Irish Water
Asset Operations Plan
Interim Price Control Submission 2014 - 2016
Document No: IW-IPC-005
Contents
1
Executive Summary
4
2
Introduction
5
3
Background
6
3.1
Overview
6
3.2
Legislative Background
7
3.2.1 European Directives
7
Key Stakeholders
7
3.3.1
3.3.2
3.3.3
3.3.4
7
8
9
9
3.3
Department of Environment Community and Local Government
Environmental Protection Agency
Health Service Executive
Group Schemes and Private Water Supplies
3.4
Local Government Efficiency Review
10
3.5
Approach to Water Loss Management
10
3.6
Data Deficit
12
4
Approach to Operations and Maintenance
13
5
Service Level Agreements
15
5.1
Service Level Agreements
15
5.2
Annual Service Plan
15
5.3
Local Authority Capabilities and Protocols
16
5.4
Transformation of Water Services Delivery via SLAs
16
6
7
2
Operation and Maintenance of Water Services
17
6.1
Introduction
17
6.2
Irish Water Utility Model
17
6.3
Asset Operations & Maintenance Function
18
6.4
Asset Operations & Maintenance Delivery
19
6.5
Data Collection
20
6.6
Work and Asset Management
21
6.7
Transition of Key Operational Capabilities
22
Operational Improvements and Efficiency Initiatives
24
7.1
24
Introduction
7.2
7.3
7.4
8
3
24
7.2.1
7.2.2
7.2.3
7.2.4
7.2.5
7.2.6
7.2.7
7.2.8
7.2.9
24
25
25
26
27
27
29
29
31
Water & Wastewater Incident Response Plan
Information Flow / EPA reporting
Water Safety Plans
Standard Operating Procedures
Plant Performance Improvement
SCADA/Telemetry
Geographical Information System
Water Loss Management
Licensing of Trade Effluent Discharges to Sewers
Operational Efficiencies
31
7.3.1
7.3.2
7.3.3
7.3.4
32
32
34
35
Transforming Service Delivery
Standardisation of Drinking Water and Waste water Operations
Procurement & Optimisation Initiatives
Reduction in spend under Irish Water’s DBO contracts
Summary
35
Operational Expenditure 2014- 2016
37
8.1
Summary
37
8.2
Explanation of Movement from 2014-2016
37
8.2.1
8.2.2
8.2.3
8.2.4
8.2.5
8.2.6
8.2.7
Materials
Plant Hire (Repairs & Maintenance)
Contractor Costs
Labour
Energy
Central Overheads
Budget Totals
38
39
39
40
40
41
41
Approach to Management and Control of Costs
42
8.3
9
Operational Improvements
Constraints and Risks
44
1 Executive Summary
The delivery of water services in Ireland has suffered from a severe lack of adequate
investment for several decades. The existing infrastructure and network are in a perilous
state, at high risk of failure, and not fit for purpose for Ireland’s future needs.
To date, a myriad of systems, processes and work practices have operated across the 34
Local Authorities (LAs). The approach to service delivery has relied significantly on personal
knowledge and commitment of staff in individual LAs across the country. Management of
water services delivery has suffered from incomplete or very poor data collection,
inconsistent and inadequate asset analysis, varied local application of policy and standards,
ad-hoc investment planning and limited application of risk management. This is not a
sustainable approach to achieve effective and efficient service delivery.
The establishment of Irish Water (IW) and the transfer of functions and assets, previously
undertaken by the LAs, is a significant development for the State and an opportunity to
deliver a more effective and efficient service.
IW’s main priority, during the transfer of functions and assets, is to ensure that there is
continuity of service and no negative impact on customers at this time. The focus from 2014
will be to continue with the work of the Irish Water Programme (IWP) in establishing the
people, processes and systems required to deliver water and wastewater services across
Ireland. IW will, during the Interim Price Control period, identify areas where opportunities
for improvement and efficiencies exist and deliver them for customers. This is against a
backdrop of increased pressure on operational costs due to growth in the services delivered,
in particular compliance driven growth.
The key challenge for IW will be to transition processes and systems from the 34 LAs, circa
1,000 Water Supply Zones (WSZs) and circa 1,100 waste water agglomerations to a single
set of processes and systems in a High Performance Utility Model. Central to this will be a
concerted effort to collect data on the existing assets and operations and convert it to
information and knowledge that can be used to deliver affordable services to meet the needs
and expectations of IW’s 1.8m customers.
The Operations & Maintenance function in IW will play a key role in the delivery of safe,
affordable and environmentally compliant water services to all customers. To this end, IW
will require sufficient funding and resources to meet its vision, objectives and obligations.
The absence of adequate funding would severely constrain the level to which services can
be improved, economic growth supported and environmental compliance achieved.
4
2 Introduction
This document sets out the framework, systems and processes for operation and
maintenance of water services following the transfer of assets from the 34 LAs to a single
national utility, Irish Water.
The objectives of this submission are:

To provide an overview of operations and maintenance activities associated with the
delivery of public water services prior to transfer of responsibility to Irish Water on 1st
January, 2014;

To outline IW’s plans to integrate water services delivery from 34 LAs into a single
public utility to improve the asset operations and maintenance function;

To outline the roadmap for improved service delivery;

To outline the measures that IW will take to improve efficiencies in the delivery of
water services and highlight the impact these efficiency measures; and,

To set out the budget for Operations & Maintenance.
The scope of this document includes the following:

The operation and maintenance of public water supplies from source to tap, including
the abstraction, treatment, storage and distribution of drinking water and treatment
and disposal of all wastes and residues;

The operation and maintenance of all public waste water services, including the
collection, transfer, treatment and disposal of wastewater and the treatment and
disposal of all wastes and residues.
A glossary of terms and abbreviations used in this document is included in Appendix No. 1.
5
3 Background
Prior to 1st January, 2014, public water and waste water services in Ireland were managed
by 34 Water Services Authorities (WSAs.
3.1
Overview
The IW Operations & Maintenance function will be responsible for assets which are used in
the provision of water and wastewater services. They include:

The above ground assets for water supply (abstraction works, treatment plants,
pumping stations and storage reservoirs) and below ground assets (trunk and
distribution mains) used in the provision of drinking water for public water supplies ;
and

The above ground assets (wastewater treatment, sludge treatment, pumping
stations) and below ground assets (foul and combined sewers, sewage rising mains
and outfall pipelines) used in the provision of public wastewater services.
There are 1,027 Water Supply Zones (WSZs) and 1,069 Wastewater Agglomerations,
spread across the State. There is a considerable difference in the scale of these WSZs and
Waste water Agglomerations as shown in Tables 1 and 2 below.
Category
Throughput (m3/day)
No. of Water
Supply Zones
E
> 20,000
16
D
10,000 to 20,000
11
C
5,000 to 10,000
32
B
1,000 to 5,000
178
A
<1,000
790
Total for Water
1,027
Table 1: Water Supply Zones
Population Equivalent (p.e.)
>10,000
No. of
Agglomerations
67
> 2,000 - 10,000
149
1,001 - 2,000
140
500 -1000
176
<500
537
Total for Wastewater
1,069
1
Table 2: Wastewater Agglomerations
1
6
Best available information on plant size; b ased on EPA Data
The operation and maintenance of waste water treatment plants (WWTP) serving the
majority of the larger cities and larger towns in Ireland have been contracted by LAs under
operational agreements to private service providers, under Design, Build and Operate (DBO)
contracts or in a small number of cases operations and maintenance (O&M) contracts.
There are c. 163 WWTP, serving approximately 75% of the total wastewater load, currently
being operated by private service providers; a full listing is included in Appendix 4. The DBO
model has not been used to the same extent for water treatment works (WTW); there are
circa 36 WTW currently operated by private service providers; a full listing is included in
Appendix 5.
3.2
Legislative Background
Prior to the enactment of the Water Services (No. 2) Act, 2013, LAs were defined under the
Water Services Act 2007 as the WSAs and were responsible for the provision of water
services in their respective areas. Prior to the introduction of the Act in 2007, the LAs
provided the service in their role as Sanitary Authority, based on a suite of legislation, dating
back to the Public Health (Ireland), Act, 1878.
3.2.1 European Directives
The European Union has been responsible for introducing a number of Directives that
impact directly or indirectly on the delivery of water and wastewater services in Ireland as
they are transposed into Irish legislation. These Directives together with the Water Services
Act 2007, were the key legislative instruments governing water services provision and
operation in Ireland 2.
3.3
Key Stakeholders – Previous model
3.3.1 Department of Environment Community and Local Government
The Department of Environment, Community and Local Government (DECLG) controlled the
water service capital expenditure programme. Investment by the LAs in water services was
guided by the policies and procedures of the DECLG.
The DECLG provided capital
expenditure funding under two programmes, namely the Water Services Investment
Programme (WSIP) and the Rural Water Programme (RWP).
Each LA applied to the DECLG for funding under the WSIP by completing and submitting an
assessment of needs. On review, and subject to funding availability, a prioritised list of
schemes was selected to form the Department’s rolling three year WSIP. The process
involved a considerable number of steps from the Assessment of Needs to the preparation
2
Following the enactment of the Water Services (No. 2) Act, 2013, Irish Water takes over the role of the local authorities und er
these legislative instruments in relation to public water and wastewater services.
7
of a Preliminary Report, various approvals and on to obtaining approval of tenders. The
RWP was an annual programme under which funds were allocated to WSAs for smaller
public water schemes.
3.3.2 Environmental Protection Agency
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is responsible for technical/environmental
regulation in Ireland and is responsible for setting out and enforcing standards as provided
for under national regulations.
Some of the EPA’s main functions with respect to water and wastewater services include:

Licensing and permitting of wastewater discharges (under S.I. 684 of 2007)

Supervisory Authority for public water supplies (under S.I. No. 278 of 2007)

Monitoring and inspecting treatment plants

National environmental enforcement

Preparation of reports on the provision and quality of drinking water and urban
wastewater discharges

Publication of guidance documents

Co-ordinating research on environmental issues
A significant amount of work has been carried out by LAs in recent years when submitting
applications for Waste Water Discharge Licences and Certificate of Authorisations to the
EPA.
The EPA is required to report on the performance of urban wastewater treatment plants on a
bi-annual basis. The most recent “Focus on Urban Waste Water Discharges in Ireland”
report3 was published by the EPA in February 2012. The report includes a review of the
operation of waste water treatment plants at all urban areas that are subject to the waste
water
discharge
licencing
regime,
mainly
covering data for 2008 and 2009.
Recommendations from this report can be found in Appendix 2 and include a number of
recommendations that impact directly on operations and maintenance.
As part of its supervisory role under the Regulations, the EPA maintains a list of public water
supplies where remedial action or management action is required to ensure compliance . The
EPA uses its RAL to focus attention on resolving any deficiencies in public water supplies
and to ensure that WSAs prepare and implement an action programme for each public water
supply on the list.
3
8
“Focus on Urban Waste Water Discharges in Ireland” report, published by the EPA in February 2012
The EPA also publishes an annual report on the Quality of Drinking Water Supplies in
Ireland. The most recent report for the year 2012 4 was published in December 2013. The
report noted that the general improvement in quality of public water supplies over previous
years was impacted by poor weather conditions in the summer of 2012, with an increase in
the number of non-compliances for some chemical parameters. Extracts from the Report,
including a paragraph on IW and key findings and recommendations for public water
supplies are included in Appendix 3.
3.3.3 Health Service Executive
The Health Service Executive (HSE) is responsible for the control of infectious diseases
under Health Legislation and has a role in drinking water quality under the European
Communities (Drinking Water) (No. 2) Regulations of 2007. The HSE has a key role in
determining whether a supply of water intended for human consumption constitutes a
potential danger to human health, deciding when “Boil Water Notices” should be issued and
subsequently when they can be lifted.
3.3.4 Group Schemes and Private Water Supplies
Approximately 80% of the population receive their drinking water from public water supplies.
Group Water Schemes (GWSs), as voluntary cooperatives, provide potable water to rural
communities in a number of counties and are represented by the National Federation of
Group Water Schemes. It is estimated5 that there are 632 Public GWSs (serving 2.3% of the
population) and 433 Private GWSs (serving 4.3% of the population). LAs have statutory
responsibilities under the Drinking Water Regulations 2007 in their role as “Supervisory
Authority” for group water schemes.
There group schemes can be divided into two categories as referenced above:

Public Group Water Scheme s are schemes where the water is provided by the
WSA but responsibility for distribution of the water rests with the group scheme. In
some cases, there is no longer a management structure in place to operate these
schemes and LAs, in some cases, are de facto operating these schemes.

Private Group Water Scheme s are schemes where the owners of the scheme
(usually representatives of the local community) source and distribute their own
water.
From 2014 Public GWSs will receive their water from IW and will consequently become
customers of IW.
4
The Provision and Quality of Drinking Water in Ireland - A Report for the Year 2012
The Provision and Quality of Drinking Water in Ireland - A Report for the Year 2012. These figures are somewhat at variance
with data from Census 2011 which indicates 8.8% of households are supplied by Public Group Schemes and 2.8% of
households are supplied by Private Group Schemes.
5
9
Small private supplies and private wells provide drinking water to over 10% of the
population.
3.4
Local Government Efficiency Review
A Local Government Efficiency Review (LGER) was initiated following the downturn in the
Irish economy in 2008.
Some of the main achievements in the local authority sector
resulting from the Local Government Efficiency Review are outlined below6:

The achievement of gross savings of €839m in the period 2008-2012

The sector has reduced staffing levels by 24%, or 8,899 from June 2008

The saving of €109m through procurement between 2010 and 2012.
As water services account for approximately 20% of local authority budgets, the water
services function would also have been impacted by the reform, including reductions in staff
and cutbacks in expenditure. Typically budgets and staff were cut without any changes to
systems and processes and impacting on maintenance of the asset base. It is generally
accepted that there has been deterioration in the asset base during this period.
One of the outcomes is that there is not an understanding of what the cost base for
maintenance should be in order to achieve an optimal approach in the management of water
services assets.
3.5
Approach to Water Loss Management
A number of water conservation initiatives have been advanced over the last decade by LAs
with support from DECLG under the Department’s Water Conservation Programme. The
National Water Conservation Programme divided water conservation works into three
distinct phases:

Stage 1 – Network Management Systems;

Stage 2 – Active Leakage Control Programme;

Stage 3 – Mains Rehabilitation.
The majority of LAs have completed Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the programme and have
progressed to Mains Rehabilitation, in some cases cutting back on Stage 2 work. However,
Stage 2 should be viewed as an on-going activity as part of an optimised water loss
management strategy.
6
Summary document of CCMA submission to Local Government Efficiency Review Implementation
Group County & City Managers’ Association (CCMA), July 2013
10
Unaccounted for Water 7 (UFW) is one of two Service Level Indicators currently reported on
by LAs through the LGMA8 .Notwithstanding the work undertaken over the last decade under
the National Water Conservation Programme, UFW still remains above 40% on average
across all of the LAs.
There are a number of shortcomings in the current approach to water loss management:

While there has been an improvement in the infrastructure to support water loss
management over the last decade, there has been limited deployment of networ k
management systems to assist operational staff detect leaks;

Poor maintenance of field equipment, such as flow meters and data loggers ; and,

Variations in approaches to calculation of Non-Revenue Water, or UFW, across the
LAs.
The most recent data on UFW is for the year 2011 and there is a concern that UFW has increased
since then due to cutbacks on active leakage control
7
The term "unaccounted f or water” has been replaced by “Non-rev enue Water” as the term f or Water Loss.
Serv ice Indicators in Local Authorities 2011, Eighth Annual Report to the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government by the
Local Gov ernment Management Agency , April 2013
8
11
3.6
Data Deficit
At the core of asset management is a requirement for good quality data, which presents a
major challenge to IW due to the limited asset data records and inconsistency of approach
across LAs to date. There is reasonable information on the water supply networks; however,
in many instances the data has not been updated in recent years. The waste water network
has very limited information, with poor or fragmented mapping and although manhole and
CCTV surveys were carried out occasionally, they are not centrally stored and lack
referencing for confident integration to IW databases.
The collection of data will be an on-going programme for IW as the business records
information on several thousand above ground assets on operational sites and the water and
waste water pipeline network. Data capture for the waste water collection network will be
particularly challenging as this will require physical surveying for asset location, type and
size and a CCTV survey for asset condition, where reliable data is not available.
12
4 Approach to Operations and Maintenance
IW’s approach to operations and maintenance is framed by organisation’s vision and values.
The IW vision is to provide a world class water infrastructure that ensures secure and
sustainable water services for communities, the economy and the environment.
The Operations & Maintenance values can be divided into four key themes:

Responsibility;

Expertise;

Efficiency;

Integrity.
IW has been established to develop a progressive and efficient asset management operating
model. IW has developed a roadmap transitioning asset operations and maintenance to a
unified and integrated model which will deliver benefits for our customers. Key steps for the
transition include:

Establishing the people, systems and processes that are required to deliver the
Operations & Maintenance functions in IW. This phased approach is reflected in the
arrangements with LAs under Service Level Agreements (SLAs);

Ensuring that there is continuity of service as responsibility for water services delivery
and assets transfer to IW;

Gathering data and building knowledge on water services assets and their
operational performance; and,

Working with partners, and in particular LAs, through SLAs and Annual Service Plans
(ASPs) to improve on the effectiveness and efficiency in water services delivery.
IW plans to achieve significant improvements in the delivery of water services that will in turn
significantly improve service quality for customers, while improving efficiency.
improvements that are linked to the Operations & Maintenance function include:

Fewer water supply restrictions

Better pressure management

Reduce unplanned interruptions

Improve drinking water quality compliance

Service request experience

Water consumption and customer side leakage

Network water loss/leakage

Sewer flooding

Wastewater discharge compliance
13
The

Energy efficiency and greenhouse gases emissions
The challenges facing IW are great. Water services and infrastructure have suffered from
decades
of
underinvestment
while
consumption,
compliance
obligations
and
customer/stakeholder expectations have increased substantially. The Operations &
Maintenance function in IW has a key role to play in meeting these challenges. Data
collection and harnessing the information and knowledge of LAs is a key priority for
establishing a baseline for current service delivery and making improvements on a planned
and phased basis. This will also allow IW to establish appropriate KPIs, baseline and target
quantitative metrics in the coming years.
14
5 Service Level Agreements
5.1
Service Level Agreements
The Water Services (No. 2) Act 2013 allows for the performance of functions by LAs on
behalf of IW through SLAs and are subject to certain provisions under the Act. The SLAs
put in place with each LA provide for continuity of service to customers, security for staff and
LA revenues.
At the same time, SLAs accommodate a degree of flexibility to deliver
operational improvements and efficiencies from year to year, through Annual Service Plans
(ASPs), in line with the strategic priorities of the business. SLAs are put in place for a period
of 12 years and cover a range of topics from finance and communication to support services
and technical and customer service.
IW oversee SLAs through central and regional management to develop centres of
excellence, to identify and implement best practice across the LAs, and coordinate all
investment and maintenance planning. Improvements and efficiencies will be driven by:

Procurement - driving quality and value in procured goods and services;

Capital investment to save operational cost (energy, chemicals, storm flows and
sludge reductions);

Reducing demand at source (lower water consumption and reduced trade waste
loads to sewers through enhanced license implementation and monitoring);

Reduced waste in leakage from water mains and into/out of sewers;

Extending automated asset monitoring systems across the asset base to central and
regional control;

Planned maintenance of critical plants;

Integrated workflow management to optimise work on asset operations and customer
response; and,

Shared resources at regional level.
5.2
Annual Service Plan
Each year IW and each LA will work together to prepare an Annual Service Plan (ASP) to
articulate the operational objectives and initiatives for the following year. The ASP sets out
the longer term goals and actions agreed to advance a 5 Year Plan. The ASPs will cover
business transformation and change management, continuous improvement plans, transition
from reactive to planned maintenance cycles and cost management.
15
5.3
Local Authority Capabilities and Protocols
From 1st January, 2014 LAs will generally continue to deliver services as they did prior to the
transfer of assets and functions to IW, albeit operating under new protocols and procedures.
Changes will be introduced on a phased basis, transitioning from the initial operating state to
an enduring state. Water services have been divided into different capabilities each with its
own protocols under the SLA. These protocols are the agreed ways of working between IW
and LAs and are supported by a process flow map and process description. The capabilities
include reporting, incident management, HSQE, procurement and customer contact.
5.4
Transformation of Water Services Delivery via SLAs
The SLAs will minimise any risk to the continuity of service during the period of the transfer
of assets and responsibilities to IW. Newly established regional offices will play a pivotal role
in spearheading the transition of responsibilities and services from the LAs. The SLA will
help promote collaboration between the LAs and IW and will achieve efficiencies and value
for money. There is explicit recognition within the SLAs that efficiencies must be delivered,
and that IW and the LAs will work together to define and deliver these efficiencies and other
initiatives.
A number of mechanisms built into SLAs will help manage performance and deliver
efficiencies, including:

Performance Management Frameworks to set baselines for current performance
standards of the assets as operated by LAs;

Annual Service Plan sets targets for improvement and identifies initiatives to help
achieve these targets;

Five Year Plan will capture long term transformation initiatives, capital programmes
and re-organisation plans; and,

SLA Reviews will be carried out by both parties at intervals to review commercial and
operational performance.
Achieving operational improvements and efficiencies through SLAs will require appropriate
capital investment from IW. It will also take time to embed standardised processes and
gather a comprehensive data set to help IW identify and prioritise improvements in assets
and service delivery.
16
6 Operation and Maintenance of Water Services
6.1
Introduction
This section outlines how the IW Asset Operations & Maintenance function will deliver water
services over the period 2014- 2016 and details the framework and approach that will be
adopted by IW across a range of functions.
6.2
Irish Water Utility Model
Asset management is the best practice approach for water utilities in managing and
operating water services infrastructure.
The LAs capital investment, operations and
maintenance functions have typically been operated as separate silos with poor or limited
information available on the existing infrastructure and operations and no focus on the total
lifecycle costs of owning and operating the assets. Part of the Government rationale to
establishment of IW within BGÉ was to draw on the experience the networks business and
their approach to asset management.
This included experience from the Networks
Transformation Programme which created a new Networks Operating Model to centralise
the Asset Management function and optimise the use of Asset Management capabilities
across the organisation. The Irish Water Programme (IWP), in conjunction with its service
providers, has created an asset management system based on a high performance utility
model for IW. The IWP has developed systems, processes and undertaken recruitment to
implement the operating model for IW outlined in Figure 1 below.
Figure 1: Irish Water Operating Model.
17
While the establishment of an asset management approach for the delivery of water services
in Ireland is a major undertaking and will take time to fully implement, it is expected that the
systems and processes put in place will deliver significant benefits to IW and its customers
over time including:

Integrated delivery of public water services in Ireland, optimally positioned to meet
the challenges of the changing environment;

High Performing Business Processes and supporting information systems, to ensure
on going operational efficiencies and better customer service;

An enhanced approach to supply chain management resulting in significant savings
over time;

Asset optimisation to reduce operating costs while improving outputs;

Improved control and management of risk;

A 360o view of assets through a centralised business solution; and,

Improved data quality and ability to capture data in the field.
6.3
Asset Operations & Maintenance Function
The high level Organisation Chart for the Asset Operations & Maintenance function is shown
in Figure 2 below.
Operations &
Maintenance
Regional
Operations
Operations
Support Services
Operational
Planning &
Control Centre
Workflow
Management
Figure 2: Asset Operations & Maintenance Organisation Chart
The team roles are as follows:

Regional Operations:
o
Responsible for managing service provision via SLAs, DBOs, or other
contractors;
18
o
Manage water conservation and connections;
o
Plan and oversee water and wastewater operations;
o
Oversee SCADA Alarm responses.

Operations Support Services:
o
Responsible for managing water and wastewater process analysis and
optimisation;
o
Provision of sampling services for water and wastewater to ensure
compliance.

Operational Planning and Control:
o
Review and maintain contingency plans and coordination across LAs ;
o
Manage the short-term water production requirements for IW;
o
Manage contract delivery and vendor performance across operational
contracts;
o

Manage alarms and events including 24/7 control of asset base.
Workflow Management:
o
Oversee the initiation of service requests;
o
Identify bundling opportunities;
o
Identify work pre-requisites;
o
Create work orders to be progressed to LAs, service providers and IW’s own
Scheduling & Dispatch team.
Given that there are over 1,000 WSZs and over 1,100 wastewater agglomerations spread
across the country, the IW Operations & Maintenance function has been divided into 3
regions with 8 regional offices as follows:
1. Eastern and Midlands
a. Dublin
b. Mullingar
2. Southern
a. Mallow
b. Limerick
c. Kilkenny
3. Connaught and Ulster
a. Castlebar
b. Cavan
c. Donegal
6.4
Asset Operations & Maintenance Delivery
A fundamental objective for the Operations & Maintenance function is to ensure that there is
continuity of service to customers and that contingency arrangements are in place to deal
with any issues that may arise during the transfer of responsibility. IW has identified a
19
number of key deliverables for the Operations & Maintenance function over the period 2014
to 2016:

Implement SLAs and protocols;

Improvements to water supply and wastewater treatment plants most at risk of noncompliance with regulations;

Improve service delivery through efficient use of resources and levels of service;

Rationalise Laboratory Facilities;

Implement new workflow management process and systems; and,

Identify opportunities for load management and plan efficiency improvements .
Activities that will be undertaken by the Operations & Maintenance function in the period
include:

Management of 34 SLAs, including over 40 protocols, annual service plans and 5year plan for each LA;

Central approach to incident management;

Improved compliance monitoring and reporting; and,

Implementation of new workflow management and process on a phased basis.
6.5
Data Collection
The creation of a robust baseline of data and information will enable IW to make correct and
informed decisions for the future benefit of all of its stakeholders. The Interim Price Control
period provides IW with an opportunity to address the existing data deficit. This will be
achieved through greater engagement with water services personnel in LAs, suppliers and
other stakeholders and will provide greater visibility of water services assets, operations,
systems and skills. This will result in some improvements in 2014 but more importantly will
be invaluable in establishing the operating regimes for 2015 and beyond. Significant gaps in
data to be addressed include:

Operational costs at a more granular level;

The operation of the DBO contracts and the payment charges for the various
contracts;

Personnel engaged in various elements of water services delivery;

Water supply and wastewater above ground assets;

Water supply and wastewater linear assets to feed into an integrated GIS for IW;
SCADA and Telemetry systems and reports on water loss/UFW at LA, WSZ and
DMA level;

Sampling, testing and reporting, in particular the arrangements in place in the various
LAs for laboratory analysis; and,
20

Liaison with and reporting to the EPA on water supply and wastewater.
As discussed in Section 4, data collection is a key priority for establishing a baseline for
current service delivery and KPIs. The data collection exercise is significant and further
work will be required in the next regulatory period in orde r to establish the level of data,
information and knowledge required to support an effective and efficient asset management
model for the delivery of water services.
6.6
Work and Asset Management
IW will be responsible for the provision and management of a national Work and Asset
Management (WAM) system as part of an integrated systems architecture that includes the
following:

Utility management systems;

Procurement;

Workflow management;

Field staff management;

Maintenance management systems;

Stock control;

Geographic information systems (GIS);

Supervisory, Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) and Telemetry systems etc.
The system is based on the software systems Maximo, Syclo and Click which, between
them support the core processes of work and asset manageme nt (WAM) in addition to
providing the back office support to field staff. The system will include the deployment of
field force mobility (FM), or mobile technology, in the operation and maintenance of water
services assets. It will involve the use by field operatives of portable hand-held devices
which are integrated with the WAM/FM solution as follows:

Maximo determines what work needs to be done based on maintenance schedules,
reported incidents, customer orders, and certain categories of project work a nd
passes the workload to Click;

Click determines the optimal scheduling of that work to field crews by reference to
business rules and its knowledge, received from hand-held devices, of the available
resources in the area. The information is then passed back to Maximo which relays it
onward to Syclo; and,

Syclo is responsible for communication with the hand-held devices and sends work
instructions to the field staff. It is also used to receive job information back from field
staff via the hand-held devices to the core WAM/FM solution.
21
The WAM/FM solution facilitates the effective management by:

Tracking costs associated with operating the assets;

Analysing maintenance costs of all water services assets;

Managing asset risk;

Creating a repository and register for assets and associated information;

Providing a more effective and efficient response to customer service requests; and,

Reporting of all assets in the organisation.
While the deployment of the WAM/FM solution is a fundamental part of the IW strategy to
provide an integrated and consistent service delivery across the state, it will involve a
significant change for field staff working with the various local authorities. The significance of
this change has been taken into account in the design and deployment of the system which
involves a number of stages as follows:

Design

Build

Testing in a number of phases

Impact Assessments

Training

Deployment, initially on a pilot basis in a number of local authority areas

Post-Go-Live support
6.7
Transition of Key Operational Capabilities
IW has identified a number of key objectives as it takes control of the Operation &
Maintenance of water services via SLAs with LAs:

Customer services should not suffer as a result of changes implemented at the time
of the transfer of water services IW;

Designing and implementing change at an operational level in treatment plants and
networks will be done on a phased approach to avoid risks to service; and,

IW’s regional structure will support access to key operational data and new reporting
and control lines.
The transformation journey from the existing operational landscape to IW’s enduring vision
for the organisation will, in practice, be completed in a series of steps or “operating states”.
IW and each LA will journey through a series of, up to three operating states for each of the
ten functional capabilities outlined previously. Progression through the operating states will
be contingent on both IW’s and each LAs capability. IW’s proposal for asset operations and
maintenance during the Interim Price Control period will be centred on the management of
22
the aforementioned capabilities and their progression from “Operations State” 1 to the
Enduring State.
23
7 Operational Improvements and Efficiency Initiatives
7.1
Introduction
IW and LAs will work together to drive improvements in service delivery and meet cost
efficiency requirements. IW will support and incentivise LAs to identify and deliver such
initiatives. SLAs will facilitate the adoption of changes to operating procedures and the
introduction of new technology to the water sector in Ireland. Anticipated benefits include:

Savings arising from an optimal regional structure;

Supply chain synergies from purchasing against centralised contracts; and,

Performance improvements from increased preventative maintenance, improved
asset management and adoption of modern technologies to manage activity in
networks and plants.
Although operations are traditionally thought of as field-based activities, there are a number
of operational responsibilities and efficiency initiatives that are best undertaken and
coordinated at a national level to drive consistency and efficiency and promote compliance
with regulatory standards. IW has identified a number of structural, process and plant and
network improvements and efficiency initiatives which over time will deliver tangible benefits
to its customers. These initiatives are described in the following sections.
7.2
Operational Improvements
7.2.1 Water & Wastewater Incident Response Plan
LAs have an excellent reputation of being able to mobilise to deal with water and wastewater
emergencies and protecting citizens and the environment. IW will manage emergency
situations through SLAs and benefit, on behalf of customers, from LA experience and
competency in this area. IW will also augment systems and processes to address incident
response for both water and wastewater emergencies to ensure that there is a consistency
in approach and national coverage.
Drinking Water Incident Response:
The Drinking Water Incident Response Plan (DWIRP) is a strategy and set of protocols for
responding to contamination incidents or other incidents impacting the potable water supply.
Each LA should have a DWIRP in place, in accordance with national guidelines, for its
functional area. While the majority of LAs have already developed a DWIRP, IW will develop
the policy, systems and processes to ensure that national coverage is in place. IW will
review the existing DWIRP landscape and prepare an overarching plan to include
information specific to each LA.
24
IW will provide management and technical support at both central and local level s in the
event of an incident. It is anticipated that revised incident management protocols will benefit
from the aggregation of both technical and physical resources that are currently available
within the existing LAs, and ensure that national resources are available to overcome local
incidents.
Waste water Incident Response:
Under the Waste water Discharge Licences (WWDL), the EPA stipulates that an Emergency
Response Procedure (ERP) is required for each waste water agglomeration.
Broad
guidelines are provided by the EPA on the formulation of an ERP, however, a standardised
document dealing with waste water incidents and suitable approaches to deal with the
different stages of an incident (similar to the DWIRP) does not currently exist. IW has
developed a Wastewater Incident Response Plan template that will be rolled out to all LAs
between 2014--2015.
7.2.2 Information Flow / EPA reporting
There has been an increase in the frequency and standard of reporting required under the
Waste Water Discharge Authorisation Regulations, 2007, particularly relating to EPA licence
applications. The establishment of IW provides an opportunity to have a more streamlined
approach to meeting these requirements.
IW will undertake a number of initiatives to
support these reporting requirements including:

A more streamlined and integrated approach to the compliance monitoring of drinking
water and waste water discharges, including sampling, transporting, testing, analysis
and reporting;

An effective and efficient laboratory service to meet the various monitoring needs of
drinking water and wastewater.
This will require that compliance monitoring is
undertaken in accredited laboratories by the end of 2015, in order to meet EPA
requirements; and,

Robust processes for monitoring from point of sampling to report outputs.
7.2.3 Water Safety Plans
The EPA and the World Health Organisation (WHO) promote and encourage producers of
potable water to adopt the concept of Water Safety Plans ( WSPs). These plans ensure the
safety of a drinking water supply through the use of a comprehensive risk assessment and
risk management approaches that encompass all the steps in the water supply process from
catchment to consumer. Work has commenced on the preparation of WSPs for 45 WSZs
and three WSPs have been completed. It is clear to IW that considerable work will be
required to complete WSPs for all WSZs. IW will learn from the work undertaken to date and
25
engage with LAs that have built up a knowledge base in the preparation of WSPs in order to
complete the remaining WSPs to be rolled out to other WSZs on a prioritised basis. The
plans are considered to be an effective means of monitoring and mitigating operational risks
and ensuring that potable water supply is both safe and secure. The benefits of WSPs to IW
and its customers include the following:

Increased compliance levels

Integrated management tools to facilitate a safe and secure water supply;

A structured approach to rationalising and documenting existing operational
procedures, leading to gains on efficiency, improvement of performance and quicker
response to incidents;

Better targeted capital investments based on risk assessment;

Improved management of existing staff knowledge and identification of critical gaps
in skills for staff; and,

Improved stakeholder relationships.
7.2.4 Standard Operating Procedures
Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) are used to maintain quality control and assurance
processes and, above all, ensure compliance with regulatory/legal requirements.
Operational work practices in the areas of water and wastewater treatment and network
management differ greatly as each LA employs its own work practices and procedures.
SOPs do not currently exist in all LAs therefore operations are often carried out using tacit
knowledge.
IW will develop a unified set of SOPs that will detail the organisation’s
expectations and standards for all operational field work. The SOPs will be developed with
LAs and document the way activities are to be performed to create a consistent approach to
product quality and system performance. They can be used to support the collection of good
quality performance data.
In the first instance, IW will rollout minimum standards which will be improved as LAs mature
through the “Operating States” defined in the SLAs. The procedures will provide IW with a
mechanism to carry out the following necessary operational tasks:

Share best practice operating processes between regions through the exchange of
documented knowledge;

Carry out quality audits at a regional level;

Understand the root causes of differences in performance between the existing LAs
and use as a basis to improve performance across the asset base ; and,

Carry out continuous efficiency improvements and thereby minimise whole life costs
of business operation.
26
Over time, and as the organisations operating model develops, IW will be better able to use
the SOPs to minimise variation and promote quality through consistent implementation of
processes across the organisation. The SOPs can be used to indicate compliance with
organisational requirements.
7.2.5 Plant Performance Improvement
IW is developing the policy, systems and processes for both water and waste water
treatment plants in order to identify improvement and efficiency opportunities. WSPs will
identify water treatment plants that will benefit from a plant performance improvement
review. Similarly, the preparation of an Annual Environmental Report for each waste water
agglomeration will identify waste water treatment plants that could benefit from a similar
review. The plant process review for both water and waste water plants will be used to
identify measures that, when rolled out on a wider scale, will produce quick gains for IW in
delivering effective and efficient services.
7.2.6 SCADA/Telemetry
IW has taken responsibility for a very significant asset base that provides essential services
across the country. With this responsibility comes a need to develop a robust framework for
managing infrastructure. To accommodate this IW will need an asset management regime
that is driven by:

An understanding of the risk of failure due to asset deterioration and/or capacity
constraints;

An understanding of the impact of increasing (or decreasing) levels of service on the
remaining useful life of the assets;

An understanding of the risk of asset failure as a result of external events that
threaten their resilience (such as floods or fire); and,

Whole-of-life cost optimisation where the assets will be operated, maintained and
renewed as appropriate to support IW’s level of service obligations.
Crucially, each of these drivers can only be fully understood if reliable data is available in a
timely manner to inform both short term and long term decision making. To that end, a
Supervisory, Control and Data Acquisition (SCADA) system occupies a prominent position
within the suite of tools and systems available to IW for collection, communication and
analysis of data. While SCADA has been installed in the majority of larger water and waste
water treatment plants constructed in the last 20 to 25 years, there has been no consistent
approach to the deployment of the technology. The establishment of IW provides an
opportunity to take a more integrated approach and deliver a roadmap which will maximise
27
the use of existing equipment and provide the right information in a timely manner and
deliver significant benefits in terms of effective service delivery and efficiency.
The inconsistent approach to deployment of SCADA poses a number of risks and issue,
namely:

Lack of software and security patch update policies;

Security issues particularly the control element arising from the undefined
communications, access control and software management

Poor access control;

Widespread use of unsecured low powered radio;

Poor backup and disaster recovery systems.

Imminent regulation of low powered radios by ComReg;

Cyber security concerns;

Extent of visibility of DBO plants via SCADA;

Availability;

Data compatibility;

Cost including duplication of systems.
IW is developing a strategy for SCADA/Telemetry that will be implemented on a phased and
prioritised basis over this and the next regulatory cycle. In addition to meeting the needs of
its stakeholders, it is envisaged that SCADA will play a significant role in achieving
efficiencies for IW by:

Providing visibility of water and waste water supply and assets at local, regional and
central level;

Building robust and secure communications infrastructure that takes account of the
varying requirements at each site and geographical constraints;

Reducing unnecessary visits to smaller plants and reducing need for 24/7 on site
cover for larger plants;

Supporting regulatory requirements on control, monitoring and alarms for chlorine
disinfection and general compliance;

Optimising active leakage control and pressure management;

Supporting energy management and cost reduction activities; and,

Moving, on a phased basis, toward a Central Operations Control Centre with
regional, district and local access.
The main benefits of investing in SCADA & Telemetry for IW include:

Early intervention to resolve plant issues;

Reduced operating costs;
28

Improved customer service;

Mitigated risk of failure; and,

Exploiting existing capacity.
7.2.7 Geographical Information System
A Geographical Information System (GIS) is a critical tool in the management of linear
assets such as water distribution and wastewater networks. This tool will used by IW to
capture underground assets.
An integrated GIS system for all IW assets will deliver
significant benefits in managing linear assets, including improved response to customer
queries and providing an essential tool for water loss management. It is expected that the
system will be functional by the end of 2014, however the data capture exercise will take a
number of years to complete and will run into the next regulatory cycle .
7.2.8 Water Loss Management
Leakage or water loss management is a critical part of water services delivery and impacts
both operational expenditures and capital investment plans. While the list of drivers for a
leakage control strategy is extensive, the following drivers are considered most pertinent:

Postponing infrastructure upgrades and optimising capex - focusing on areas where
reduced leakage will postpone need for treatment plant expansion;

Improving plant performance - some existing assets are operating at over 100%
capacity, presenting compliance and operational issues;

Sustainable water resource management;

Reducing variable costs - leakage reduction will reduce energy and chemical
demand and combined with pressure management, can significantly reduce
unplanned burst repair costs; and,

Stakeholder requirements - customers will rightly demand value for money and a
quality of service.
Revenue collection activities may suffer in the absence of
demonstrable leakage reduction.
Leakage management is integral to, and has dependencies on, almost all IW functions.
Figure 3 illustrates the leakage management pillars including active monitoring and
detection, speed and quality of leak repairs, pressure management and pipeline
rehabilitation. All four pillars need to be considered to achieve optimum results from a
Leakage Strategy.
29
Figure 3: Four Pillars of Leakage Management.
IW is committed to making significant improvements in Water Loss Management in the
coming years, by following a number of steps:
1.
Establish the systems and resources to provide a consistent and robust baseline of
water loss across all IW Assets;
2.
Achieve a balance across the four pillars of Water Loss Management so as to
achieve best value from investment in the reduction in water loss;
3.
Prioritise the WSZs and District Meter Areas for water loss reduction initiatives,
based on factors such as limited or no headroom and drinking water quality;
4.
Deploy established international methodologies for water loss estimation and
management;
5.
Establish and implement a roadmap to transition from the current situation of high
losses to a future scenario where targets are based on sustainable economic levels
of leakage; and,
6.
Establish performance indicators to support the execution and performance
management of the Water Loss Management Strategy for IW.
30
As reported previously UFW is estimated at over 40% across the country. There is a
concern that UFW has increased since it was last reported in 2011 due to cutbacks on active
leakage control. IW is taking steps to deal with this by rebalancing resources between active
leakage control and water main rehabilitation. It is estimated that the installation of domestic
water meters will lead to a reduction of circa 10% in domestic consumption and should result
in a reduction of customer side leakage. Reduction in domestic consumption and customer
side leakage will in some cases result in increased pressure in distribution mains and a
consequential rise in leakage in the mains. However, measures are in place to deal with this
issue and should minimise additional leakage from this source.
7.2.9 Licensing of Trade Effluent Discharges to Sewers
IW will put in place a standardised approach for the management of trade effluent
discharges to sewers across the country under Section 16 licences9. Standardisation will
lead to improved turnaround times for the issue of licence s. This will be combined with
appropriate monitoring of compliance and processed to control and minimise the discharge
of fats, oils and grease (FOG) to sewers.
FOG is generated in significant quantities from food service establishments and can cause
blockages in pipes, pumping stations and equipment. These blockages can then cause
flooding, pollution of rivers and streams, basement flooding and problems at waste water
treatment works. While a national guidance document has been prepared on the matter by
the LA Services National Training Group, there has not been consistent implementation of
FOG reduction measures amongst the 34 WSAs. The Operations & Maintenance regional
teams will work with the Asset Management function in implementing a more integrated
approach to licensing of discharges to sewers, including control of FOG.
Work will
commence in 2014 and will be implemented on a phased and prioritised basis across all
waste water agglomerations.
7.3
Operational Efficiencies
Following the transfer of responsibility for services to IW, a significant proportion of the
operating expenditure incurred for the provision of water and waste water services will be
funded through SLA payments from IW to the individual LAs.
The process of spend
consolidation and the standardisation of methodologies under a Public Utility Model is
expected to deliver significant savings on the original operating expenditure base. A number
of the initiatives that are being advanced by IW are included in the following sections. The
benefits on operating costs are set out in Section 8.2 below.
9
Licensing of discharges to sew ers under Section 16 of the Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, 1977
31
7.3.1 Transforming Service Delivery
The transformation of the water industry in Ireland can only be achieved in partnership with
local government.
This partnership, managed through SLAs and ASPs set out the
headcount in LAs for the coming year and will be reviewed annually. The optimum level of
resource needed to deliver services, as part of a managed transformation, will be
determined by the business needs (including public health) and will be subject to scrutiny by
the CER.
The transformation of the way water services are delivered may lead to a change in the
resourcing level required in the LAs. There is scope to do this through natural attrition, given
that the age profile of the workforce is estimated to be 50% over the age of 50. In addition,
Government may decide to introduce Voluntary Redundancy Schemes in the LAs and
redeployment to other service areas within the LA may also be an option. Previous reports
on the water sector have noted that the standardisation of operating procedures and
benchmarking across LAs has not been achieved on a comprehensive basis 10 and, in
general, staff from one LA will not cross the relevant city or county boundary to work in
another LA area11. It is expected that a number of factors will improve productivity in the
workforce and result in efficiency savings; these include:

The transition to a regionalised management model;

A commercially driven SLA agreement;

The transition to planned and preventative maintenance;

The standardisation of key operating procedures;

The prioritisation of maintenance works enabled by improved asset and work
management data;

The introduction of enabling technology such as scheduling and mobile field
technologies;

The further use of plant automation and SCADA; and,

The creation of continuous improvement teams to analyse performance and
implement process changes.
7.3.2 Standardisation of Drinking Water and Waste water Operations
Installation of Water Meters
The installation of water meters on domestic water connections and the introduction of a
charging system based on consumption will provide customers with an incentive to reduce
consumption and is thus expected to reduce the overall requirement to produce treat ed
10
Pg. 34, ‘Irish Water: Phase 1 Report’ , PWC
11
Pg. 35, ‘Irish Water: Phase 1 Report’ , PWC
32
water.
Based on international experience it is expected that average household
consumption will be reduced by approximately 10% as a result of the Metering Programme.
This reduction in demand, coupled with a targeted strategy on customer-side leakage
(subject to funding), should result in a reduction in operating costs. This reduction is
expected to deliver savings predominantly in chemical and energy costs.
Reduction in Network Leakage
IW intends to focus efforts and increase investment to reduce UFW to 35% by 2021. UFW
was previously estimated in the LA Indicator Report for 2011 12 at approximately 41% of
distribution input and the target corresponds to a reduction in leakage of approximately 20%.
While a number of water conservation initiatives have previously been advanced by LAs with
support from the DECLG, the establishment of IW creates an opportunity to make significant
progress on reducing water loss through its asset management approach comb ined with
supporting systems and technical resources. To achieve this, IW, working with LAs, will be
required to increase repairs and maintenance investment over the period 2014 -2021.
Transition to Predictive and Preventative Maintenance.
IW will also introduce a standardised asset planning and operations capability across all of
their assets. This is expected to support the introduction of more reliable and efficient
system designs and enable a transition to planned and predictive maintenan ce
methodologies. This transition is expected to safeguard the delivery of IW’s regulatory
outcomes and to reduce repair and maintenance spending.
Trade Effluent Monitoring and Fats, Oils and Greases Campaigns
IW will drive down repair and maintenance costs through the introduction of FOGs
campaigns and improved trade effluent monitoring. After initial piloting in key regions these
schemes are expected to:

Decrease waste water treatment requirements leading to a reduction in energy
spend; and,

Decrease sewer damage and blockages leading to a reduction in repairs and
maintenance spending.
Other Tactical Initiatives
IW will also focus on the implementation of tactical measures to reduce cost including the
rollout of treatment optimisation techniques and ener gy efficiency schemes based on the
introduction of plant Energy Performance Indicators (EnPIs). The IW Industry Procurement
and Optimisation Programme, has also been established and is based on a similar initiative
12 Serv ice
Indicators in Local Authorities 2011, Eighth Annual Report to the Minister for the Environment, Community and Local Government by the Local
Gov ernment Management Agency , April 2013
33
undertaken by BGÉ Networks to identify initiatives that will deliver significant operational
efficiencies.
7.3.3 Procurement & Optimisation Initiatives
Despite the National Procurement Service on energy and regional procurement initiatives on
consumables, to date procurement contracts for operations have generally been offered on a
city or county basis13.
IW will consolidate this spend and introduce a standardised
procurement capability that will partner with IW’s individual business functions to drive
supplier performance and economies of scale. IW’s strategy can be broken down into three
elements:

Contract Negotiation & Management including the creation of standard contracting
strategies, implementing consistent contracts and terms and conditions and creating
robust contract management processes to manage existing contracts.

Category Management & Spend Consolidation to introduce a centralised category
management methodology and using contract frameworks to consolidate spending,
developing supplier relationship management and market intelligence too ls. In
addition to implementing governance and controls to improve accountability and
budget compliance.

Supply Chain Optimisation to implement flexible agreements to reduce long term
costs, consolidating supplier to increase buying power and reducing risk through the
supply chain process.
Introduction of supply side management paired with the
integration of functions and collaboration of business units will also reduce demand.
The introduction of a standardised procurement methodology will also improve the
compliance of each contract issued in line with national procurement guidelines and EU
procurement legislation. Compliance is a leading indicator of the level of commercial risk
carried by an organisation and, by following due process, Irish Water will ensure it fully
understands and reduces the organisation’s commercial risk. Framework contracts are now
in place for approximately 70% of the overall operational spend .
Delivery of the Procurement and Optimisation Programme
The measures being implemented under the IW Industry Procurement and Optimisation
Programme include the following:

PMO: to provide structure and direction and manage issues and risks;

Process & Governance: to define how benefits shall be qualified, validated and
tracked through the process;
13
34
Pg. 35, ‘Irish Water: Phase 1 Report’, PWC

Joint Category Teams: multifunctional teams supporting the identification of
opportunities, facilitation of workshops and delivery of benefits; and,

Data: to provide structure and take ownership of spend data analysis and input into
savings calculations.
There are a number of challenges facing IW that will affect the delivery of benefits in the
short term:

Bringing together 34 separate buying organisations into one organisation using a
standard procurement and contract management system;

The large number of current contracts and frameworks not up for re-negotiation until
Q1/2 2015;

The new Commercial and Procurement Team currently being recruited will n eed to
understand the internal IW requirements and market landscape;

Currently no accurate view of spend or volumes to establish a benchmark ;

Regulatory requirements to improve quality and customer service will incur new
costs; and,

Ageing asset base with high operating and maintenance costs.
7.3.4 Reduction in spend under Irish Water’s DBO contracts
The cost of current DBO contracts is based on the volume and load input into individual DBO
plants. IW will target a reduction in volume and load input to wastewater treatment plants
through trade effluent monitoring and targeted FOGs campaigns. IW’s Commercial function
will also introduce dedicated teams to manage its DBO contracts. These teams will focus on
monitoring and enforcing the DBO contractors’ compliance with the commercial terms of its
agreement and will assess and pursue opportunities for renegotiation where it is in IW’s
interests to do so. No further savings have been estimated in this area as many of the
current DBO contracts were put in place within the past 10 years with limited scope for
renegotiation, long lifetimes, prohibitive exit fees and only periodic break clauses 14. As
stated in Section 3.1, approximately 75% of the total wastewater load is treated at treatment
plants operated by DBO Contractors and consequently these contract costs are a significant
element of IW’s annual operational costs.
7.4
Summary
IW has outlined significant operational improvements and efficiency gains across the
Operations & Maintenance function in this submission.
The achievement of these
efficiencies are, inter alia, dependant on the appropriate and continuing investment in
14
Irish Water Establishment Programme: Capital Inv estment Project
35
systems such as SCADA, telemetry, high speed connectivity to water and waste water
plants and network points, automation of a growing number of components of the plants and
networks and related IT systems.
The combination of these activities will enable and
support the achievement of the proposed operational improvements and efficiency gains.
The budgets for these systems and activities are included in the Capex budgets.
36
8 Operational Expenditure 2014- 2016
8.1
Summary
The budget for IW’s external Operations & Maintenance costs for the period Q4 2014 to
2016 are outlined in Table 3.
O&M Expenditure Category
Materials
Plant Hire
Maintenance
Contractor Costs
Labour (LA)
Energy
Overheads – LA Charges
Total
Q4 2014
2014
12
7
3
36
48
14
20
139
2015
47
27
11
145
191
55
80
556
2016
47
28
12
148
187
51
76
548
48
29
12
152
189
49
73
551
Table 3: O&M Budgets for Interim Regulatory Period (Q4 2014, 2015 and 2016).
A review of current available data shows the split between the overall Opex for water and
wastewater at approximately 50% of Opex. Accordingly, it can be assumed that the opex for
water supply and wastewater are each 50% of the costs shown in the table above.
8.2
Explanation of Movement from 2014-2016
The change in budget from 2014-2016 can be considered in terms of cost drivers under two
main headings:

Growth - an increase/decrease in operational cost as a result of change in
Operations & Maintenance outputs or activities, resulting from a number of factors:
o
Growth in demand for water services;
o
Change in environmental regulatory requirements;
o
Operation of additional infrastructure as part of the CIP;
o
Cost of additional activities resulting from strategic initiatives by IW e.g.
increase in leak detection and repairs;
o
Cost of additional activities resulting from exceptional events e.g. dealing with
backlog in repairs and maintenance.

Operational Efficiencies - resulting from the various initiatives outlined in the
previous section namely, volume and unit cost efficiencies and cost efficiency relating
to a reduction in the number of activities performed, services rendered or materials
procured, including changes in activity levels due to operational efficiencies
described above.
The change in budget is examined in the section below for each of the budget lines in the
context of the drivers outlined above.
37
8.2.1 Materials
Repairs & Maintenance (65%)
There are three main factors that will impact on Opex on materials used in repairs and
maintenance for the period 2014- 2016:
1. Growth: It is anticipated that there will be a growth in Repairs & Maintenance output
due to a number of factors:
a. Increase in opex linked with capital investment in new and upgraded
infrastructure and more demanding environmental standards;
b. Increase in leak detection and repairs as part of an overall Water Loss
Management Strategy being implemented by IW;
c. Dealing with a backlog in repairs and maintenance following a number of
years of deficits in Opex budgets.
2. Volume Efficiencies: It is expected that the rollout of a more active approach to the
management of trade effluent monitoring, and sewer campaigns to reduce FOG will
result in less activity and consequent Opex efficiencies in wastewater delivery.
3. Unit Cost Efficiencies: It is estimated that contract negotiation and management
and category management paired with spend consolidation will result in a reduction
of unit prices of approximately 4% and 3% in 2015 and 2016 respectively.
In summary, based on the combined effect of the factors above, it is estimated that there will
be an increased expenditure on materials used in Repairs & Maintenance of approximately
2.6% and 6.3% in 2015 and 2016 respectively, with respect to the baseline year of 2014.
Consumables (35%)
The factors that will impact on Opex, the main element of which is chemicals for water
supply, in the period 2014- 2016 are as follows:
1. Growth: It is anticipated that there will be a minor increase in Opex on consumables
resulting primarily from production at new and upgraded water treatment plants.
2. Volume Efficiencies: It is expected that the following measures will result in reduced
consumption of chemicals in the period 2014- 2016 of approximately 4% and 3.5% in
2015 and 2016 respectively, caused by:
a. Reduced consumption due to introduction of water charges on a metered
basis;
b. Reduced water production as a result of a more active approach on Water
Loss Management;
c. Chemical Optimisation at water treatment plants.
38
3. Unit Cost Efficiencies: It is estimated that contract negotiation and management
and category management paired with spend consolidation will result in a reduction
of unit prices for consumables of approximately 3% and 1% in 2015 and 2016
respectively.
In summary, it is estimated that there will be a decrease in expenditure on consumables of
approximately 6.5% and 10.2% in 2015 and 2016 respectively, with respect to the baseline
year of 2014.
8.2.2 Plant Hire (Repairs & Maintenance )
The factors that will impact on expenditure on Plant Hire used in Repairs & Maintenance in
the period 2014 to 2016 are described in Section 8.2.1 above. It is estimated that there will
be an increase in expenditure on Plant Hire used in Repairs & Maintenance of approximately
2.6% and 6.3% in 2015 and 2016 respectively, with respect to the baseline year of 2014.
8.2.3 Contractor Costs
DBOs (75%)
There are two main factors that will impact on DBO Opex costs in the period 2014 - 2016:
1. Growth: There has been significant growth in DBO Opex over the last decade as new
treatment plants, particularly in waste water, have been commissioned.
For
example, the increase from 2013 to 2014 is 9% and with lower annual growth rates of
4% estimated for subsequent years based on the best available data.
2. Volume efficiencies: It is estimated that the measures outlined in Section 7.3.4 will
achieve savings in Opex on DBO contracts of approximately 2% in 2015 and 2016.
There is limited scope for unit cost efficiencies, given the terms and duration of the existing
contracts.
It is estimated that there will be an increase of Opex on DBO contracts of
approximately 2% and 4% in both 2015 and 2016 respectively, with respect to the baseline
year of 2014.
Repairs & Maintenance (25%)
The factors that will impact on expenditure on contractors used in repairs and maintenance
in the period 2014-2016 are described in Section 8.2.1 above. It is estimated that there will
be an increase of Opex on contractors used in Repairs & Maintenance of approximately
2.6% and 6.3% in 2015 and 2016 respectively, with respect to the baseline year of 2014.
In summary, it is estimated that there will be an increase of Opex on Contractor Costs for
DBOs and Repairs & Maintenance of approximately 2.1% and 4.5% in 2015 and 2016
respectively, with respect to the baseline year of 2014.
39
8.2.4 Labour
Section 7.3.1 sets out the opportunities to achieve labour efficiencies as part of the
transformation of the water industry. While the main productivity gains will be achieved over
the medium to long term, the budget has included for a reduction in labour cost in 2014 due
to the impact of personnel transferring from LAs to IW, whose roles are not backfilled, and
further efficiency gains in 2015 and 2016. In summary, it is estimated that there will be
efficiency gains and cost avoidance in labour expenditure of approximately 6.2%, 7.9% and
6.9% in 2014, 2015 and 2016 respectively, with respect to the opening position for 2014.
8.2.5 Energy
The factors that will impact on Opex on Energy in the period 2014 - 2016 are as follows:
1. Growth: It is expected that there will be a minor increase in Opex on Energy
resulting primarily from operation of new and upgraded water treatment plants as
new wastewater infrastructure is for the main part accounted for under DBOs.
2. Volume Efficiencies: It is expected that the following measures will result in reduced
energy consumption in the period 2014-2016 caused by:
a. Improved energy efficiency due to implementation of various measures and
improvement works as part of the IW Energy Policy;
b. Reduced consumption due to introduction of water charges on a metered
basis;
c. Reduced water production as a result of a more active approach on Water
Loss Management;
d. Decrease in waste water treatment load, leading to a reduction in energy
spend, due to the rollout of a more active approach to the management of
trade effluent monitoring, and sewer campaigns to reduce FOGs.
3. Unit Cost Efficiencies: Negotiation of energy contracts; due for renewal in October
2014.
In summary, it is estimated that there will be efficiency gains in expenditure on energy of
approximately 7.2 % and 10.4% in 2015 and 2016 respectively, with respect to the baseline
year of 2014. These efficiencies need to be considered in the context of the gains made to
date by LAs in reducing spend on energy through consolidation of procurement into a single
national framework with the National Procurement Service (NPS) and various energy
efficiency initiatives. There is a general trend of rising energy prices which may impact on
the ability to achieve any unit cost efficiencies and indeed could have negative impacts on
IW energy costs.
40
8.2.6 Central Overheads
It is anticipated that there will be volume efficiencies that will impact on opex on LA Central
Overhead Charges and resulting in reductions in expenditure of approximately 5.5% and
8.9% in 2015 and 2016, respectively with respect to the baseline year of 2014.
8.2.7 Budget Totals
The net result of all of the growth and efficiency factors, as described above, is that the
budget figures for 2014, 2015 and 2016 are estimated respectively at 2.2%, 3.6% and 3.1%
below the 2014 baseline figure.
Table 4 shows the relative impacts of growth and
efficiencies on the Opex for the period 2014- 2016.
Year on Year Change
2014
2015
2016
Volume Efficiencies
-2.2%
-2.6%
-1.3%
Unit Cost Efficiencies
0.0%
-1.0%
-0.8%
Total Efficiencies
-2.2%
-3.6%
-2.1%
Growth
0.0%
2.1%
2.6%
-2.20%
-1.50%
0.50%
Net
Table 4: Impact of Cost Drivers (Year on Year Change Expressed as a %)
The budget for the 2014-2016 period provides for the commencement of various operational
efficiencies which set IW on a glide path to more substantial Opex efficiencies by the end of
the Regulatory period 2017- 2021. Furthermore, it is estimated that without these operational
efficiencies that the Opex would increase to 4.6 % above the baseline for 2014 by 2016,
which equates to overall efficiency gains and cost avoidance over the period of circa €80m.
Figure 4 shows the projected Opex for 2014 to 2016 against a baseline with no efficiency
initiatives.
€800m
€600m
€400m
€200m
2014
2015
IW Projected Opex
2016
Baseline
Figure 4: Irish Water Projected Opex v Baseline
41
8.3
Approach to Management and Control of Costs
A significant proportion of the IW Operations & Maintenance costs are incurred on foot of the
work of LAs, carried out under SLAs. In recognition of the importance of controlling these
costs, a Managing Costs Protocol was developed and rolled out to all LAs and supported by
a training programme for LA staff. The Managing Costs Protocol outlines the steps involved
in managing operational costs in a timely manner by identifying the following objectives:

Planning and mapping the financial impact of water and waste water activities arising
from the Annual Service Plan (ASP);

Prioritising initiatives to be implemented in water and waste water operations;

Capturing and appropriately coding payroll and procurement spend to enable
production of accurate and complete management accounts;

Comparing actual expenditure against budgets in a timely manner thereby enabling
corrective action to be taken as necessary;

Making payment for all reasonably incurred LA inputs into delivery of the SLAs in line
with agreed budgets and approved cost variations; and,

Identifying new initiatives and improvements related to managing costs to be
implemented in future years.
IW and LAs work together each year to prepare an ASP to articulate the operational
objectives and initiatives for the following year and the budget costs are derived from these
operational plans. A reporting process takes place each month which facilitates effective
understanding and monitoring of water related expenditure. In addition each LA prepares a
year end forecast of anticipated material expenditure in excess of that already reflected in
the agreed budget. Approval may be provided for additional expenditure in a particular area;
however savings will have to be made in other areas so that the overall agreed budget is not
exceeded, which may impact on the ASP delivery.
The protocol document applies to the following cost management processes:

Payments for LA staff; i.e. reimbursement of payroll costs and related expenses; and

Operational expenditure in respect of goods and services.
These processes are linked with other protocol documents, such as the ProcurementPurchasing Process Protocol, which address the authorisation of work and activities to be
completed. Reports of spend value by appropriate cost classification and location will be
required to support each payment claim made under the SLA. For goods and services, it is
intended that all procurement will go through IW’s Oracle system. In the initial stages of the
SLA there are some exceptions where an LA procures directly. In these circumstances
42
these costs are recharged to IW and supporting documentation is provided, including details
of cost classification and location.
43
9 Constraints and Risks
There are a number of constraints that will impact the IW Asset Operations & Maintenance
function in the delivery of effective and efficient water services, including:

Legislative requirements relating to SLAs;

Extent of the existing supply and services contracts that will transfer to IW;

A significant proportion of waste water loads (estimated at circa 75% of total load)
are treated at plants that are operated under the DBO contracts, these contracts are
typically of 20 year duration and many of the contracts have over 10 years to run ;
and,

The Asset Operations & Maintenance function in IW is faced with the operation of the
water services assets in their current state. In general, the assets have not been
designed and constructed in a manner that is optimal from an operations and
maintenance perspective and furthermore have not been properly maintained. Irish
Water faces higher operations and maintenance costs as a result.
IW also faces a number of risks in developing an Operations & Maintenance Plan and
associated budgets:

Poor data on the existing water services assets make it difficult to effectively and
efficiently operate and maintain the assets;

Uncertainty as to the role and responsibility of IW for Public Group Water Schemes
with no operational governance structures that are supplied from public water
supplies and being de facto operated by local authorities on an informal basis ;

Time taken to transition from existing different and varied approaches to operations
and maintenance of water services assets across 34 LAs to an integrated asset
management approach;

The number of agglomerations requiring Licences and Certificate s is 544 and 546
respectively. At the end of 2013 there were 512 Certificates but only 301 licences in
place. There is a potential impact on Opex in meeting the requirements of these new
licences;

There is a general acceptance that there is need for improve ment in Drinking Water
Quality in some WSZs and with a more significant issue with regard to waste water
discharges. Improving performance will in many cases require capital investment
and other improvements in operations and maintenance; resulting in uncertainty on
the impact of this investment on Opex, which represents a risk to IW;
44

While some provision has been made for growth in terms of new DBO contracts,
there is limited data available to support this assessment and there is a risk that
Opex on additional DBO contracts may not be adequately covered;

No provision for contingency has been include in the Opex budget;

The baseline Opex has been determined following a period of 6 years of budgetary
constraint by LAs and significant savings on LA expenditure under the guidance of
the Local Government ;

The delayed transfer of assets may have implications for Opex incurred by IW during
the first year of operations and more significantly, in collecting data on the existing
asset base;

It is expected that a further Water Services Act will be brought before the Oireachtas
in 2014 to deal with a number of issues that were not addressed in the Water
Services (No. 2) Act, 2013.
This poses a double risk to IW as it may place
constraints on IW pending enactment of this legislation and it may result in additional
requirements being imposed on IW that would impact Operations & Maintenance and
as a consequence on Opex for IW.
45
Appendices
Appendix No. 1 - Glossary of Terms and
Abbreviations
Term/Abbreviation
Description
AER
Annual Environmental Report
Agglomeration
“agglomeration” means an area where the population and/or economic
activities are sufficiently concentrated for urban waste water to be collected
and conducted to an urban waste water treatment plant or to a final
discharge point 15;
ASP
Annual Service Plan
Capex
Capital Expenditure
CCMA
City and County Manager’s Association
CIP
Capital Investment Plan
CMC
Central Management Charge
CSL
Customer Side Leakage
DBO
Design Build & Operate [form of procurement where Service Provider
builds, operates and maintains the infrastructure, typically for a period of 20
years]
DWIRP
Drinking Water Incident Response Plan
EPA
Environmental Protection Agency
ERP
Emergency Response Procedure
FOG
Fats, Oils and Grease (used in the context of control of FOG to sewers)
GHG
Green House Gases
HSE
Health Service Executive
IW
Irish Water
IWIP&OP
Irish Water Industry Procurement and Optimisation Programme
LA
Local Authority
LGER
Local Government Efficiency Review
15
46
Regulation 2 of S.I. No. 254/2001 - Urban Waste Water Treatment Regulations, 2001
Term/Abbreviation
Description
LGMA
Local Government Management Agency
NPS
National Procurement Service
Opex
Operational Expenditure
O&M
Operations & Maintenance
p.e.
Population Equivalent, a measure of the pollution load on a wastewater
treatment plant
RAL
Remedial Action List created and maintained by the EPA to focus attention
on resolving the most serious deficiencies in public water supplies.
RWP
Rural Water Programme
SLA
Service Level Agreement
SOPs
Standard Operating Procedures
Transfer Day
The 1st day of January 2014 is appointed as the transfer day for the
purposes
of the Water Services (No. 2) Act 2013 (No. 50 of 2013) under S.I. No. 576
of 2013
UFW
Unaccounted for Water
UWWTD
Urban Waste Water Treatment Directive
WAM
Work and Asset Management
WHO
World Health Organisation
WSA
Water Services Authority
WSIP
Water Services Investment Programme
WSP
Water Safety Plan
WSTO
Water Services Transition Office
WSZ
A water supply zone is a geographically defined area within which drinking
water comes from one or more sources and water quality is uniform 16.
WWTP
16
47
Wastewater Treatment Plant
The Provision and Quality of Drinking Water in Ireland - A Report for the Year 2012
17
Appendix No. 2 – Extracts from EPA Urban Wastewater Report , 2012
5. Recommendations
Urban waste water is one of the principal pressures on water quality in Ireland and continued financial
investment in waste water infrastructure is vital to ensure that infrastructural improvements specified in
licences are completed in a timely manner and that Ireland meets its obligations under the Urban Was te
Water Treatment Directive and the Water Framework Directive.
To achieve this goal the EPA will pursue five intermediate outcomes. These outcomes can be applied to all
agglomerations, both licensed and at application stage. The EPA makes the following re commendations in
relation to actions to achieve these intermediate outcomes:
5.1 Progress on infrastructural improvements

The provision of secondary treatment for the 11 agglomerations that did not have the required
level of treatment at the time of reporting should be progressed as a matter of priority (see Table 2 2 for the list of 11 agglomerations).

Nutrient reduction must be provided at the 8 agglomerations greater than 10,000 p.e. that continue
to discharge to sensitive areas in the absence of such treatment (see Table 2-3 for the list of 8
agglomerations).

Water services authorities should ensure that appropriate treatment is provided at the 26 locations
identified in Appendix I of this report where waste water is being discharged with either no
treatment or preliminary treatment only. For the 71 agglomerations with primary treatment in place,
it must be determined whether primary treatment is appropriate depending on site specific
conditions. These agglomerations are listed under the county reports i n Appendix B. Higher priority
should be given to those where there is environmental pollution and/or risk to high quality waters.

Water services authorities should implement programmes of improvements required by the waste
water discharge licence within the specified timeframes as these improvements are now legally
binding.

National capacity for sludge treatment needs to improve and the future needs reviewed in light of
new legislation to control on-site waste water treatment systems.
5.2 Reducing the environmental risk profile of agglomerations

Water services authorities should ensure that waste water discharges from the 35 agglomerations
listed in Appendix C (Waste water treatment plants prioritised for enforcement to protect
freshwater pearl mussel catchm ents) of this report do not impact on the habitat of freshwater pearl
mussels.

The 8 waste water works listed in Appendix D (Seriously polluted river locations where the source
of pollution is attributed to urban waste water discharges) of the report as ca using serious pollution
must be upgraded or improved by the relevant water services authorities in order to minimise the
impact of discharges on the receiving waters and restore the waters to at least good status.

Water services authorities should ensure that discharges from the 52 waste water works listed in
Appendix E (Moderately or slightly polluted river locations where there is a high probability that the
17
48
“Focus on Urban Waste Water Discharges in Ireland” report, published by the EPA in February 2012
principle cause of pollution can be attributed to urban waste water discharges) are improved in
order to protect the receiving waters, as there is a high probability that these discharges are the
principle cause of moderate or slight pollution.

Water services authorities should ensure that the impacts of urban waste water discharges on
designated bathing areas are minimised. Discharges of urban wastewater that continue to be the
principal cause of poor quality bathing water should be upgraded to improve discharge quality and
restore the bathing waters to at least good status.

Water services authorities should ensure that discharges from the 55 waste water works listed in
Appendix F (Urban waste water works identified in Pollution Reduction Programmes as key
pressures on designated shellfish waters) of this report do not adversely affect the aquatic habitat
of shellfish within designated shellfish waters.

Urban waste water discharges should be managed and controlled in order to minimise risks to any
drinking water abstractions downstream of waste water discharge points.
5.3 Compliance with effluent quality standards in WWDLs and the UWWTD

Water services authorities should review the operation of, and develop corrective action
programmes for, all urban waste water treatment plants in their functional areas that fail to meet
effluent quality standards, including those less than 500 p.e. Particular priority should be placed on
plants whose discharges are causing or contributing to environmental pollution of receiving waters
(Appendices D & E).

Water services authorities should review sampling programmes to ensu re sufficient sample
numbers are taken each year. Failures due to insufficient sampling should be eliminated.

Key equipment necessary to monitor plant performance, such as composite samplers and flow
meters, should be installed where necessary and maintain ed.

Water services authorities should continue to invest in the training of plant operators in order to
improve the management and operation of waste water treatment plants.
5.4 Environmental incidents and complaints

Maintenance and operation programmes should be put in place for all plant and equipment to
ensure the correct operation of the waste water works at all times and to prevent environmental
pollution. These programmes also serve to improve effluent quality. This programme should also
address the provision of back up equipment (duty and standby) such as mobile generators and
pumps.

All environmental complaints should be dealt with in accordance with the national environmental
complaints procedure.
5.5 Comprehensive and accurate reporting by water service authorities to the EPA

Water services authorities should ensure that all monitoring and analysis is reported in accordance
with the requirements of UWWTD and the individual WWDLs.

Sampling and analyses should be carried out using the methods specified in the WWDL. In
particular, time-based twenty-four hour or flow-proportional composite samples should be taken.

The Annual Environmental Reports should be prepared in accordance with EPA guidelines and
submitted by the 28th February each year.
49

Water services authorities should assess all storm water overflows from their waste water works
for compliance with the ‘Procedures and Criteria in relation to Storm Water Overflows’ and report
the findings to the EPA. Any storm water overflows that are not in compliance should be upgraded
to ensure compliance, or decommissioned.

Water services authorities must improve compliance with the licence condition that covers financial
provision to cover risks or liabilities identified in their environmental liability ri sk assessments.
50
Appendix No. 3 – Extracts from EPA Drinking Water Report for 2012
18
IRISH WATER
Next year marks a new beginning for the delivery of water services in Ireland with the responsibility for the
provision of water services moving from the 34 Local Authorities to one national water authority, Irish
Water, a semi-state company. The EPA will continue to be the environmental regulator with regard to public
water supplies. Irish water is charged with delivering drinking water to homes, businesses and other
organisations with greater efficiency, economies of scale and better strategic infrastructural planning than
has existed in Ireland to-date.
There are a number of challenges that Ireland faces to provide safe and secure drinking water. These
include:






Reducing the population on long-term boil water notices.
Addressing delays to the provision of major water supply projects, and upgrade supplies with no
Cryptosporidium barriers.
Ensuring that supplies are capable of delivering drinking water during al l weather conditions and
variations in raw water supply.
Elimination of lead pipes from the distribution mains and service lines.
Provision of up-to-date monitoring results which allows consumers to gain timely information about
the quality of their drinking water.
Operation of the Water Safety Plan approach in the provision of water supplies.
As the environmental regulator, the EPA will continue to update, track and report the number of supplies on
the Remedial Action List; drinking water exceedances notifications; active boil water notices on public water
supplies; supplies with no Cryptosporidium barriers, the number of water safety plans in place and progress
made in making Ireland a leader in the provision of drinking water. In addition, the Agenc y will continue to
publish the results of all drinking water audits on our website
(www.epa.ie).
3. FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
The main recommendations presented in this chapter are based on an assessment of monitoring results for
2012 and EPA enforcement of the Drinking Water Regulations in 2012. While some of the
recommendations are similar to previous years they are still considered relevant and in need of
implementation by WSAs. New recommendations have been added where issues have been identified and
remedial actions are needed. Recommendations are aimed at all WSAs and should be adopted for all
public water supplies, public group water schemes, private group water schemes, and private supplies, as
applicable.
Findings – Water Supply in Ireland
1.
1. In Ireland, 82% of the population is served by 932 WSA operated public water supplies. The
remaining 18% is served by 632 public group water schemes (serving 2.3% of the population),
433 private group water schemes (serving 4.3%), 1,705 small private supplies (serving 0.8%)
and private wells that are exempt from the regulations (serving 10.6%).
Findings – Public Water Supplies
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
18
51
237 (70%) of the original 339 public water supplies placed on the EPA Remedial Action List
(RAL) have completed the necessary action programmes and have been either replaced,
upgraded or have improved operations.
There are now 147 supplies on the EPA Remedial Action List. The WSAs have indicated that
remedial works in a further 70 supplies will be complete by the end of 2013.
E. coli was detected in 7 (0.8%) public water supplies during compliance monitoring in 2012 as
compared to 12 (1.3%) supplies in 2011. The number has reduced from 87 in 2005,
representing a 92% reduction in the past seven years.
At the end of 2012, one public water supply did not have a chlorine monitor or alarm in place.
Nitrate exceedances were reported in five public water supplies in both 2011 and 2012.
However, the population affected by nitrate exceedances decreased from 3,293 in 2011 to 820
in 2012.
Public water supply compliance with the chemical standards disimproved from 99.5% in 2011
to 99.3% in 2012.
The Provision and Quality of Drinking Water in Ireland - A Report for the Year 2012
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
The number of public water supplies failing to meet the trihalomethanes parametric value
disimproved from 10.9% in 2011 to 14.9% in 2012. This was due to the poor weather
conditions in the summer of 2012 and the inability of some treatment plants to adequately
cope with raw waters during this period.
Aluminium compliance was 98.8% in both 2011 and 2012 while turbidity (at the water
treatment plant) compliance improved from 95.5% in 2011 to 96.0% in 2012.
Pesticide exceedances were notified to the EPA in respect of 16 public water supplies in 2012;
an increase from 6 in 2011. Notably, the herbicide MCPA has increased both in the number of
notifications and in its prevalence over other pesticides.
In 2012, WSAs issued 42 Boil Water Notices (BWN) and Water Restrictions (WR) affecting
approximately 50,000 consumers while 66 BWN and WR affecting approximately 57,000
consumers were lifted.
EPA Groundwater E-Audits undertaken in 2012 found that 13 of 47 supplies visited had poor
source protection, poorly protected springs or well heads and 10 had evidence of
microbiological contamination in raw water sampling. A significant proportion of the
groundwater supplies audited, therefore, were of questionable integrity and security.
EPA general audits in 2012 found that, in tandem with improvements across some key
indicators at drinking water treatment plants visited, there were disimprovements in other
equally critical areas. The findings highlighted the need for further improvements in the
operation of filters, the achievement of final water turbidity of less than 1.0 NTU and in the
protection of spring and well head sources from surface water ingress. Prolonged periods of
heavy rainfall experienced during 2012 appear to have tested the robustness and of treatment
processes in many cases and their ability to respond to changing raw water conditions.
The 2012 drinking water returns showed that 66 Water Safety Plans are in pre paration and
two are complete.
Recommendations - Public Water Supplies
15. WSAs should prioritise improvement works on supplies with a boil water or water restriction
notice in place on all or part of the supply in order to have the required works completed as a
matter of urgency. Following completion of the works, the WSA should liaise with the Health
Service Executive in order to determine whether the completed works allow the removal of the
boil water notice or restriction.
16. WSAs should ensure that all failures to meet the microbiological, chemical and indicator
parametric values are investigated to ensure that the cause of the failure is identified and the
appropriate corrective action is taken. Lessons learnt and corrective measures should be
implemented in other supplies in the county.
17. WSAs should implement the World Health Organisation (WHO) Water Safety Plan approach
to the management of water supplies. The EPA recommends that, in the first instance, Water
Safety Plans should be prepared by the seven WSAs who provide drinking water to the largest
populations in Ireland (Drinking Water Safety Plan Working Group members). WSAs should
also commence the preparation of Water Safety Plans for selected small supplies.
18. WSAs should prioritise remedial works in suppl ies that are on the Remedial Action List of
Public Water Supplies. The actions outlined to the EPA should be completed as soon as
possible and within the timeframe specified to the EPA. Where the necessary works are
complete, the WSA should collate and submit monitoring data without delay, so the EPA can
verify the effectiveness of the remedial works to enable the supply to be removed from the
RAL.
19. WSAs should review the management of chlorine monitors and alarms and ensure that such
monitors are managed correctly (i.e. in the correct location and with an appropriate alarm
setting) and that documented response protocols are in place for dealing with activations of
the alarm. Where issues are outstanding in relation to the response to out of hours alarm
remain these should be resolved without delay.
20. WSAs should carry out chlorine residual monitoring in the network at a frequency which allows
WSA personnel to respond quickly to any deviation in chlorine levels in the network.
21. WSAs should ensure that all disinfection systems are operated in such a way that
undisinfected water does not enter the distribution mains at any time. WSAs should have
regard to EPA Advice Notes and the EPA Water Treatment Manual on Disinfection and should
optimise the operation and m anagement of the disinfection system to minimise disinfection byproduct formation. Disinfection contact times should be calculated for all supplies and it should
be ensured that adequate contact time is achieved prior to serving the first consumer.
22. WSAs should ensure that filters are managed correctly and their performance reviewed
regularly as a matter of priority. Final water turbidity should be closely monitored and
52
23.
24.
25.
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.
31.
32.
53
responsive action taken as is necessary in order to achieve levels of less than 1.0 NTU at all
times
WSAs should ensure that sources of drinking water supplies are adequately protected against
potential sources of contamination. Potential sources of pollution should be identified and
managed so as to reduce risk of contamination in line with the Water Safety Plan approach.
Where public water supplies are using surface water or water influenced by surface water as
their source, WSAs should ensure that a Cryptosporidium treatment barrier is in place. If these
barriers are not in place, WSAs should implement an appropriate improvement plan without
delay which may involve upgrading, replacing or closing the plant. Cryptosporidium risk
assessments should be carried out on all supplies to assist in the identification of high risk
supplies and the actions that are necessary to reduce this risk.
WSAs should examine the cause of trihalomethanes exceedances and should optimise plant
operation and management of the distribution network to reduce the levels of THMs in supply.
The formation of THMs can be minimised by effective coagulation, sedimentation and filtration
by removing organic precursors prior to final disinfection or by additional treatment to slow
sand filters. However, the efficiency of the disinfection system must never be compromised in
an attempt to reduce THM levels. WSAs should have regard to the recently published EPA
Advice note on disinfection by-products in drinking water.
WSAs detecting pesticide exceedances in public water supplies should have regard to Advice
Note No. 13: Pesticides in Drinking Water in determining the appropriate actions to take.
When conducting a lead survey, WSAs should have regard to the new lead parametric value
of 10 μg/l (effective from 25th December 2013) and to the EPA Advice Note No. 1: Lead
Compliance Monitoring and Surveys.
WSAs should remove lead distribution mains as a priority in accordance with EPA Advice Note
No. 2: Action programmes to restore the quality of drinking water impacted b y lead pipes and
lead plumbing. Such works should be completed no later than 25 December 2013 (i.e. when
the more stringent parametric value of 10 μg/l becomes effective.
WSAs should review the type and format of information provided to the public and as a
minimum should implement the requirements of Ministerial Direction WSP6/09.
Prolonged heavy rainfall events experienced during the summer of 2012 challenged many
treatment processes in public water supplies. WSAs should ensure that treatment process are
both robust and responsive to changing raw water quality order to effectively and reliably treat
water that meets the standards set in the Drinking Water Regulations in all conditions.
WSAs should have in place operational Drinking Water Incident Response Plans (DWIRP) in
accordance with the requirements of the Department of the Environment, Community and
Local Government (DEHLG) Circular letter L4/09 issued in April 2009 (including for adverse
weather conditions). An annual review and rehearsal of the DWIRP procedures should be
carried out so that all personnel involved understand and are familiar with exactly what they
have to do when an incident or emergency occurs.
All drinking water operators should undergo appropriate training in the provision of drinking
water such as that delivered by the Water Services Training Group (www.wsntg.ie). As a
minimum, each operator should be trained for each treatment process for which they are
required to operate at the plant.
Appendix No. 4 – DBO Contracts Wastewater Treatment Plants
Organisation Name/ Employer
Scheme/Agglomeration Name
Plant
Design
PE
Dublin City Council
Ringsend
1,640,000
Cork City Council
Cork City Carrigrenan
413,000
Waterford City Council
Waterford city
190,600
Dun Laoghaire Rathdown County Council
Shanganagh
186,000
Louth County Council
Dundalk
179,000
Limerick City Council
Limerick (Bunlickey)
130,000
Louth County Council
Drogheda
101,000
Galway City Council
Galway (Mutton Island)
91,600
South Tipperary County Council
Clonmel WWTP
80,000
Fingal County Council
Balbriggan/Skerries
70,000
Fingal County Council
Portrane/Donabate/Rush/Lusk
65,000
Westmeath County Council
Mullingar
55,000
Sligo County Council
Sligo WWTP
50,000
Offaly County Council
Tullamore
45,000
Wexford County Council
Wexford town
45,000
Laois County Council
Portlaoise WWTP
39,000
Mayo County Council
Castlebar
34,000
Wicklow County Council
Wicklow
32,000
Wicklow County Council
Greystones
30,000
Waterford County Council
Dungarvan
25,000
Donegal County Council
Letterkenny WWTP
20,000
Cork County Council
Fermoy
20,000
Waterford County Council
Tramore
20,000
Cork County Council
Mallow
18,000
Wexford County Council
New Ross
16,000
Cork County Council
Clonakilty WWTP
15,000
Cork County Council
Midleton
15,000
Clare County Council
Donegal County Council
Shannon Town
Donegal Town
12,500
54
Plant
Design
PE
12,000
Organisation Name/ Employer
Scheme/Agglomeration Name
Leitrim County Council
Carrick on Shannon
11,500
South Tipperary County Council
Carrick-on-Suir
11,000
Cork County Council
Kinsale WWTP
10,000
South Tipperary County Council
Tipperary Town
9,800
Wexford County Council
Rosslare Harbour
9,400
Kildare County Council
Monasterevin WWTP
9,000
South Tipperary County Council
Cashel
9,000
Kildare County Council
Kildare Town
7,000
Meath County Council
Duleek
7,000
Wexford County Council
Bunclody
6,500
Donegal County Council
Ballyshannon WWTP
6,100
Wicklow County Council
Blessington
6,000
Cork County Council
Bantry WWTP
6,000
Meath County Council
Athboy
5,800
Sligo County Council
Enniscrone
5,000
North Tipperary County Council
Templemore
5,000
South Tipperary County Council
Cahir
5,000
Cork County Council
Skibbereen
4,700
Sligo County Council
Ballysadare
4,500
Donegal County Council
Killybegs
4,200
Cork County Council
North Cobh
4,000
Limerick County Council
Kilmallock
4,000
Wicklow County Council
Rathdrum
3,500
Cork County Council
Dunmanway
3,500
Mayo County Council
Kiltimagh
3,333
Longford County Council
Granard
3,200
Cork County Council
Buttevant
3,150
Meath County Council
Summerhill
3,000
Galway County Council
Dunmore WWTP
3,000
55
Organisation Name/ Employer
Scheme/Agglomeration Name
Plant
Design
PE
Galway County Council
Headford
3,000
Cork County Council
Whitechurch
3,000
South Tipperary County Council
Fethard WWTP
3,000
Longford County Council
Edgeworthstown
2,700
Leitrim County Council
Roosky (Co. Roscommon)
2,600
Sligo County Council
Carney
2,500
Sligo County Council
Gurteen
2,500
Sligo County Council
Coolaney
2,500
Sligo County Council
Dromore West & Environs
2,500
Kilkenny County Council
Kilmacow
2,500
Leitrim County Council
Dromahair
2,200
Longford County Council
Ballymahon
2,125
Leitrim County Council
Kinlough
2,100
Roscommon County Council
Strokestown
2,076
Cork County Council
Castlemartyr
2,000
South Tipperary County Council
Ballyclerihan
2,000
Longford County Council
Newtownforbes
1,800
Cork County Council
Doneraile
1,675
Cork County Council
Cloughduv
1,500
Cork County Council
Cloyne
1,400
Clare County Council
Kilmurry Ibrickane (Quilty)
1,365
Kerry County Council
Barraduff
1,316
Clare County Council
Scarriff
1,300
Cork County Council
Schull
1,266
Roscommon County Council
Creagh
1,220
Longford County Council
Drumlish
1,200
Meath County Council
Donore
1,200
Mayo County Council
Achill Sound
1,200
Cork County Council
South Tipperary County Council
Mogeely
Killenaule
1,200
56
Plant
Design
PE
1,200
Organisation Name/ Employer
Scheme/Agglomeration Name
Cork County Council
Baltimore
1,150
Meath County Council
Kilmainhamwood
1,000
Donegal County Council
Rossnowlagh WWTP
1,000
Roscommon County Council
Ballyleague WWTP
1,000
Cork County Council
Belgooly
1,000
Cork County Council
Killeagh
1,000
South Tipperary County Council
Ardfinnan
1,000
South Tipperary County Council
Ballyporeen
1,000
South Tipperary County Council
Clogheen
1,000
South Tipperary County Council
Kilsheelan
1,000
Cork County Council
Ladysbridge
950
Roscommon County Council
Tulsk
820
Meath County Council
Moynalty
800
Meath County Council
Rathmolyon
800
Roscommon County Council
Ballinlough
800
Roscommon County Council
Elphin
800
Roscommon County Council
Hodson Bay
800
Cork County Council
Kilbrittain
800
Sligo County Council
Aclare & Environs
750
Roscommon County Council
Loughlynn
700
Roscommon County Council
Arigna WWTP
650
Clare County Council
Feakle
635
Longford County Council
Clondra
600
Roscommon County Council
Cootehall
600
Cork County Council
Cill Na Martra
600
Roscommon County Council
Knockcroghery WWTP
590
Kildare County Council
Allenwood
560
Galway County Council
Leenana
550
Cork County Council
Riverstick WWTP
550
57
Organisation Name/ Employer
Scheme/Agglomeration Name
Plant
Design
PE
Galway County Council
Kilkerrin
500
Roscommon County Council
Frenchpark
500
Roscommon County Council
Lisacul
500
Sligo County Council
Cloonacool and Environs
500
Clare County Council
Corofin
500
Cork County Council
Aghabullogue
500
Cork County Council
Kilbrin
500
Kerry County Council
Waterville WWTP
500
Cork County Council
Ballygarvan
463
Sligo County Council
Easkey
450
Cork County Council
Halfway
450
Cork County Council
Rylane
450
Cavan County Council
Stradone Waste Water Works
400
Cork County Council
Ardgroom
400
North Tipperary County Council
Terryglass
400
South Tipperary County Council
Clonoulty
400
South Tipperary County Council
Hollyford
400
Cavan County Council
Mountnugent Waste Water Works
350
Longford County Council
Abbeyshrule
300
North Tipperary County Council
Clonmore
300
North Tipperary County Council
Loughmore
300
North Tipperary County Council
Upperchurch
300
South Tipperary County Council
Cullen
300
Cavan County Council
Crosskeys Waste Water Works
275
Leitrim County Council
Cloone
250
Cork County Council
Courtbrack
250
Cork County Council
Kilmacsimon
225
Leitrim County Council
Killarga
200
Leitrim County Council
Leitrim County Council
Kiltyclogher
Tullaghan
200
58
Plant
Design
PE
200
Organisation Name/ Employer
Scheme/Agglomeration Name
Leitrim County Council
Drumcong
150
Kerry County Council
Firies
150
Leitrim County Council
Longford County Council
Longford County Council
Longford County Council
Ballinagleragh
Ardagh
Aughnacliffe
Ballinalee
Kilcogy Sewerage Scheme Contract 2 - M&E
Plant
Redhills Waste Water Works
Drumkeeran
Jamestown
Killala WW
Bunninadden WWTP
Grenagh
Ros Ard Upper Glanmire
Milltown WWTP
Ballynagaul
100
Cavan County Council
Cavan County Council
Leitrim County Council
Leitrim County Council
Mayo County Council
Sligo County Council
Cork County Council
Cork County Council
Kerry County Council
Waterford County Council
59
Appendix No. 5 – DBO Contracts Water Treatment Plants
Local Authority
SchemeName
Population
Served
Limerick City Council
Limerick City Water Supply
55,000
Kildare County Council
Barrow Abstraction Scheme At Srowland
Clare County Council
Ennis PWS
30,000
Donegal County Council
Letterkenny Pws
14,075
Sligo County Council
Foxes Den Public Water Supply
11,375
Kildare County Council
Monasterevin PWS
4,500
Kildare County Council
Rathangan
4,000
Cavan County Council
Ballyconnell P.W.S.S.
1,220
Sligo County Council
Kilsellagh WTP
1,038
Galway County Council
Cleggan/Claddaghduff
1,025
Carlow County Council
Hacketstown
982
Kerry County Council
Waterville PWSS 075H
890
Wicklow County Council
Hollywood Donard Public Supply
701
Laois County Council
Swan Pws (South Leinster Bundle)
572
Monaghan County Council
Newbliss
492
Monaghan County Council
Inniskeen
489
Monaghan County Council
Smithboro
483
Wicklow County Council
Roscommon
County
Council
Ballyknockan Public Supply
450
Knockcroghery PWS
450
Wicklow County Council
Coolboy Coolafancy Public Supply
337
Wicklow County Council
Stratford Public Supply
321
Wicklow County Council
Kiltegan Public Supply
294
Cavan County Council
Bawnboy P.W.S.
280
Wicklow County Council
Knockanarrigan Davidstown Public Supply
255
Wicklow County Council
Knockananna Public Supply
165
Wicklow County Council
Rathdangan Public Supply
153
Wicklow County Council
Barndarrig Public Supply
135
Wicklow County Council
Thomastown Public Supply
126
Wicklow County Council
Kirikee Public Supply
60
Local Authority
SchemeName
Population
Served
92
Wicklow County Council
Grangecon Public Supply
49
Wicklow County Council
Ballycoog Public Supply
46
Galway County Council
Clonbur Ps/Cornamona P.S.
-
Westmeath County Council
Portloman Water Treatment Plant
Cavan County Council
Roscommon
County
Council
Knockataggert P.W.S.S.
Cork County Council
Bantry PWS
61
Lecarrow