Water quality monitoring and incident management system
The specialist evaluates the water or wastewater quality signal along with the sample and object information. The responsible team sees the assigned actions and the progress of the investigation.
The location of the sample, the method used, the limit applied, and the action taken on the result are not linked to the same assessment. Checking quality management requires a re-collection of facts and an interpretation of why the decision was made.
How the solution works
- A sample or monitoring report shall indicate the location, time, method of measurement and reliability of the data.
- The responsible professional evaluates the threshold and known risk applied to a specific process.
- The response framework initiates the required verification or safeguard and identifies potential impacts.
- The new study and technical action update the estimate and the overall progress of the mandated information.
- The completion decision preserves a sufficient basis for verification, the measures adopted and the remaining monitoring.
Key challenges
- The basis for quality assessment and action is not traced
- Quality risk does not reach the required conservation action
Solution capabilities
Sample and monitoring data
Location, time of pick-up and result, method, unit and correction remain traceable.
Proper application
Drinking water, process control and wastewater discharge requirements are treated separately.
Risk and action course
Staff see the monitoring report, the verification result and the laboratory conclusion separately. If action is needed while awaiting investigation, the responsible principal is appointed.
Assessment of potential impacts
A true process and network connection is used and the extent of impact that has not yet been verified is noted.
Harmonized information
The quality conclusion or precautionary clause is communicated to the authorised general incident communication.
Evidence of the decision
The information held at a specific time, the instrument chosen and the basis for completion are preserved.
Business context
- The basis for quality assessment and action is not traced
- The location of the sample, the method used, the limit applied, and the action taken on the result are not linked to the same assessment. Checking quality management requires a re-collection of facts and an interpretation of why the decision was made.
- Quality risk does not reach the required conservation action
- Laboratory or equipment alert is not linked to the location of the sample, the activities that took place at the time and potentially affected customers. This results in delays in specialist assessment, precautionary actions or customer information.
- The quality issue has a clear course of examination
- It is important for the customer to get verified information about the quality situation significant to his service. The results associated with the sample and location help professionals evaluate the data, assign actions and match the message. The service team can respond according to the approved conclusion, maintaining a connection to the ongoing investigation.
Core features
- Sample and monitoring data
- Proper application
- Risk and action course
- Assessment of potential impacts
- Harmonized information
- Evidence of the decision
Key integrations
- Laboratories and Measurement Sources
- Sample, method, time, result state and correction history.
- Process and Network Data
- Relevant sample location interface, mode and reliable basis for potential exposure.
- Application and response documents
- A condition for a specific parameter and an authorized set course of action.
- Coordination of the incident and work
- A security or repair measure, notices and approval of the action performed are provided.
Potential impact (%)
The ranges indicate an illustrative relative change in the metric under the stated assumptions. Results depend on the starting position and actual use of the solution. Percentages for different metrics must not be added together.
Time to required protection action
2–12%Decreasing
This illustrative scenario assumes that the controls described can address 10-30% of discrepancies. That share is assumed to fall by 20-40%. Company data is needed to verify both the addressable share and the resulting change.
It is measured from receiving the signal requiring the action to actually starting it, separating different risk situations.
Time to collect water quality survey data
16–42%Decreasing
This illustrative scenario assumes that 40-70% of information searches and repeated cross-checks can be addressed. That share is assumed to fall by 40-60%. Company data is needed to verify both the addressable workload and the resulting change.
The employee's time is measured to find the documents needed for a specific inspection and to restore how the decision was made.
Conditional calculation scenarios. The assumptions have not been validated against client measurements.
When this solution is relevant
- Network measurements and laboratory results are obtained at different times, and additional checks are manually administered.
- Once a water quality problem is identified, it is difficult to quickly identify which customers are supplied with water from the affected part of the network.
Implementation requirements
Water quality specialists approve response plans, sample data requirements, and procedures for assessing equipment alerts. The system must provide for early precautionary actions, informing the responsible personnel, and registering each action before the end of the incident.
Further development options
- Applying additional groups of parameters following verification of their method and response basis
- Use of quality event history to refine specific controls