****
Scottish Executive*Consultations  

Making it work together
* * *
* Home | Topics | About | News | Publications | Consultations | Search | Links | Contacts | Help *
*
 

< Previous | Contents | Next >

Investing in Water Services 2006 - 2014

3 MAINTAINING SERVICE STANDARDS (CAPITAL MAINTENANCE)

Introduction

3.1 This chapter outlines the emerging conclusions from the working group looking at the level of investment which will be required to keep the industry’s current assets working properly to deliver the standards of service customers want.

What is capital maintenance?

3.2 Capital maintenance describes the need for Scottish Water to invest sufficient funding in its infrastructure to deliver at least existing levels of service, in terms of long-term sustainability, water quality and environmental considerations. Funds are spent on above ground assets (non infrastructure), e.g. wastewater and water treatment works, and below ground assets (infrastructure), e.g. underground pipes, for water and waste water.

3.3 It would cost approximately £32 billion7 at today’s prices to replace all of Scottish Water’s assets. It is vitally important therefore to maintain the infrastructure in a reasonable condition to offset the danger of significant decline in serviceability of its assets (e.g. more water main bursts). This would adversely affect the quality of service that the customer receives.

What is happening at present?

3.4 Within the current investment programme, a significant proportion (nearly £900 million over 4 years) is being invested specifically to maintain the existing infrastructure and prevent its deterioration. Included in this is investment to:

  • replace 3,051km of water mains - (1,896 miles);
  • replace 446km of sewers - (277 miles); and
  • maintain the effective operation of the existing infrastructure.

How were the investment requirements for Quality and Standards III derived?

3.5 The specialist working group which looked at this issue considered a number of different approaches for establishing the appropriate level of investment required to maintain the existing infrastructure. These included a number of established engineering or finance-based methods as well as a new approach called the Common Framework Approach. The Common Framework Approach is considered to be the water industry’s best practice approach on this issue. Rather than looking backwards to either historic spend or the specific engineering condition of assets, it models the impact of capital maintenance upon asset performance as measured by a suite of what are called ‘serviceability measures’ or customer-focussed service measures. As the methodology seeks to provide a better relationship between capital maintenance spend and the standard of service the customer receives, the working group decided to use this approach.

What are the investment requirements for Quality and Standards III?

3.6 The Common Framework Approach links level of service to a set of ‘Serviceability Indicators’ specified below. With two exceptions8, these are based on measures similar to those used by OFWAT 9in England and Wales but they are still subject to refinement by the group. The indicators currently being used are outlined in table 4a and 4b below.

Table 4a: Wastewater Serviceability Standards and costs

Wastewater
Serviceability Indicator

Description

Number
as at 31/3/06

Number of internal properties flooded due to other causes

Flooding that is caused by a means other than overloaded sewers. Such "other causes" are blockages, collapses or operational failures that prevent the sewer system from carrying sewage, and subsequently the sewage discharges to the surface uncontrolled

 

366

Number of pollution incidents(i.e. due to collapses, chokes or Pumping Station operational failure)

Pollution Incidents resulting from uncontrolled sewage discharges (flooding and overflows) from the sewer network to a watercourse or area that harm the environment, habitat or population.

 

555

Number of collapses per 1,000km

Structural collapse of a sewer that prevents it from carrying sewage. Partial collapses also occur which do not completely prevent the sewer from carrying sewage but may decrease performance

 

56

Number of failing wastewater treatment works (capital maintenance)

A Wastewater Treatment Works is deemed to be "failing" if its discharge does not comply with the sanitary requirements (numerical limits for a number of biological and chemical parameters) set out in the discharge consent, according to a permitted number of exceedences for each parameter (derived from statistical look up tables - LUT).

45

Total estimated maintenance costs (over the 8 years period)

£1,300m 10

Source: Scottish Water’s Work Package 2/1: Scottish Water Assets Interim Report Version 2

Table 4b Water Serviceability Standards and costs

Water
Serviceability Indicator

Description

Number
as at 31/3/06

Number of bursts per unit length

Structural failure of a water main that prevents it from carrying water or results in loss of pressure in the main. Quoted as the number of bursts per 1,000km of mains

198.3

Number of unplanned interruptions exceeding 12 hours

Loss of supply to customers for greater than 12 hours, either as the result of a burst or through a failure of another infrastructure asset.

3000

Number of properties on the low pressure register

The number of properties receiving pressure below the reference level.

14,942

Water Quality 1000 Index

The Water Quality 1000 Index covers regulatory compliance at customers’ taps with 10 drinking water parameters. These are total coliforms, faecal coliforms, colour, turbidity, pH, aluminium, iron, manganese, lead and trihalomethanes. The 1000 Index is subject to refinement as an indicator because not all of these 10 parameters are related to capital maintenance.

985

Number of microbiological (coliform) failures at water treatment works

The coliform group of organisms is present in the gut of all warm-blooded animals and also widely distributed in the environment. While their presence in water leaving a water treatment works indicates a failure of the disinfection system.

85

Total estimated maintenance costs
(over the 8 years period)

£920m

Source: Scottish Water’s Work Package 2/1: Scottish Water Assets Interim Report Version 2

3.7 The costs identified for the period 2006-14 are based on the assumption that the level of service found at 31 March 2006, will be maintained throughout the forthcoming investment period. The definition of this scenario and the service standards associated with it are outlined in the tables above together with the costs. Investing to maintain the existing infrastructure is a fundamental requirement for the industry and is justified on a number of grounds. Firstly, given that the replacement value of all Scottish Water assets is in the region of £32 billion, it is important to invest in appropriate levels of capital maintenance to ensure that previous investment is not wasted. Secondly, investment in capital maintenance impacts directly upon the standards of service Scottish Water delivers to more than 5 million customers. For these reasons it is important that these standards do not deteriorate.

What are the costs associated with maintaining serviceability?

3.8 To maintain the level of service throughout the forthcoming investment period to that found at 31 March 2006 will cost an estimated £2.2 billion or £275 million per annum. The addition of a further £500 million of investment in Capital Maintenance over the Q&S III period would allow for further improvements to the above serviceability measures. For example, distributing this funding across water and wastewater infrastructure plus non-infrastructure, and for leakage reduction would provide enhancements in all of these areas. It could provide further improvements in water quality, reduce leakage rates across Scotland, reduce the numbers of failing wastewater treatment works and rates of flooding and sewer collapses.

How do we decide upon final investment requirements?

3.9 Further work is being undertaken to consider options for effecting savings on the global figures shown above. For example, it may be possible to deal with sewer collapses in a different way. There may also be instances of some costs overlapping with the work/costs from specialist working groups considering water quality and environmental requirements.

3.10 The process of finalising preferred investment options for capital maintenance is underway and the 4 guiding principles for consideration across the consultation exercise are listed at paragraph 1.17 above.

Consultation point 3
Do you agree that maintaining serviceability levels (as defined above) should be an essential objective for Quality and Standards III?

Consultation point 4
What are the most important serviceability standards?

Consultation point 5
If you wish to see a higher level of serviceability, do you wish this benefit secured from
a) higher charges or b) lower spend on other areas of capital investment?

 

< Previous | Contents | Next >

* * *
* Home | Topics | About | News | Publications | Consultations | Search | Links | Contacts | Help *
Crown Copyright | Privacy policy | Content Disclaimer | General enquiries