplies at their local store. There are
issues that concern them that another Walkerton situation might happen wherein deaths occur due to E.coli contamination of their
local water system. The public health is at risk and in response a risk management plan was initiated to handle the issue by
protecting the welfare of the people, notifying the public of the hazard and amending the hazard in methodical way with the use of
an efficient plan to be carried out by the risk management team.
Step 1: Initiation
1.1 Define the Problem and Associated Risk Issues.
The initial problem that is identified is that the local water supply does not meet the standards for Canadian Drinking Water
Quality. These guidelines are created to safeguard the drinking water supplied to customers are safe and reliable at source. There
are parameters to consider such as bacteriological, chemical, physical and radiological that are acceptable for health reasons. The
public health is at risk in this scenario that is why several levels of public notice is usually given by local board of health to warn
the public of any risk involved. In local water source, biological hazard such as bacteria is the culprit that might contaminate the
drinking water source. There are also chemical hazard involve, when using chlorination process, but this issue is not scientifically
backed up and this is the standard of some water systemoperator in disinfection process.
1.2 The Risk Management Team
Table 1: The Risk Management Team& Their Role
Risk Management Team
Members
Role
1. Drinking water
officer
a. Lay down surveillance and monitoring of drinking water systems that may affect
the public’s health.
4. 4
b. Point person to contact prior to the creation or alteration of drinking water
systems.
c. They are the one who issues construction and operating permits of local water
system provider.
2. Public Health
Engineers (Health
safety and
Environmental
advisor)
a. Serve as a third party agent and part of the advisory committee in managing drinking
water.
3. Medical Health
officers/
(Provincial Health officers)
a. Administer and enforce Drinking Water protection act and Regulation
b. This official maybe the drinking water officer or part of a team who enforce the law
4. Local government a. Responsible for the provision of drinking water in a municipality or board of regional
district
5. Water system
owners
a. Accountable in providing safe drinking water in a locality.
b. Duty-bound in notifying the public and health authorities about water quality problems
6. Microbiologist from
approved Laboratory
a. They are technical expert in microbial water testing and this must come from the list of
approved laboratories authorize by the BC provincial health officer as of Dec. 31, 2014
7. Local Public (local
water quality watch
group or
organization or
concerned citizen
group); Media
personnel from
print, TV or radio
a. Gives feedback to health authorities or water system owners about the quality of their
water
8. Risk Communication
Specialist/
a. Act as an intermediary person in ways to communicate the issue and synthesizing the
impact of the hazard by prioritizing things in order so that every stakeholder involve is in
the loop and well informed.
5. 5
Communication
team
Each stakeholder is further analyzed by their responsibility in this risk scenario and their authority to carry on the
responsibilities and the resources available to them.
Table 2: Risk Management Team Member Analysis
Risk Management
Team Member
Responsibility Authority Resources
1. Drinking water
officer/ Medical
Officers
Doesthe surveyand
monitoringof drinking
waterqualitythatmay
affectpublichealth.
-Maybe appointedby
the Ministry(with
Provincial Healthofficer
approval) orMedical
HealthOfficerof which
theyhave an establish
area of jurisdiction.
-Issuesconstruction
permitsand
requirementsforwater
supplysystem.
-Reviewwatersupplier
emergencyresponse
and contingencyplan
-Identifyandassess
threatsto drinking
watersupply.
-May enterthe premises
of local watersupplier
and conductan
inspection.
-Followsthe guidelinesanddirectivessetbythe Ministry
of Healthinaccordance in performingdutiesorfunction
underthe DrinkingWaterprotectionActand Public
HealthAct of BritishColumbia.
-ReceivesandReviewsrequestmade bythe publicin
relationtowaterthreatand investigatesthe matterif
warranted.
6. 6
2. PublicHealth
Engineers(Health
safetyand
Environmental
advisor)
-Actas an advisory
committee thatprovide
an independentthought
and recommendations
inrespectto drinking
watermatters.
-Maybe createdby the
Ministryof Healthin
consultationwith
Provincial HealthOfficer
to provide advice and
recommendationsin
respectto Drinking
Water ProtectionAct.
-Inaccordance withB.C.DrinkingWaterProtectionAct
and PublicService Act
-theyare part of the technical advisorycommittee that
will assessthe situationandmay provide advicein
respectto the directionsmandatedbythe regulation.
3. Provincial Health
officers
>Monitorscompliance
of drinkingwater
officerswithguidelines
and directives
establishedunderthe
DrinkingWater
ProtectionAct.
> Teameffortwith
Ministryof Healthin
implementingand
executingpublicinterest
withregardsto Drinking
Water ProtectionAct.
DrinkingWaterprotectionActand PublicHealthActof
BritishColumbia.
4. Local government Responsible forthe
provisionof drinking
waterin a municipality
or board of regional
district.
-Protectsthe drinking
watersource as potable
and safe to use bythe
publicinaccordance to
the DrinkingWater
ProtectionAct.
Local GovernmentAct
5. Water system
owners
-Watersuppliermust
provide publicusers
drinkingwaterfromthe
watersupplysystem
that ispotable and
meetsrequirements
establishedbythe
regulationorbyits
operatingpermit.
-Personnelworkingin
the companyare
qualifiedinaccordance
withthe regulations.
-A personisqualifiedto
operate the water
supplysystemif the
personiscertifiedbythe
Environmental
OperatorsCertification
Program.
-Watersuppliermustreportanythreatsto drinking
water.
-Ownersare requiredtohave a writtenemergency
response andcontingencyplaninthe eventof
unforeseencircumstancesaffectingitswatersupply
systemor drinkingwatersource.
-Requiredtogive publicnotice announcementif there is
a breach inwatersafetystandardsinaccordance to
drinkingwaterofficerdirectives.
-To publishresults of the monitoringincompliance with
the regulations.
-To informthe publicthe currentassessmentandplanof
actionto be takeninrelationtothe guidelines.
7. 7
-Watersuppliermusthave avalidEnvironmental
Operatorscertification.
-Watersuppliersare educatedandtrainedbyaccredited
trainingorganizationssetbythe Ministryof Health
6. Microbiologist
from approved
Laboratory
-Analyse the sampling
requiredformonitoring
by the watersystem
owners.
-If wateranalysisfailed
the standard,it isthe
responsibilityof the
laboratoryto notifythe
drinkingwaterofficer,
medical healthofficer
and watersupplier
aboutthe findingsand
take all reasonable steps
to contact all concerned
party.
-Laboratoriesthatmeet
the requirements
establishedbythe
regulations
-Qualifiedpersonnel
whomeetthe standard
setby the regulation
-RulesandregulationinrelationtoDrinkingWater
ProtectionAct
-PublicHealthAct
-EnvironmentalManagementAct
7. Local
Public/Concerned
citizen(local
water quality
watch group or
organization or
concernedcitizen
group); Media
personnel from
print, TV or radio
-May requestthe
drinkingwaterofficerto
investigateaparticular
issue if there isa threat
intheirlocal drinking
watersupply.
-Requestshouldbe in
writingandmustinclude
facts that supportthe
threatin local water
supply.
-Theyneedtoknowthe
truth of the matter in
relationtohazard and
issuesof theirwater
supply.
DrinkingWaterSafetyAct
8. 8
8. Risk
Communication
Specialist/
Communication
team
Act as a liaisonof
informationfrom
differentstakeholder
and responsible in
mediacommunication
process.
-Authoritydependson
the approval of different
stakeholderonwhat
aspectthat is neededto
communicate ina
particularperiodof time
-Reportsare basedon the minutesof the meeting thatis
agreeduponand all factual informationwithregardsto
problemscenario.
1.3 Identifying Potential Stakeholders
The stakeholders identified in Table 3 are those whom the Issue can affect, are affected, or could be affected by any decisions
or activity related to the risk. Each stakeholder is then matched with their relationship to the issue.
Table 3: Stakeholders & Their Relationship to the Issue
Stakeholder Relationship To Issue
1. Local public/concerned
citizens
-Affected party in this situation if ever there is a valid proof that there is a breach in their
local water quality. They have the right to contact with their local health authorities and
inform their concern to the supplier of their local water system.
2. Ministry of Health (British
Columbia)
-Creates and implements Drinking Water Protection Act and Drinking Water Protection
Regulation. They represent the interest of the government to protect and deliver safe
water supply to concerned citizens. They enforce the legislation approved by the
provincial assembly.
3. Health Authorities
(Provincial Health
officer/Medical Health
Officers/ Drinking water
officers)
-they are the one who govern and enforce Drinking Water Protection Act and regulation
4. Water system owners -They are responsible for providing the public safe drinking water. They are required by
the law to notify the public and health authorities any water quality problems.
9. 9
5. B.C. Tap water alliance
(water management
watch group)
-They serve the interest of the public by monitoring and protecting British Columbia’s
community water supply resources. (www.bctwa.org)
6. Comox valley water
watch coalition (water
management watch dog)
-They focus on the interest of the public in terms of having safe water supply in their
locality.
7. Media such as BC1 or CTV -A stakeholder itself and provide information to other stakeholder participants
8. Risk Communication
Specialist/Communication
Team
- They focus on media communication aspect and serve as a conduit of information from
other risk management team members.
Step 2: Preliminary Analysis/Risk Identification
2.1 Identifying the Hazard & Its Potential Consequences
The publichealthisat riskin thisscenarioof whichthe watersupply maybe contaminated.It isthe reasonwhynoticeswere giveninforming
themthat theirlocal watersource didnot meetthe Canadiandrinkingwaterstandards.Source of publicadvisory isusuallygivenbylocal
drinkingwaterofficialorMedical officerof local healthauthoritytowarnthe publicforanyrisk involved. Usuallyinlocal watersource,
biological hazardsuchas microorganismsisthe culpritthatmightcontaminate the watersource.There are alsochemical hazardinvolve,
whenusingchlorination process, butthisissue isnotscientificallybackedup.Thisisalwaysonthe fearlistof some local watersupply
distributorspecificallymanagedbyMunicipal entitysuchasinChilliwackandWhite rock,BritishColumbia.
2.2 Types of Hazard
Human error –inconsistent posting of reports/ invalid data posting
Technical hazard – system and equipment failure
2.3 Types of Loss
Health loss – risk in public health; life threatening effect; acute to chronic illness
Loss of income –due to hospitalization and disability to work
10. 10
The table belowmayguide ushowto zeroin the potential biologicalorchemical hazardinvolvedinthisgivenscenario:
TYPE OF HAZARD KINDOF HAZARD SOURCE OF
HAZARD
POTENTIAL
CONSEQUENCES
TYPE OF LOSS ASA
RESULT
A. BIOLOGICAL 1. EscherichiaColi
(Benigntype)
Serotype
E. coli 0157:H7 (Deadly
type)
Usuallyfoundin
intestinesof
warm blooded
animal suchas
humansand
othermammals
throughbody
waste (feces)
and animal
droppings.They
are naturally
occurringin soil
of whichrun-off
fromanimal
manure made its
wayto ground
watersupply.
Drinkingwater
contaminatedwith
these organismscan
cause stomach and
intestinal illnesssuch
as diarrheaand
nausea.
The effectsmaybe more
severe andpossiblylife
threateningforbabies,
children,elderlyor
people withimmune
deficienciessuchas
cancer and AIDS.
E. coli O157:H7 isa
deadlyserotype that
may cause permanent
damage to kidneysand
liver.Itmaycause
hemolyticuremic
syndrome,asevere form
of kidneyfailure.The
mostprobable affected
populationof thisdeadly
microbe are veryyoung
childrenandelderly
group.
1. Giardialamblia People develop
infectionwith
Giardia by
swallowing
Giardia cysts
(hardshells
containing
Giardia) foundin
> Beaverfeveror
Giardiasisisthe most
frequentlydiagnosed
intestinal parasitic
disease in North
America. Signsand
symptomsof
giardiasisnormally
In children,severe
giardiasismightdelay
physical andmental
growth,slow
development,andcause
severe malnutrition.
11. 11
contaminated
water.Cystsare
immediately
infectiousonce
theyleave the
hostthrough
feces.An
infectedperson
mightshed1-10
billioncystsdaily
intheirfeces
and thismight
lastfor several
months.
Nevertheless,
swallowingas
fewas 10 cysts
mightcause
illnessto
someone. Mode
of Transmission
may be passed
person-to-
personor even
animal-to-
person.
begin1 to 3 weeks
aftera personhas
beeninfected.The
followingare the
acute symptoms:
Diarrhea
Gas
Greasystools
that tendto
float
Stomachor
abdominal
cramps
Upsetstomach
Nausea/vomiting
Dehydration
(lossof fluids)
2. Cryptosporidium This
microorganism
livesinthe
intestine of
infectedhumans
or animals.An
infectedperson
or animal sheds
Symptomsof
cryptosporidiosis
generallybegin2to 10
daysafter becoming
infectedwiththe
parasite.The most
commonsymptomof
cryptosporidiosisis
People of weak immune
systemsmaydevelop
serious,chronic,and
sometimesfatal illness.
Examplesof people with
weakenedimmune systems
include:
12. 12
Cryptosporidium
parasitesinthe
stool bythe
millions.
Infectionbegins
as the symptoms
startedand can
lastfor weeks.
Microorganism
transmission
commence
whenyou
accidentally
swallowedthe
parasite thatcan
be foundinsoil,
food,water,or
watersurfaces
that have been
contaminated
withfecesfrom
infectedhumans
or animals.
Contaminated
watermay
include water
that has not
beenboiledor
filtered.Several
community-wide
outbreaksof
cryptosporidiosis
have beenlinked
to drinking
waterydiarrhea.Other
symptomsinclude:
Stomachcramps
or pain
Dehydration
Nausea
Vomiting
Fever
Weightloss
People withAIDS;
Those with
inheriteddiseases
that affectthe
immune system;
and
Cancer and
transplantpatients
whoare taking
certain
immunosuppressive
drugs.
13. 13
municipal water
contaminated
with
Cryptosporidium.
3. Campylobacter
jejuni
Campylobacter
thrivesbestin
birdsbecause of
theirideal body
temperature of
41C to 42C. The
birdsact as a
carrier thatcan
harm otherbirds
through
droppings.
Source of water
supplyfrom
surface water
and mountain
streamscan
become
contaminated
frominfected
fecesof birds.
Campylobacteriosis
commonsymptoms
are bloodydiarrhea,
stomachpain,
weakness,nauseaand
vomiting.
In a rare situation
campylobacteriosismay
leadinfectedpersonto
developarthritisanda
rare disease called
Guillain-Barre syndrome.
Thissyndrome affects
the nervesof the body
beginningseveral weeks
afterthe diarrheal
illness.
B. Chemical hazard 1. CHLORINE Usedas drinking
water
disinfectant
HealthCanada
guideline valueisnot
mandatorydue to low
toxicityat
concentrationsfound
indrinkingwater.
Basedon HealthCanada
guidelines,free chlorine
concentrationsinmost
Canadiandrinkingwater
distributionsystems
range from 0.04 to 2.0
mg/L.
2. CHLORINE DIOXIDE Usedas drinking
water
disinfectant
A HealthCanada
guideline forchlorine
dioxide isnotrequired
A maximumfeeddose of
1.2 mg/L of chlorine
dioxide shouldnotbe
14. 14
(primary
disinfection
only)
because of itsrapid
reductiontochlorite
indrinkingwater. But
basedon EPA
guidelines,the
maximum
contaminantlevel
shouldnotexceedat
0.8mg/L.
exceededtocontrol the
formationof chlorite and
chlorate whichmay
cause potential health
effects.
3.CHLORITE A by-productof
drinkingwater
disinfectionwith
chlorine dioxide
MaximumAcceptable
concentrationshould
be lessthanor equal
to 1mg/L to prevent
some
neurobehavioural
effectssuchas
loweredauditory
startle amplitude and
decreasedexploratory
activity.Thischemical
may decreased
absolute brainweight
and alterthe weight
of humanliver.(based
on HealthCanada
guidelines)
Chlorite formation
shouldbe controlledby
respectingthe maximum
feeddose of 1.2 mg/L of
chlorine dioxide and
managingformationin
hypochlorite solutions.
4.CHLORATE A by-productof
drinkingwater
disinfectionwith
chlorine dioxide
MaximumAcceptable
Concentrationshould
be lessthanor equal
to 1 to prevent
possible effecton
thyroidglandsuchas
colloiddepletion.
As chlorate isdifficultto
remove once formed,its
formationshouldbe
controlled byrespecting
the maximumfeeddose
of 1.2 mg/L of chlorine
dioxide and monitoring
15. 15
(basedonHealth
Canada guidelines)
formationin
hypochlorite solutions.
2.4 Hazard Identification
A list of key references for hazard identification & risk characterization can be seen in risk information library portion. This list
of references contains all the information necessary for making risk management decisions by the risk management team. A
sample template can be seen to standardize reporting procedure and to create a common lingo to all stakeholders.
Step 3: Risk Estimation
3.1 Frequency of Hazard & Consequences
There isan eminentrisktothe publiconce thisBiological andChemical hazardsare beingexposedto.The hazardispresent especiallywhen
exposedtothese Biological microorganisms.Forthe pastyears,the sporadicoutbreakof E. coli and GiardiainfestationinBritishColumbia
waterdistributionsystemspurdebate onhowthe governmentwill implementthe DrinkingWaterProtectionActinrelationonhowthe local
watersystemoperatormanage theirdrinkingwatersource.There isapublicmisinformationregardingthe effectof chlorination.The
misperceptionharpsonthe dangerof the chemical componentinthe waterdisinfectionprocessof whichsome linkitonpossiblehealth
effectsuchas cancer.The riskof usingchemicalsinwatertreatmentmaybe factual butitaidsinpreventingreservoircontaminationby
pathogenicmicrobesthatmayputpublichealthatrisk.For example,there isadispute rightnowinBritishColumbiainteriorcityarealike
Chilliwackwithregardstowaterdisinfectionprocessbecause theywanttopreserve the purityof theirwater.Local governmentwho
managedtheirwatersource doesn’twantthe Provincial HealthAuthoritytointerveneinimplementingthe chlorinationprocess aspartof
protectingthe publichealthinterest.Learningfromthe commentof aforemostmicrobiologistfromMcmasterUniversityinOntario,Mr.Herb
Schellhornmentionedthataminiscule dose of E.coli or about10 E. coli cellscanmake a personill.Escherichiacoli maybe benignordeadly
but contaminatingwatersource withserotypeE.coli O157:H7 may damage an individualkidneysandliverthatmayleadto hemolyticuremic
syndrome.Constantmonitoringthroughmicrobiallaboratorytestingisone keyof havingasafe drinkingwaterinBritishColumbia.
Biological andChemical monitoringplansincludeelementsof factual datacollectionandanalysistoachieve overall appreciationof trendsin
waterqualityandpotential riskstopublichealth.Consequence of biological healthhazardmaybe lessinurbanareassuchas Metro
Vancouversince massive chlorinationof watersource isbeingundertaken.Butthatisnot the case in White rockarea, a nearbycitynear
Vancouver.Inspite of numerousattemptof the local healthauthoritytoconvince the local governmenttochlorinate theirdrinkingwater
source,theyare adamant to complywiththe regulationbecausetheywanttomaintainachlorine free facilitytopreservethe purityof their
water.But newsof animal droppingscontaminatingtheirreservoirsparkan issue of weighingthe benefitof chlorinationoverpotentialriskof
16. 16
the chemical involved. There are several studieswithmajorfindingscitingthe relationshipbetweencattle populationandhumandensity.
The possibilityof highE.coli infestationinlocal watersource isdirectlyproportionalwithhighdensityof animal populationsuchascattle in
farmlands.Manure or animal droppingsmayleechtheirwaytowardslocal watergroundsource thatmay contaminate publicwater source
and mayleadto health illness.The majorhealthimpactof chemical hazardssuchas chlorine dioxideandchlorite maybe containif there is
propermonitoringinfeedingdose duringchlorinationprocess.Inaddition,mindingthe maximumdose of thesechemicalsasto prevent
formationof chlorate thatmay contaminate waterdisinfectionprocess.The estimate of biological andchemical exposurefrequency may
happenanymomentthatis whyaccurate dailymonitoringshouldbe factual basedonobserveddataatsource.The table belowmayguide us
the frequencyof eachtype of hazard mightoccur and the possible impactof exposure:
A.BIOLOGICALHAZARD
KINDOF HAZARD FREQUENCY OF HAZARD IMPACT OFEXPOSURE
1.Escherichiacoli > Duringbirdmigration
(e.g.fall towinteror
wintertospringmigration
pattern) thatmay
contaminate local drinking
watersource such as lakes
and riversthroughbird
droppings.
> Animal manure from
cattle fieldsleaching
towardslocal ground
watersource.
> Positive testontotal coliformisuseful todetermine general drinking
waterquality.
> E. coli testsare bestindicatorsof fecal contaminationonwatersource.
> May contaminate nearbywaterwellsdue toinfestationof pathogenic
bacteria.
2. Giardia lamblia > Water-borne infections
happenwhenanimal or
humanwaste such as feces
contaminatesdrinkingwater
systems.Infectedanimalscan
include pets,livestock,
>It is plausiblewhenpublicandprivate drinkingwatersystemsgettheir
waterfrom surface waterssuchas rain, creeks,ponds,riversandlakes.
Theirlocal watersource can be tainted wheninfectedanimals,petsor
humansdefecate inornear the bodyof water.
17. 17
B.CHEMICAL HAZARD
poultry,orwildanimalslike
beaver,deerorrodents.
3.Cryptosporidium Leachingof humanwaste
fromlandfills,septicfields,
sewerpipes,orresidentialor
industrial developmentscan
alsoinfectlocal surface water
source.
>Potential healthillnesstoanindividual withweakimmune system
4.Campylobacterjejuni Outbreakscanhappen
whenthe source of
drinkingwaterisnot
properlytreatedorwhen
waterstorage tanks or
reservoirsbecome infected
withthismicroorganisms.
In industrialized countries such as Canada, the illness may affect
children older than 5 years old and young adults.
KINDOF HAZARD FREQUENCY OF HAZARD IMPACT OFEXPOSURE
1. CHLORINE Commondisinfectantagent Dailychlorine residualmonitoringisneededtodetermine
whethercontaminationisoverwhelming the disinfectantcapacity
of the chlorine.
2. CHLORINEDIOXIDE Addedtodrinkingwateras
disinfectant.Itreadilydegrades
As perEPA guidelines,the maximumresidual disinfectantlevel is
0.8mg/L.
18. 18
Step 4: Risk Evaluation
4.1 Perceptions of Risk
Table 4: Stakeholder Analysis & Their Perceptions of Risk
Stakeholder Analysis
Stakeholder Background
Culture Values
At Risk?
Perception of
Risk?
Interest Level Misconceptions
Level of Knowledge
Needs Issues
Concerns
Best Messenger and
Communication
medium
1.Local
public/conc
erned
citizen
There is a polarized
attitude with
regards to public
interest on the
ways they manage
The risk to the
public is high
enough to raise
their perception
of familiarity of
This group has
high interest
level to know
the impact of
biological and
They have high
misconception level
with regards to the
impact of chemical
hazards but has low
Create awareness
among public
citizen on the
possible effect of
biological and
This is a vital role for
risk communication
specialist to deliver
any factual
information directly
inaqueoussolutionunder
ultravioletlight.
3. CHLORITE Generally,chlorite ionis
predominantdisinfectionby-
product.
As perEPA guidelines,the maximumresidual disinfectantlevel is
1.0mg/L. The effectof thischemical hasnodirectimpacton adult
drinkingwaterconsumptionsince the estimatedlevelsdepends
on individual conditionforeachcommunity.However,inchildren
theyhave a greaterchance to experience the hazardsince they
consume more waterthanregularadult.
4. CHLORATE A disinfectionby-productif
maximumfeedingdose of
chlorine dioxide exceeds.
WHO provisional guidelinesthatlimitschemical exposure to
0.7mg/L. Chlorate maybe linktooxidativedamage toRedblood
Cell.
19. 19
their local water
source. Here in
lower mainland of
B.C. such as Metro
Vancouver,
chlorination of
water is not big
deal to the people.
In contrast to
outside B.C. such
as in Fraser Valley
and interior area,
they tend to
preserve the purity
of their water
without using
chemical
disinfection
process such as
chlorine. They are
more concern on
the danger of
chlorination
process than the
benefits of
disinfecting their
local water source.
the biological
and chemical
hazards
involved in this
situation.
chemical
hazards
involved.
knowledge on the
possible worst effect
of a biological
hazard that can
influence human
health.
chemical hazards
on human health.
to public by using a
conduit such as media
outfits like television,
radio, internet or
print form
(newspapers).
20. 20
2.Ministry
of Health
(British
Columbia)
An advocate of
public health of
which they are the
one who creates
and implements
the legislative Act
to protect the
interest of the
public. This is a
highly structured
organization with
protocols that they
follow. They have
yearly finite budget
that they allocate
in each services
they promote.
They are highly
at risk since
they are the one
who will
monitor and
implement
certain
regulations to
protect public
welfare. They
are
knowledgeable
with the
biological and
chemical risk
that may evolve
that is why they
focus on the
possible impact
of this risk to
human health.
They have a
high interest
level since
they are the
one who
implements
the law and
how this
legislation
impacts on the
overall
protection of
public health.
The health
department has a
high knowledge with
regards to possible
impact of any
biological and
chemical hazards.
They coordinate and
communicate
provincial initiatives
that may impact
drinking water.
Surveillance and
monitoring of
drinking water
system that may
affect safety and
interest of public
health.
Either of this
following personnel
(Provincial Health
Officer/Medical
Health Officer/
Drinking water
officers) can act as the
messenger and
medium
communication of
which they follow a
set of guidelines and
directives respecting
drinking water
protection. The
Minister of health
established this
protocol in relation to
the Drinking Water
Protection Act and in
addition conforming
to Public Health Act.
3.Health
Authorities
such as
Provincial
Health
They are health
officers who works
in a highly
structured
organization with a
They are highly
at risk group
since they are
the one who
enforce the
They have high
interest level
since they
provide
interventions
They have high level
of knowledge in
implementing the
Drinking water
guidelines since they
Upholding public
interest to have a
safe and reliable
drinking water by
enforcing and
B.C. Drinking Water
Health Authority:
1. Fraser Health
2. Interior Health
21. 21
Officer,
Medical
Health
officers or
Drinking
water
officers
set of protocols to
follow. They are
the one who
govern and enforce
the Drinking Water
protection act by
following a
framework such as
Drinking Water
Program. Their
mantra is to ensure
a safe, reliable and
accessible drinking
water for all British
Columbians.
regulation. They
are
knowledgeable
with possible
health hazards
that is why they
are the people
to be contacted
prior to creation
or alteration of
drinking water
systems.
to minimize
health and
safety hazards.
are the one who
issue construction
permits and
operating permits
for local water
operators. This is to
ensure that the
water supplier
create and maintain
a water systemthat
is safe to the public.
implementing
B.C. Drinking
Water Program
3. Island Health
4. Northern Health
5. Vancouver Coastal
Health
Communicating their
advisories thru
various media such as
print, radio, television
and internet.
4.Water
system
owners/
distributors
such as
Municipal
or City
Administrat
ion
Here in lower
mainland such as
Metro Vancouver,
chlorination
process is part of
the water
treatment to
supply a safe and
potable drinking
water. As you go
inwards such as
Chilliwack area,
As owners of
water system
you have a low
level of risk but
you have a high
moral
responsibility to
prevent future
risk outcome.
They have a
high interest
level to
provide their
customers a
safe and
potable water
supply.
Some water
distributors has a
misconception on
the highly toxic
effect of chlorine
without realizing the
potential benefit of
it. Some are against
to the new
implementing
guidelines of B.C.
Drinking Water
Awareness
campaign on the
long term
benefits of
chlorination
process and
possible
collaboration of
best practices in
rural and urban
management of
drinking water
In Vancouver area,
the water
Administrator is
Metrovancouver.org
who manages major
water facilities and
treatment areas. They
act as a conduit for
municipalities,
stakeholders and
general public in
promoting a safe
22. 22
they are adamant
to apply
chlorination
process because
they want to
preserve the purity
of their water. In
this context, the
city of Chilliwack
implements a
comprehensive
Groundwater
Protection Plan to
maintain the
quality of their
drinking water.
protection Act and
merely contend to
their locally initiated
guidelines such as
protecting their
groundwater supply.
But they have a high
level of knowledge
in terms of
monitoring their
local water source
for chemical and
biological hazards.
supply. water supply in the
entire region.
In interior area such
as Chilliwack- The city
administration
manages their local
water source and
treatment process.
They manage all the
communication
aspect with regards to
the drinking water
quality of the area.
5.B.C. Tap
Alliance
This is an alliance
of different
community and
environmental
organization that
advocates the
protection of
community water
supply watersheds
from exploitation.
This is a unison
Their risk level is
low since they
act as a local
water
management
watch dog. The
responsibility of
ensuring a safe
water supply
lies in the hand
of the Health
They have low
interest level
but will only
rise if there is
an immediate
issue that
affect public
health.
They have moderate
level of knowledge
with the possible
effect of
contaminants but
may increase their
level of
misconceptions if
there is hazard not
familiarwith them
Ensuring the
protection of
local water shed
areas to have a
sustainable water
supply source.
The Risk
Communicator
specialist is the best
person to convey
technical messages
for the common
understanding of all
concerned
stakeholders.
23. 23
effort to have a
collective voice in
raising public
consciousness and
implement change
in the process.
Ministry, Health
authorities and
water system
owners.
6. Comox
valley water
watch
coalition
Promotes citizen
control over water
supplies and
support legislation
with regards to
protecting local
water source.
They are highly
at risk group.
They are
advocate of
public
participation in
implementing
Drinking Water
protection Act.
They perceived
a certain risk
toxic if they are
not familiarwith
it.
Their interest
level is high
since they
campaign for
citizen control
in managing
local water
supply.
They have low level
of Knowledge on the
possible of impact of
contaminants that is
why they harp more
on social
misconception.
The need to
educate this
sector on the
advantages and
disadvantages of
certain water
processes to
provide the
public a safe
drinking water at
source.
The Risk
Communicator
specialist is the best
person to convey
technical messages
for the common
understanding of all
concerned
stakeholder.
7. Media
such as BC1
or CTV news
Magnify any
negative news and
the best medium
to use if you need
to raise the level of
awareness for a
They have a low
level of risk than
the affected
public but they
perceived any
risk as dreaded
They have a
high level of
interest that
will generate
public
attention and
They have a low
level of knowledge
in terms of the
technical aspect of
any biological or
chemical hazard
How to convey
technical
terminologies in
layman
understanding so
that public
This is a vital role of
risk communicator to
correspond effectively
to various media by
updating them an
advisory bulletin with
24. 24
particular hazard
perceived by
others as normal
occurrences. Can
make or break any
government or
business entity if
the issue is not
properly
addressed.
subject matter. media mileage
for some news
personnel.
involved. Their
misconceptions can
be magnified if you
let them out of the
loop in your
communication
process.
confusion will be
addressed
immediately.
regards to perceived
hazard affecting
public health.
8. Risk
Communica
tion
Specialist
Act as a balancing
personnel in
synthesizing all
aspect of the
hazard and ways in
addressing the
issue, if he needs
to raise or
decrease the level
of outrage. He
evaluates the
issues and
prioritize things in
order so that every
stakeholder involve
is in the loop and
The specialist
has a low level
of risk but has
familiarity with
the uncertainty
involved.
He has high
level of
interest since
he acts a
conduit of all
stakeholders
involved in
upholding
drinking water
management.
Initially, he has low
level of knowledge
of the possible
hazards involve but
eventually it will be
high enough for him
to synthesize
everything and
come up with right
communication
strategy to the
public.
Accuracy of data
gathered from
different sources
such as from
stakeholders and
how to evaluate it
fairly and come
up with right
public
communication
strategy.
The communicator
specialist is the best
messenger and
usually they update
the people important
advisories that has
interest on public
health.
25. 25
well informed.
4.2 Benefit & Cost Analysis
Benefits: The benefits of protecting drinking water at source is enormous especially to the health of the public.
Providing the community a safe and reliable tap water has an overall impact on the well-being of each individual. A
safe clean drinking water has been said to help body’s overall metabolism process such as aiding the digestion
process, thermal regulation and protection from dehydration. The projected benefits has a huge impact if from the
start control measures are in place and frequently been evaluated when providing a safe and reliable drinking water
to the people.
Costs: The cost in providing a safe and reliable water may be initially high during the construction of the water system
but it has a huge impact on minimizing the direct cost when public health is at risk. The risk of having adverse health
illness due to compromised water system may impact the government’s budget on healthcare services. But the long
term effect of investing sufficient capital infrastructure budget may outweigh the cost over the benefit it will provide
in preventing and protecting future health risk that may affect the society.
Table 5: Risk, Cost & Benefit Analysis
Risks Hard Cost Soft Cost Hard Benefit Soft Benefit Acceptable? Yes
or No
& Explain
1.Public Health
Risk by biological
exposure
These are the potential
adverse health effects if
biological hazards are
the main source of
Some harmful health
effects reduced the
quality of life of a
person that may
Controlling the
eminent danger
of biological risk
to public health is
Controlling the risk
may increase
people lifespan by
giving them quality
No. Risking the
health of the public
is not acceptable
and proper
26. 26
contamination:
gastrointestinal illness
such as diarrhea and
nausea, life threatening
effect on children and
elderly that may involve
kidneys and liver, people
with weak immune
systems may develop
serious illness (multiple-
organ damage
syndrome), and some
may develop arthritis
and a rare disease called
Guillain-Barre syndrome
that affects the nerves of
the body. The damaging
health effects cost a
tremendous burden on
the health care system
and may deplete the
budget of our Health
Ministry. In effect, there
is a domino effect on
taxation by gradually
increasing government
tax to fund an increasing
cost of healthcare
delivery to the public. In
addition, there is a direct
effect on economic loss
affect his
relationship to
others or directly to
his family members.
promoting the
general health of
the people to the
fullest. As we
know, less sick
days means
greater
productivity that
contributes to
economic activity.
drinking water that
is needed in daily
body’s processes.
We know our body
needs water
constantly and part
of building block in
balancing the
chemistry inside.
guidelines should
be in place to
protect the
interest and
welfare of the
people.
27. 27
if productivity of a
person is reduced due to
acute or chronic illness.
2.Public Health
Risk by chemical
exposure
The maximum feed dose
of chlorine dioxide
should not be exceeded
and if not an adverse
health effect may
happen. Possible effects
such as neurobehavioral
damage and colloid
depletion in thyroid
glands that may lead to
cancer. An added burden
to healthcare systemand
productivity loss to
individuals affected.
A direct effect on
the quality of life of
affected individual.
An indirect effect on
family’s caregiver.
Controlling the
amount of
chemical at
maximum
acceptable
concentration or
free chlorine
concentration
eliminates the
risk of adverse
health. This
create a healthy
community
drinking a safe
and potable
water at source.
If we control the
chemical risk, it
allays the fear of
unknown and
harping the
benefits of
chlorination to
combat biological
contamination.
Proper water
quality monitoring
increases the
longevity of a
particular
community.
No. Risking the
health of the public
is not right that is
why there are
health guidelines
on the maximum
amount of chlorine
in drinking water
and ways of
monitoring the
chemical residue in
daily, weekly and
monthly basis.
4.3 Acceptability of Risk
The risk is unacceptable at any level that is why there are decision steps to consider when responding if adverse
observations or test has been reported. Steps such as verifying a certain information if it is accurate by coordinating
with stakeholders like the water systemoperators and accredited testing laboratories. Having a standard protocol or
emergency plan is vital when addressing situation such as adverse event in water quality.
28. 28
Step 5: Risk Control
Table 6: Risk Control Options
Risk Control Options Optimal
Choice √
1. Levels of Public notice notification from appropriate health authorities- If it is a Water quality advisory,
boiling water notice for affected residents or do not use water warning.
Yes for short
term plan
2. Provision for free water bottle allocation for distressed residents especially the immunocompromised
individuals.
Yes for short
term plan
3. Biological Hazard monitoring by approved laboratory testing centers.
Yes for short
to medium
term plan
4. Chemical Hazard monitoring initiated by local water systemowners.
Yes for short
to medium
term plan
5. Provision for water chlorination systemif the local water supplier is not into it yet.
Yes for
medium term
plan
6. Provision for local filtration system if the local water supplier is only using chlorination process. No- this is for
long term
plan if budget
permits
29. 29
7. Construction of groundwater well system as alternative source of water supply if local water system
fails.
No-this is for
long term
plan if budget
permits
The choice of risk control options are based on the short, medium and long-term objective of mitigating the risk. The
hierarchy that were listed are based on circumstances and eminent danger of the risk involved. The above options that were
mentioned focus on the preventive and remedial action to reduce health risk to the public in a particular time-frame. The
listed items consider the cost of each control options ranging from nothing to hundred dollars in implementing those
alternatives. Collaboration and involvement of stakeholders are vital in implementing this control options and making it
successful during adverse event that affects the water quality. Engineering and substitution control can be recommended if
all stakeholders are informed of the control options and probable impact on the overall delivery of safe and reliable drinking
water. The writer believes each option has a positive merits and relevance based on the need of the affected residents.
Step 6: Implementation & Monitoring
List steps of implementation and monitoring
A. Short term action plan and monitoring
1. Activation of emergency management plan (emergency response and contingency plan) by the local
water systemowners in coordination with local public official and health authorities to convey the
present situation for the public to know the true situation of their local water supply.
2. Involvement of accredited and independent laboratory to test the biological and chemical
component of the hazard involve to validate the issue that the local water supply does not meet the
Canadian drinking standard.
3. A substantial release of information from Ministry of Health with regards to Drinking Water quality
to advise the public in various degree of notification. For example, if it is a water quality advisory,
30. 30
boil water notice or do not use water notice. This will help in minimizing public confusion and
possible hysteria with regards to the possible effect of the hazard involved.
B. Short to medium term action plan and monitoring
1. Constant collaboration of Health authorities with the drinking water providers by educating and
training water systemoperators for safe and efficient delivery of water for public consumption.
2. Health authorities should encourage current water system operators to upgrade their systems,
standards and processes by accomplishing environmental operator certification program.
3. Water system operators should be open and transparent in their reports such as the Daily task
record form so that potential risk will be subdue immediately at source.
4. The operators should accomplish their daily water treatment monitoring in a factual manner to
appreciate the trends in overall water quality.
5. Monthly review of water quality monitoring report to detect possible outbreak due to seasonal
changes and environmental factors that may affect the drinking water quality.
6. Monthly audit of water bacteriological testing report in terms of how the approved laboratory
testing centers analyze their samples and how local water owners comply in water sampling
protocol.
7. The local water operators should furnish the health authorities their monthly water chemical
monitoring and water quality assurance report so that any possible water quality problems may find
answers and solutions in reducing the possible impact of this chemical hazard.
8. Health authorities should find ways on how to collaborate with local water operators to add
chlorination process in their water system operation to lessen the risk of biological hazard and its
impact on human health.
C. Long term Action Plan and monitoring
1. If the current water operator has no filtration treatment, the health authorities should find ways in
upgrading their water treatment process of which public-private partnership may help in raising the
capital expenditure needed for that proposed project.
31. 31
2. Construction of alternative ground water well as source of local water supply during emergency
situation, if the current system fail. This may need the help of private entity in partnership with local
water operators to raise the funds needed in accomplishing this project.
32. 32
Risk Information Library
TAB A – DETAILED SPECIFICATIONOF VERIFIED ISSUES RELATED TO THE PROBLEM
1. http://www.nanaimodailynews.com/news/nation-world/facts-about-e-coli-the-reason-for-the-winnipeg-water-scare-1.1745083
2. http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/e-coli-bacteria-sparks-chilliwack-water-chlorination-fight-1.1374513
3. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/british-columbia/source-of-e-coli-eludes-reservoir-operators/article1378227/
4. http://www.gov.mb.ca/health/publichealth/factsheets/campylobacteria.pdf
5. http://www.health.gov.bc.ca/protect/dwpublications.html#dwog
6. http://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/dwq/chemicals/chlorateandchlorite0505.pdf
TAB B – REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
1. http://www.eab.gov.ab.ca/dec/Hrudey%20Drinking%20Water%20Disease%20Outbreaks.pdf
2. http://www.oliver.ca/water-quality
3. http://journal.cpha.ca/index.php/cjph/article/viewFile/268/268
4. http://www.healthlinkbc.ca/healthfiles/pdf/hfile49a.pdf
5. http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/ewh-semt/pubs/water-eau/sum_guide-res_recom/index-eng.php#fn_t2b1
6. http://www.cdc.gov/parasites/giardia/epi.html
7. http://www.cdc.gov/ecoli/general/index.html/
33. 33
8. http://www.cdc.gov/nczved/divisions/dfbmd/diseases/campylobacter/
9. http://www.cdc.gov/parasites/crypto/gen_info/index.html
10. http://www.bccdc.ca/NR/rdonlyres/114BFA11-AFCB-4885-B3BF-62AFFE749C4C/0/PHMRL_TestingSaferDWinBCJan2006.pdf
11. www.atsdr.cdc.gov/ToxProfiles/tp160-c6.pdf
12. http://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxfaqs/TF.asp?id=581&tid=108#bookmark10
TAB C- MEETING OF THE MINUTES
SAMPLE FORM
MEETING MINUTES RECORDING FORM
MEETING NUMBER: ________
DATE: ___________
TIME: ___________
PLACE:__________
MEMBERS: _______
SECRETARY IN-CHARGE:_________
RISKMANAGEMENT TEAM MEMBERS PRESENT:______________
RISKMANAGEMENT TEAM MEMBERS ABSENT:_______________
GUESTS PARTICIPANT:_______________
34. 34
AGENDA ITEM NO. DISCUSSION ACTION BY
NEXT MEETING DATE: __________
TIME: __________
PLACE:_____________
SIGNED:____________
__________________________ ________________________
STAKEHOLDERCO-CHAIR MANAGEMENT CO-CHAIR
TAB D- DAILY TASK RECORD
SAMPLE FORM
Name of in-charge:__________
Date of the Task: ____________
SAMPLE TASK SAMPLE NOTES
1. Collectaseriesof free chlorine residual
sample andrecordon monthlyoperation
report.
The free chlorine residualshouldbe atleast0.8
mg/L at the entrypointto the system.
35. 35
TAB E- RISK MANAGEMENTTEAM CONTACTINFORMATION
NAME OF RISKMGMT
MEMBER
POSITION CONTACTNUMBER CONTACTADDRESS
1. MR/MS X DRINKINGWATER OFFICER
2. MR/MS X PUBLIC HEALTH ENGINEERS
3. MR/MS X MEDICAL HEALTH OFFICERS FRASERHEALTH
AUTHORITY
4. MR/MS X CITY/MUNICIPALMAYOR
5. MR/MS X WATER SYSTEM OWNER
6. MR/MS X MICROBIOLOGIST
7. MR/MS X B.C. TAPWATER ALLIANCE
REPRESENTATIVE
8. MR/MS X COMOX VALLEY WATER
WATCH GROUP
REPRESENTATIVE
9. MR/MS X BC1 NEWSOR CBC NEWS
REPRESENTATIVE
36. 36
TAB F- DAILY WATER TREATMENT MONITORING FORM
DATE TIME TREATMENT METHOD MONITORING RESULT INITIALS OF IN-
CHARGE
CHEMICAL AMOUNT CALIBRATION LEVEL PH
TAB G- MONTHLY WATER QUALITY MONITORING REPORT
>FORM FROMWATER SYSTEM OWNERSAND FROMB.C.MINISTRY OF HEALTH
TAB H- MONTHLY BACTERIOLOGICAL WATER QUALITY MONITORING REPORT
>FORM FROMAPPROVEDLABORATORYTESTINGCENTERS
> TO BE COLLECTED FROMLOCAL WATER SYSTEM OWNERS
TAB I- MONTHLY WATER CHEMICAL MONITORING REPORT
>FORM FROMLOCAL WATER SYSTEM OWNERS
TAB J- MONTHLY WATER QUALITY ASSURANCE REPORT
COLLATED FROMLOCAL WATER SYSTEM OWNERS
