Survey Respondents. AwwaRF Project 2930 Utility EMS Survey

Transcription

1 AwwaRF Project 2930 Utility EMS Survey The project team conducted a web-based survey to assess industry professionals current views about key issues facing drinking water utilities and evaluate how an EMS might help them manage these issues more effectively. The survey results are intended to provide additional background to the project team and the utility workgroup on drinking water utilities unique needs, priorities, and challenges. The raw survey results are available upon request in the form of an Excel spreadsheet. The survey was sent to professionals in the drinking water industry with knowledge about current issues facing drinking water utilities such as regulatory compliance, product and service quality, and environmental performance. In addition, we surveyed professionals from both within and outside the industry that have direct experience in implementing EMS for public utilities. The survey is not intended to produce statistically significant results. We used a web-based survey and informal distribution of an link to the survey to reach respondents. We can assume that respondents with experience or interest in EMS were more likely to take the time to click on the link and take the survey. The survey group was culled from a variety of sources, including contacts that the project team and its extended contact group identified as potentially interested in EMS issues or likely to have been involved in activities that would be related to EMS programs. Even given these acknowledged limitations, the survey represents an important addition to the knowledge base, given the very limited information related to EMS programs within the water industry, which is primarily limited to the case examples of the few utilities, such as the City of Charleston, which have implemented EMS programs. Survey Respondents As of June 6 th, 2004, 349 people had taken the survey. Table A-1 shows a breakdown of the respondents by the organizations they represent. R:\ACTIVE PROJECT FILES\ECRO - EVL\2930JW \WEB SITE\SUPPORTING RESOURCES\UTILITY EMS SURVEY_2930.DOC 1

2 TABLE A-1 Survey Respondents Organization Type Number of Respondents Drinking Water Utility - Public 64 Drinking Water Utility - Private 11 Combined Drinking Water and Wastewater Utility 23 Public Works Department 35 Wastewater Utility 22 City / County Government 178 Other 16 Total 349 Of the drinking water utility respondents (from public, private, and combined DW / WW utilities), the breakdown of respondents by job function is shown in Table A-2 below. TABLE A-2 Breakdown of Respondents by Job Function Job function Senior management 53 Facility manager 5 Middle management-environmental management/compliance 12 Middle management-treatment operations 7 Middle management-other 12 Facility operations 0 EMS coordinator 1 City manager 3 Other 4 No response 1 Total 98 Summary of final results The survey assessed respondents views on key issues facing drinking water utilities, incentives for implementing an EMS, experience in implementing an EMS, and the benefits of EMS. Responses to selected questions are shown in the graphs below. In some cases, we present the responses of drinking water utilities only. In others, when they might be of interest, we include responses from respondents from wastewater utilities, public works departments, and city / county government as well. R:\ACTIVE PROJECT FILES\ECRO - EVL\2930JW \WEB SITE\SUPPORTING RESOURCES\UTILITY EMS SURVEY_2930.DOC 2

3 FIGURE A-1 Population Served Population served DW Utilities (Public, Private, and Combined DW / WW utilities) Less than 2,999 3,000-9,999 10,000-49,999 50,000-99, , , , ,999 1,000,000 or more R:\ACTIVE PROJECT FILES\ECRO - EVL\2930JW \WEB SITE\SUPPORTING RESOURCES\UTILITY EMS SURVEY_2930.DOC 3

4 FIGURE A-2 Number of Employees Number of employees 30 DW Utilities (Public, Private, and Combined DW / WW utilities) less than ,000 or more R:\ACTIVE PROJECT FILES\ECRO - EVL\2930JW \WEB SITE\SUPPORTING RESOURCES\UTILITY EMS S URVEY_2930.DOC 4

5 FIGURE A-3 Top Three Issues or Challenges What are the top three issues or challenges facing your organization? DW Utilities (Public, Private, and Combined DW / WW utilities) Credibility with stakeholders Competitiveness Environmental performance Meeting regulatory requirements Exceeding regulatory requirements Managing capital assets/infrastructure Internal communications Interdepartmental coordination Knowledge management Product quality Data management and recordkeeping Emergency preparedness Security Succession planning N/A Other (please describe) R:\ACTIVE PROJECT FILES\ECRO - EVL\2930JW \WEB SITE\SUPPORTING RESOURCES\UTILITY EMS S URVEY_2930.DOC 5

6 FIGURE A-4 Top Three Activities that have a Potential to Impact the Environment What are the top three activities conducted by your organization that have the potential to impact the environment? 10 9 DW Utilities (Public, Private, and Combined DW / WW utilities) Energy consumption Laboratory waste management Landscaping and grounds maintenance Maintenance waste management Office operations (computers/paper/etc.) Operation of treatment processes and equipment Residuals management and disposal Source water protection and watershed management Tank and reservoir construction and maintenance Transportation and fleet maintenance Use, storage, and disposal of hazardous chemicals Used parts disposal Water conservation programs Water main construction repair and replacement N/A Other (please describe) R:\ACTIVE PROJECT FILES\ECRO - EVL\2930JW \WEB SITE\SUPPORTING RESOURCES\UTILITY EMS S URVEY_2930.DOC 6

7 FIGURE A-5 Scenarios Most Likely to Cause a Regulatory Non-Compliance Which of the following potential scenarios is most likely to cause a regulatory non-compliance at your organization? Lack of training 5% N/A 2% Other 5% Internal communication failure 4% Inadequate records / documentation 8% Failure to follow proper procedure 25% Equipment failure 51% DW Utilities (Public, Private, and Combined DW / WW utilities) R:\ACTIVE PROJECT FILES\ECRO - EVL\2930JW \WEB SITE\SUPPORTING RESOURCES\UTILITY EMS S URVEY_2930.DOC 7

8 FIGURE A-6 Scenarios Most Likely to Lead to a Public Relations Problem Which of the following stakeholder groups do your existing public relations and communications activities reach? (Select all that apply.) 10 9 DW Utilities (Public, Private, and Combined DW / WW utilities) Board Customers Environmental groups Consumer groups Local government officials Regulators Facility neighbors Community groups Outdoor recreation groups Schools N/A Other (please describe) R:\ACTIVE PROJECT FILES\ECRO - EVL\2930JW \WEB SITE\SUPPORTING RESOURCES\UTILITY EMS S URVEY_2930.DOC 8

9 FIGURE A-7 Scenarios Most Likely to Lead to a Public Relations Problem Which of the following scenarios could most likely lead to a potential public relations problem for your organization or potentially damage your credibility with stakeholders and customers? (Select three) 10 9 DW Utilities (Public, Private, and Combined DW / WW utilities) Compliance problem Financial mismanagement Misperceptions about risk Public health incident Quality issues (color, taste, odor) Rate increase N/A Other (please describe) R:\ACTIVE PROJECT FILES\ECRO - EVL\2930JW \WEB SITE\SUPPORTING RESOURCES\UTILITY EMS S URVEY_2930.DOC 9

10 FIGURE A-8 Involvement in Activities Related to EMS and Quality Management Is your organization involved in any of the following activities related to EMS and quality management? (Select all that apply) 10 9 DW Utilities (Public, Private, and Combined DW / WW utilities) American Public Works Association's (APWA) Management Accreditation Program Balanced Scorecard Eco-Management and Audit Scheme (EMAS) ISO 9001 ISO Malcolm Baldrige Award National Biosolids Partnership Partnership for Safe Drinking Water QualServe U.S. EPA EMS for Local Government Initiative Hazard Analysis Critical Control Point (HACCP) N/A Other (please describe) R:\ACTIVE PROJECT FILES\ECRO - EVL\2930JW \WEB SITE\SUPPORTING RESOURCES\UTILITY EMS S URVEY_2930.DOC 10

11 FIGURE A-9 Efforts to Develop and Implement an EMS How would you describe your effort to develop and implement an EMS? Our EMS is operational 9% N/A 18% Still under development 21% We are not developing an EMS 36% Just getting started We are hesitant about implementing an EMS 6% DW Utilities (Public, Private, and Combined DW / WW utilities) R:\ACTIVE PROJECT FILES\ECRO - EVL\2930JW \WEB SITE\SUPPORTING RESOURCES\UTILITY EMS S URVEY_2930.DOC 11

12 FIGURE A-10 Issues Causing Hesitation in Implementing an EMS Which of the following issues (if any) are causing your organization to hesitate in implementing an EMS? (Select all that apply) Drinking Water Utilities (Public, Private, Combined DW/WW) Public Works Departments City/County Government Wastewater Utilities Too many other high-priority activities underway at the moment Not enough resources to devote to it EMS is too complicated We don't have the necessary inhouse expertise Not clear what the benefits would be to my organization N/A Other (please describe) R:\ACTIVE PROJECT FILES\ECRO - EVL\2930JW \WEB SITE\SUPPORTING RESOURCES\UTILITY EMS S URVEY_2930.DOC 12

13 FIGURE A-11 Reasons for Implementing an EMS If you have or are developing an EMS, why did your organization decide to implement the EMS? (Select all that apply) 10 9 DW Utilities (Public, Private, and Combined DW / WW utilities) To improve internal communication To improve understanding of roles and responsibilities to achieve organizational mission and priorities To improve operational effectiveness To improve product and service quality To improve ability to maintain regulatory compliance To improve ability to engage and educate stakeholders To improve ability to understand and manage risks To improve ability to manage information, documents, and records To improve employee morale To reduce costs Other (please describe) R:\ACTIVE PROJECT FILES\ECRO - EVL\2930JW \WEB SITE\SUPPORTING RESOURCES\UTILITY EMS S URVEY_2930.DOC 13

14 FIGURE A-12 Actual Benefits Realized from EMS Implementation If you have or are developing an EMS, what actual benefits have you seen as a result of your EMS implementation effort so far? (Select all that apply) Drinking Water Utilities (Public, Private, Combined DW/WW) Public Works Departments City/County Government Wastewater Utilities Improved internal communication Improved understanding of roles and responsibilities for achieving organizational mission and priorities Improved operational effectiveness Improved product and service quality Improved ability to maintain regulatory compliance Improved ability to engage and educate stakeholders Improved ability to understand and manage risks Improved ability to manage information, documents, and records. Improved employee morale Reduced costs Other (please describe) R:\ACTIVE PROJECT FILES\ECRO - EVL\2930JW \WEB SITE\SUPPORTING RESOURCES\UTILITY EMS S URVEY_2930.DOC 14

15 FIGURE A-13 Barriers and Challenges Faced in Implementing an EMS If you have or are developing an EMS, which of the following barriers or challenges have you faced in implementing your EMS? (Select all that apply) Drinking Water Utilities (Public, Private, Combined DW/WW) Public Works Departments City/County Government Wastewater Utilities 6 2 Communications barriers among departments within the organization EMS is not seen as a top priority EMS is not well integrated with core activities EMS is too complicated We don't have the necessary in-house expertise Inadequate resources (staff, funding, etc.) assigned Lack of understanding of what an EMS is and why we are doing it Lack of support from key staff Lack of support from senior management None Other (please describe) R:\ACTIVE PROJECT FILES\ECRO - EVL\2930JW \WEB SITE\SUPPORTING RESOURCES\UTILITY EMS S URVEY_2930.DOC 15

16 FIGURE A-14 Most Useful/Valuable Components of EMS If you have or are developing an EMS, what is the most useful/valuable component of your EMS? (Select one) 45% 35% 25% 2 15% 5% DW Utilities (includes public, private, and combined DW / WW Utilities) Public Works Departments Wastewater Utilities City/County Manager Policy statement Environmental aspects/impacts Goals/objectives/targets Performance measurement Preventive and corrective action Communication and public involvement Quality management (i.e. identification of key activiti.. Training Management review Other R:\ACTIVE PROJECT FILES\ECRO - EVL\2930JW \WEB SITE\SUPPORTING RESOURCES\UTILITY EMS S URVEY_2930.DOC 16

17 FIGURE A-15 Status of Independent or Third-Party Verification/Certification If you have or are developing an EMS, what is the status of your efforts to obtain independent or third-party verification/certification of your EMS? DW Utilities (includes public, private, and joint) Public Works Departments Wastewater Utilities City/County Manager Achieved third party verification/certification Actively pursuing third party verification/certification Considering pursuing third party verification/certification Not considering pursuing third party verification/certification N/A R:\ACTIVE PROJECT FILES\ECRO - EVL\2930JW \WEB SITE\SUPPORTING RESOURCES\UTILITY EMS S URVEY_2930.DOC 17

18 FIGURE A-16 Status of Independent or Third-Party Verification/Certification Which third-party party verification/certification standards have you achieved or have you considered? (Select all that apply) Drinking Water Utilities (Public, Private, Combined DW/WW) Public Works Departments City/County Government Wastewater Utilities ISO National Biosolids Partnership State recognition program Other (please describe) R:\ACTIVE PROJECT FILES\ECRO - EVL\2930JW \WEB SITE\SUPPORTING RESOURCES\UTILITY EMS S URVEY_2930.DOC 18