ITIKI is a Fountaine Pajot Helia 44 Catamaran, currently cruising the Med. This is our Water Safety Plan.

1. Water on Water
ITIKI’s Water Safety Plan
All you need to H2(kn)O(w)
Author: Lynda Shelley
Co-Author: Dr Annette Davison
Date: 9 Feb 2020

2. ITIKI’s water safety plan (WSP)
The aim of a water safety plan (WSP) is to
consistently ensure the safety and acceptability of
a drinking-water supply.
We have been inspired by WHO(1) guidelines in
analysing our water system and preparing our WSP.
“The most effective means of consistently ensuring
the safety of a drinking-water supply is through the
use of a comprehensive risk assessment and risk
management approach that encompasses all steps
in water supply from catchment to consumer.”

3. Key steps to developing a water safety plan
Assemble a team
Describe the process
Identify the hazards & assess the risks
Define control measures
Implement the plan & evaluate its effectiveness
Ongoing review and revision of the plan

4. Our WSP Team
Our able team came
together on-site for 5 days
in September 2019, in
Gocek Bay in Turkey.
While it’s important to
ensure your team is
suitably qualified and
experienced, these days
you have to take what you
can get…
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Annette
Lynda
Keith
Steve
Team Qualifications
Degrees Diplomas Other

5. Annette
Chief Risk
Assessor
Lynda
Chief Risk
Manager &
Author
Keith
Chief Desal
Operator
Steve
Chief
observer
ITIKI’s
Water Safety
Team
“Trust me, I’m a Dr”
“I can’t taste the gin”
“You guys are mad!”
“Let’s just go sailing”

6. Making water is a simple process, right?
1. It rains
2. I don’t have any information
about this bit

7. Description of ITIKI’s water supply system
A full description of the water
supply and storage system can be
found here and is illustrated in the
flow chart following. Fortunately
ITIKI’s system is fairly simple.
There are 3 main streams of
supply to consider……
1. Town or Dock water – essentially the
town supply, via the marina infrastructure,
wherever we happen to be
2. Desalinated water – as generated
and stored on board from the
seawater we are floating in
3. Seawater – as used directly on
the boat for hosing certain areas

8. Marine
Catch-
ment
Sea-
water
Title: Conceptual flow
diagram: ITIKI Water
Supply System
Version: 1.0
Created: 23/09/2019
Modified: 24/1/2020
Controller: Lynda Shelley
Pump
Tank 1
(350 L)
High
Pressure
Pump
Reverse
Osmosis
(x 2 mem-
branes, in
series)
Kitchen
Potable
Tap
Bathroom
Sink /
Shower
Outdoor
Shower
Brinestream
Product
water
Washing
Machine
5 (or 1)
micron
Filter
Toilet
Flushing
Hose
Down
Pre-
filter 5
micron
Lift
Pump
Town
Water
Pre-
filter
5
micron
Filter
Garden
Hose
Connec
tion
Optional
Tank 2
(350 L)
Line
Rainman®DesalSystem
DockWaterSystem
Handover Point
Handover Point (conditions
depend on agreement with
marina)
Marina
Infra-
structure
Kitchen
Rinse
Tap
Mesh
Strainer
Hot
water
(45 L)
Key
Triangle – storage
Circle – operation
Arrow – transport
Blue line – when
required / available
Itiki
Other

9. Identify and describe the hazards
Our aim is to describe what could go
wrong at each point in the overall
process train, in terms of hazards and
hazardous events.
• Hazards could be physical, biological,
chemical or radiological agents that
can cause harm.
• Hazardous events are those events
that introduce a hazard or fail to
remove a hazard from the water
supply.
We have restricted our focus to the
desal and dock-water systems, because
these systems impact on drinking
water.

10. Seawater
Our source water is everything……
Town/
Dock
supply
Germs
(e.g. Bacteria, cysts, viruses, helminths)
Salinity
Carbonates (e.g. lime scale)
Nasty tasting/smelling
chemicals (toxic and non-toxic)
Hydrocarbons
(e.g. diesel, petrol, oil, microplastics)
Particles
(e.g. sand, dust, organic matter)
High chlorine
Colour compounds
The “garbage in, garbage out” principle applies here -
our systems for cleaning water have their limitations.
At left is a list of key hazards that we may be worried
about. We note that:
• Some hazards are common to all of our water
sources but some are specific (like high chlorine
levels from the town supply).
• Even with the common hazards, there will be
different concentrations in the different sources,
which will vary by location
• Other chemicals may be introduced from the
fixtures and fittings that were used in constructing
the water supply components of the boat.
• Although official water quality guidelines tell us to
consider radiological hazards, there’s not much we
can do about these (except avoid cruising around
Moruroa and Fangataufa any time soon…)
Boron(2a)

11. DesalSupplyTown/DockSupply
End PointStorageTreatmentCollectionSource
Public town water supply
below EU standards ….who
knows?
What could possibly go wrong…??
Things that have happened to us or others!
Contamination with marina water (the
yucky stuff we are floating in) via the
marina’s or ITIKI’s infrastructure (ie our
garden hose)
Filters failing due to cracked
housing, blockage, faulty
parts/installation, too low/high
pressure etc, letting un-filtered
town water through
Town supply accidentally used by one
of us for drinking (eeew!).
Final inline filter failure (cracked
housing, blockage, faulty parts etc)
letting nasties through.
Contamination with (dodgy) town water (eg
limescale, particularly hot water tank).
Leaching tank materials into stored water.
Corrosion caused by desal water.
“Things” getting into the tanks after water
production
Failure of our RO membranes allowing
contaminants through.
• Eg membrane damage (chemical or
mechanical)
• Inadequate operation & maintenance
(eg backflush, pickling)
Intake fouled with
weed or rubbish
Seawater containing
contaminants could damage
our membranes (eg oil,
detergents, sunscreen,
microplastics)
Health effects of drinking desal. water
(See Appendix #1)

12. What is the Risk?
How do we manage
the Risk
How do we know if the
risk is being managed?
Managing risk is an
ongoing cycle What is the hazard?
When, where or how could it occur?
Which part of the process?
How important is the risk to us? What is
its likelihood of occurring,
What is its impact if it does occur (risk
rating)?
What can we do to prevent
it (mitigation or control)?
What can we do to fix
things if it does happen
(contingency)?
What is the risk rating after
mitigation?
How can we detect if the
problem could or has
occurred?
How do we ensure
standards are maintained?
What improvements are
required?

13. Desal Risk #1 - Dirty source sea-water
Likelihood:
Mitigations (controls)
Restrict water-making to low risk locations & conditions
• >3nm from the coast & populated areas
• >25m depth; <18kts TWS, <1m swell
• Clear of fish farms
• Clear of busy shipping lanes, and other vessels
• Outside tideline, geographically open area
• Clear of visible debris, oil on the surface, turbidity etc
Contingency
• Troubleshoot (per manufacturer’s guidance):
• Stop desal process & backflush; check and clear intakes and
filters; restart process.
• Failure of the RO membranes is catastrophic for the water-maker
and they will need to be replaced
• Test tank water (taste/TDS meter/ Lishtot) to determine the
extent of contamination. It may still be useable for non-drinking
purposes. Otherwise it needs to be completely replaced
• Switch to ”emergency” drinking water supply until clean supply
can be re-established.
Detection: Product water is taste-tested(2b) >30 s after commencing the process
by our Chief Desal Operator and must pass the “taste test” before being cleared
to go in the tank. A TDS meter, or Lishtot(3) could also be used to test product
water at this stage. Product water may be re-tested during and/or at the end of
the desalination process.
Description: Source seawater containing contaminants (eg oil, detergents, sunscreen, chlorine) could damage our membranes
leading to failure of our Rainman® desal unit and allowing contaminants & salinity through to tank water.
Almost Certain
Impact: Major
Risk rating (post
mitigation): Low
Risk rating (before
mitigation): High
Risk Treatment: Additional pre-filters for desalination could be
installed to remove contaminants from sea water. Deploy TDS meter
to check product water quality. No further major improvements
identified. Risk acceptable with current controls.

14. Desal Risk #2 – Inadequate maintenance
Likelihood:
Mitigations (controls):
• Manufacturer recommends backflush within 3 days of
last usage. Backflush water must be pure desal product
and not taken from the tank (which retains some risk of
contamination with chlorine). Our backflush water is
always made fresh prior to starting to fill the tank. It is
placed in a 20L closed gerry can so it is available in case
watermaking needs to be interrupted unexpectedly.
• Pickling is currently only done once per year. It is
important to refer back to the user manual, and carefully
follow the instructions rather than relying on memory.
Contingency
• RO membranes are normally expected to last for around 10
years. Failure of the RO membranes is catastrophic for the
water-maker and they will need to be replaced.
• Test tank water (taste/TDS meter/ Lishtot) to determine the
extent of contamination. It may still be useable for non-
drinking purposes. Otherwise it needs to be completely
replaced
• Switch to ”emergency” drinking water supply until safe
supply can be re-established.
Detection: Product water is tested >30s after commencing the
process by our Chief Desal Operator. Water must pass the “taste
test” before being cleared to go in the tank. A TDS meter, or Lishtot
could also be used to test product water at this stage. Product water
is also re-tested during or at the end of the desal. process.
Description: Inadequate maintenance (eg delayed or insufficient backflush, incorrect pickling for winterisation) could
damage Rainman® RO membranes leading to reduction of water quality and reduced lifespan of the unit.
Possible
Impact: High
Risk rating (post
mitigation): Low
Risk rating (before
mitigation): Moderate
Risk Treatment:
No further major improvements identified. Risk acceptable with
current controls.

15. Desal Risk #3 – Storage tank contamination
Likelihood:
Mitigations (controls):
• Ensure that the relay tap to allow dock water to enter the
storage tanks always remains shut off and deck filling hole
thingy is tightly closed.
• Check specs on tank materials to determine if they are
subject to leaching or corrosion. Replace any that are not.
Metallic fittings in particular are to be avoided.
• Regular visual inspection of tank to ensure no damage, holes
or breaches where ”things” could get in
• Winterisation: Tank is left full with desal to minimize airspace
and hence bacterial contamination.
Contingency:
• Test tank water (visual inspection/taste/TDS meter/Lishtot) to
determine the extent of contamination. It may still be
useable for non-drinking purposes. Otherwise it needs to be
completely replaced
• Deploy 1 or 5 micron filter on tank water if contamination is
limited
• Check, clean or change the filters
• Switch to ”emergency” drinking water supply until safe
supply can be re-established
Detection: Evidence of limescale in the kettle. Change in
taste or colour of water. Testing with TDS or Listot. Blockage
of 1 micron in-line filter (under sink).
Description: Contamination with (dodgy) town water (eg limescale, particularly hot water tank). Leaching of tank materials
into stored water. Corrosion caused by desal water(2c). “Things” getting into tanks after water production (see Appendix #2)
Possible
Impact: Low-Moderate
Risk rating (post
mitigation): Low
Risk rating (before
mitigation): Low
Risk Treatment:
Maintain emergency drinking water. No further major improvements
identified. Risk acceptable with current controls.

16. Dockwater Risk #1 – Contamination or low quality of incoming supply
Likelihood:
Mitigations (controls)
• Inspection of supply pipes (where possible) to determine
whether they pass through the marina water, to determine
potential for contamination
• Ensure ITIKI’s hose does not touch the marine water when
passing between the dock and the boat; Use a separate,
dedicated hose for connecting the dock water supply to the boat
intake
• Regular inspection and annual replacement of dock-water filters
• Deploy the 1 micron inline (kitchen) filter when using dock-water
• Ensure dock-water is never directed to the water tanks
Contingency
• Refrain from using dock-water for drinking
• Depending onTDS readings and “sniff” test results,
decide whether town supply can be used for other
purposes (showering, washing etc)
• Use the “emergency” drinking supply or bottled water
for drinking for the duration of the stay at the marina
Detection: Check dock-water at source withTDS meter.
Check water post filtration withTDS, Lishtot® & “sniff test”.
Description: a. Contamination with marina water (the yucky stuff we are floating in) via the dock’s or
ITIKI’s infrastructure (ie our garden hose). b. Public town water supply below EU standards.
Possible
Impact: Moderate
Risk rating (post
mitigation): Low
Risk rating (before
mitigation): Moderate
Risk Treatment: Consider adding UV treatment to drinking
water. Addition of a Y-valve to allow ease of switching flow though to
the 1 micron filter. No further major improvements identified. Risk
acceptable with current controls.

17. Dockwater Risk #2 – In-line filter failure
Likelihood:
Mitigations (controls)
• Careful regulation of incoming pressure. Check
dockwater pressure before connecting and use dock tap
to regulate input, whilst checking pressure at kitchen tap.
• Adjust ITIKI’s pressure control valve as needed and check
pressure at kitchen tap.
• Regular inspection of engine bay for water (fresh or salt)
and regular inspection of filter housings.
• Regular inspection of filters for colour and potential
blockage. Clean and/or replace as needed.
Contingency
• Switch off dockwater and resume use of tank
water.
• Manually bypass 1micron filter (under sink) if that
housing is cracked.
• Replace housing(s) and/or filters as required
Detection: Fresh water in port engine bay where
primary inline filters are located. Water in cupboard under
sink if 1micron housing has failed. Loss of pressure in the
system.
Description: Filters failing due to cracked housing, blockage, faulty parts/installation, too low/high
pressure etc, letting un-filtered town water through (see appendix #2)
Probable
Impact: Moderate
Risk rating (post
mitigation): Low
Risk rating (before
mitigation): Moderate
Risk Treatment: Consider adding UV treatment to drinking
water. Addition of a Y-valve to allow ease bypass of the 1 micron
filter, if housing cracked. Carry spare filter housings. Risk acceptable
with current controls.

18. Implementation of the Plan (1) – Improvements We’re Going to Make
While this plan largely reflects what we are currently doing, there are a few changes that we plan to make for
improvements and to further reduce risk. These changes will be ratified by the WSP team prior to
implementation…hopefully via another on-site meeting!

19. Implementation of the WSP (2) – Improvements to park
Pre-filters will not be implemented because:
• They are not compatible with the specifications for the Rainman®
system which advises not to place anything between the intake
and the lift pump.
• In our current cruising grounds, it is not difficult to avoid areas
with potential for contamination.
• They will not significantly reduce the risk rating over and above
the practical measures already in place.
UV disinfection is normally installed as the last stage of a
water treatment system (at least in terms of its use on small
vessels), but will not be implemented at this stage because:
• UV treatment requires a power source and the units can generate
considerable heat, which we see as a downside. The installation
location is limited and there is potential for fire risk.
• UV is effective in killing harmful bacteria, protozoans and cysts as
well as disabling most harmful viruses. For me there remains the
“ick factor” of their “remnants” remaining in the water. These
creatures are just as effectively removed by the RO membranes
and also by the 1 micron filter.
• UV does not remove harmful chemicals such as PFOS which is
removed by the 1 micron carbon block filter.
Therefore we feel it is not a necessary addition to our current set up.
There are a number of ideas that we considered but decided to park, as they don’t significantly
change the risk profile, and may have knock-on effects elsewhere in the system.
Desal Risk #1: Additional pre-filters for desalination could
be installed to remove contaminants such as hydrocarbons
or detergents from sea water, prior to desalination.
Dockwater Risk #1 & 2: Consider addition of UV treatment
(disinfection) to the water management system

20. Implementation of the WSP (3) – Extra monitoring to park
Lishtot TDP® testing device
Desal Risk #1 (& others): More extensive LishtotTDP®(3) testing of product water.
While we have a Lishtot device, there are significant and frustrating
limitations of this device, that in a practical setting such as ours, limit
its value. The device tests the presence of a range of chemical and
biological contaminants down to quite low concentrations, giving a
blue or red signal by way of result. The manufacturer states:
“It is important to note that water that does not meet our criteria,
although registering with a red light on the TestDrop, is not
necessarily undrinkable. In fact, many locations have different
standards for water, and many will not meet Lishtot's standards
particularly given the sensitivity of the TestDrop and its underlying
technology.”
In other words if you get a red light you don’t have any idea what
contaminants are showing up. So whether the water is
contaminated with milk or PFOS the test result is the same – a red
light.
In practical terms, the result does not allow us to make an informed
decision about whether the water:
• Is really drinkable, not-drinkable but useable for other purposes,
or
• Needs to be completely discarded (tank cleaned/decontaminated
etc).
In addition the device requires the use of a single use plastic cup for
every test.
These factors make it a deal breaker for us and we have chosen not
to use the device extensively, and certainly not to rely on its “black
box” approach alone to evaluate the safety of our water.

21. Ongoing review and revision of the plan
As we will be more diligently
maintaining a water system
management log book, we plan to
review the results in the middle and at
the end of next season.
A particular focus will be on whether
the new modifications have added value
and/or reduced risk to our water safety.
Further adjustments to the water
management system will be ratified by
the WSP team before implementation.

22. Conclusions
From silly idea over drinks on ITIKI in September 2019, this
exercise tookon a life ofits own.It was great to challenge
ourselves to think through our water systems in a
structured way, applying a recognized risk
management process and with reference to
industryand WHOstandards.
While our system is simple and may not be
perfect it is certainlyfit for purpose as is,and the
inherent risks are acceptable to us. There is of
course always room for improvement. We will be
implementinga few changes as a result of this critical
analysis, and continuing to document and review our
results. And of course we will always compare notes with
other cruisers and pick new ideas and find out about new technologies.

23. References
(1) Water safety plan manual (WSP manual), Step-by-step risk management for drinking-water suppliers; WHO 2009
https://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/publication_9789241562638/en/
(2) Safe Drinking-water from Desalination; WHO 2011; WHO/HSE/WSH/11.03
https://www.who.int/water_sanitation_health/publications/desalination_guidance/en/
(a) Although boron is an essential element for plant growth, it is herbicidal at higher levels, and some plants are sensitive at 0.5 mg/l.
(b) The taste threshold is in the region of 200–250 mg/l, depending upon the associated anions
(c) Desalinated water is initially more corrosive [to metals] than many other drinking-water sources.
(3) Lishtot Test Drop Pro ®
https://www.lishtot.com/Water-testing-kit.html
https://www.lishtot.com/ListOfDetectableContaminants.pdf

24. Appendix 1 - Health effects of desalinated water
Like us, many cruisers use their desalinated water as
their exclusive drinking water, supplemented with the
odd glass of beer or wine... From time to time
concerned cruisers raise the question of the health
effects of drinking desalinated water exclusively.
These concerns largely relate to the lack of minerals
in the water. Some cruisers will take mineral
supplements or drink a rehydration formula to
counter these concerns. Others recommend
remineralization via limestone percolation, which also
can reduce the corrosive effects of desalinated water.
Millions of people around the world rely on
desalinated water for their drinking supply. What
does WHO(2) have to say about the nutritional
aspects of drinking desal all the time? Annex 3 of the
referenced report addresses the issue. Although
formal studies on this issue are yet to be conducted,
we feel that well nourished cruisers need not be too
concerned about this.
“In a number of cases, water is remineralized to reduce its
corrosive potential during transmission and distribution. Under
these circumstances, it is appropriate to consider whether the
methods used, such as percolation through limestone, can also
increase the concentrations of important nutritional minerals,
particularly calcium and magnesium, in the drinking- water.
While diet remains the principal source of nutrients and
minerals, drinking-water may provide supplemental amounts
that could be important for some people.”
“Low fluoride intake is also a potential consideration with regard
to loss of fluoride from bone and reduced incidence of dental
caries.”
“WHO states that there is clear evidence that long-term
exposure to an optimal level of fluoride results in diminishing
levels of caries in both child and adult populations and that
fluoride is being widely used on a global scale, with much
benefit (WHO, 2006). However, good dental care, use of fluoride
toothpaste and low sugar consumption are also important
dental health factors.”

25. Appendix #2 – Incident Report
Date Noted:
Observations
• Noted slight brown tinge to tank water, despite having
passed through 1 µ (under sink / inline) filter. No
suspended particles visible to naked eye.
• Pressure pump struggling to maintain pressure through
the 1µ filter unit
• Also noted hairline crack in the housing and water
leaking into the under-sink area.
• No noticeable difference in taste or smell for the water
• TDS/Lishtot® meters unavailable for testing
• Visual inspection of tanks - no obvious sign of ingress
Actions
• Removed 1 µ filter and replaced with 5 µ filter
• Replaced filter housing
Description: Possible tank water contamination
May 2020
Severity: MildSeriousness Mild
Root Cause:
Extensive “dirty” rain carrying fine Saharan dust, in the
month prior to the incident. Suspicion is that this has
made its way into the tank somehow (via RO or
somehow directly eg undetected dockwater
contamination)
Location: Northern Adriatic
Outcome:
• 5 µ filter takes on a distinctively orange tinge
• Water returns to a normal clear colour

26. Appendix #3 – Author biographies
On returning to Australia Lynda joined the contract research industry, initially managing Covance’s growing Asia Pacific Project
Management team, expanding business within the region and enabling resultant team growth, from 4 to 12 regional project managers
in the space of 12 months.
In mid-2006 Lynda moved to Novotech Australia as Executive Director of Clinical Operations, ensuring departmental and project
profitability, overseeing a steady growth in the company business and market share, and ensuring requisite team growth from just
under 50 to well over 300 across Australia, South Africa and Asia Pacific. During her 12-year tenure Lynda was a member of the
Executive Leadership Team contributing to steering Novotech through two private equity sales and subsequent ownership changes.
Lynda was an active participant in the industry’s professional association (ARCS), a member of the ARCS CRO forum and regular speaker
and panel member at industry conferences.
Lynda is currently taking a break from the “9-5” of the corporate world to use her skills and experience in support of a range of small
businesses, through independent consulting. She is also pursuing her passion for travel, photography, sailing and writing.
Lynda Shelley holds a Bachelor of Science (Biochemistry/Microbiology; UTas) and Masters of Public Health (Health
Economics; USyd) and joined the pharmaceutical industry in 1991. She held positions of increasing seniority in the
field of clinical research for companies such as the Wellcome Foundation and Ares Serono in Australia, before
transferring to Serono International in Geneva in 1999.
During her 5+ years’ tenure with Serono International, Lynda was a valued member of the Clinical Management
Team and was responsible for project delivery in the key therapeutic areas of Reproductive Health and
Immunology. She managed a team of Project Managers, based in both Europe and USA, providing career
development and project oversight, including budget adherence. Addition responsibilities included leadership of
process re-engineering projects, reshaping the clinical trial start up and regulatory processes. Lynda was also a
member of the Medical Marketing Support Team providing advice and guidance on post marketing and research
initiatives in line with market expansion plans.

27. Appendix #3 – Author biographies
Dr Annette Davison is a sought-after risk and auditing expert, with over 30 years’ experience in the industry,
having worked for a range of private and public companies/organisations and regulators.
Annette has undertaken the Australian Institute of Company Directors ‘Applied Risk Governance’ course and
routinely publishes in corporate governance and risk (see example publications below). Annette has
developed the ERM and risk appetite/tolerance framework for the Australian Water Association and
developed risk frameworks for various companies including facilitating risk processes for ASX-listed
regenerative medicine company, Regeneus Ltd and the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART).
She has worked on developing the WSAA Aquality system (for assessing compliance with the Framework for Management of Drinking
Water Quality) and then later contracted to lead development of Requality, the National Water Commission/WSAA system for assessing
compliance with the Framework for Management of Recycled Water Quality and Use.
Annette has conducted many audits for all components of the water cycle including operational licence audits for the NSW Independent
Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal for Sydney Water, Sydney Catchment Authority, Hunter Water and State Water, has Section 53V audit
experience under the Environment Protection Act 1970 (Vic) and Water Supply (Safety and Reliability) Act 2008 (QLD) and is experienced in
auditing statutory water management systems in both the Queensland and Victorian jurisdictions. Most recently (2017), Annette was a
member of the panel (with Ms Megan Dyson, water lawyer), handpicked by the Chief Minister’s office, to review 57 water extraction
licences in the Northern Territory.
As a qualified trainer and assessor (Certificate IV qualified), Annette teaches and has developed teaching materials for the then Unit
NWP279 Understanding the risk management principles of the Australian Drinking Water Guidelines. Annette was interviewed as a NSW
Legend of Water in 2011 and from 2015-2017, served on the Board of the Australian Water Association (her second term) and sat on the
Governance and Audit Committee and Professional Development Committee of that Board. Annette also chaired the Animal Ethics
Committee for Regeneus Ltd (an ASX-listed regenerative medicine company). Annette has lead- and co-authored many catchment
assessment and water supply management publications domestically and internationally including for the World Health Organisation,
WSAA and for the Water Industry Operators’ Association. Her expertise in catchment management, water supply risks, ERM and water
product system auditing is highly sought after.