Page 1
Non-Revenue Water Reduction:
Audit, Meter Testing, and Beyond
August 7 2014
1
Non-Revenue Water Reduction:
Audit, Meter Testing, and Beyond
ISAWWA Meter Symposium (Hillside)
August 7, 2014
Presented By:
Mike Pubentz, P.E., Director of Public Works, Village of Montgomery
Michele L. Piotrowski, P.E., LEED AP, Engineering Enterprises, Inc.
Overview
• Background
• Water Loss History Prior to 2011
• A Dawn of A New Era: AWWA Water Audit
• Findings and Benchmarks
• Action Plan
• Next Steps
Page 2
Non-Revenue Water Reduction:
Audit, Meter Testing, and Beyond
August 7 2014
2
Background Information
Village of Montgomery, Kane Co., IL
Background
Page 3
Non-Revenue Water Reduction:
Audit, Meter Testing, and Beyond
August 7 2014
3
Background
Residential Water Consumers
Village 19,089
Unincorporated 8,399
Total 27,488
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
1985 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 2020 2025 2030 2035
Po
pu
lati
on
Year
EXHIBIT B: HISTORICAL AND PROJECTED POPULATIONS
Village of Montgomery, Kane and Kendall Counties,IL
4,268 (1990 U.S. Census)
5,199 (1998 Special Census)
22,705 (2022 Forecast)
18,438 (2010 U.S. Census)
1.75% Projected Annual Growth Rate
27,007 (2032 Forecast)
17,062 (2008 Special Census)
14,407 (2006 Special Census)
5,471 (2000 U.S. Census)
Background Information
Existing Water Works System
Wells No. 14 & 15 WTP LSWTP
Well No.8 WTP
3 Pressure Zones, 3 WTP Distribution Points,
127+ Miles of Water Main
Page 4
Non-Revenue Water Reduction:
Audit, Meter Testing, and Beyond
August 7 2014
4
BackgroundMetered Water By Consumer Type
Incorporated Residential53.5%
Incorporated Commercial & Industrial
20.8%
Unicorporated Residential23.3%
Unincorporated Commercial & Industrial
2.4%
Exhibit D: Metered Water By Consumer TypeFiscal Year 2012
Village of Montgomery, Kane and Kendall Counties, Illinois
Background
0
100,000
200,000
300,000
400,000
500,000
600,000
700,000
800,000
900,000
2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Mete
red
Wate
r(1
,000 G
all
on
s)
Year
Historical Metered Water
Incorporated Residential
Incorporated Commercial & Industrial
Unincorporated Residential
Unincorporated Commercial & Industrial
Total
Metered Water By Consumer Type
Page 5
Non-Revenue Water Reduction:
Audit, Meter Testing, and Beyond
August 7 2014
5
Background
Water Loss(Treatment and Distribution)
Background
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Res
iden
tial
Wat
er U
se (
GP
CP
D)
Fiscal Year
Residential Water Use Trend Based on Pumped Water Use Data
(GPCPD)
Residential Water Use (GPCPD)
Trendline - Residential Water Use
Page 6
Non-Revenue Water Reduction:
Audit, Meter Testing, and Beyond
August 7 2014
6
Background
• Why Calculate Water Loss?
– Good Steward of a Limited Resource
– Where is Our Water Going?
– Water Rate Increases
• Operational Costs Need to be Contained
• Heightened Board/Political Pressure
• Unincorporated/Incorporated Costs
– Capital Improvement Planning – Determine
Optimal Locations to Use $$
– Regulations
Water Loss Prior to 2011
• “Unaccounted for Water” = 19±%
• Reviewing Bi-Monthly = Not Accurate
Water Use Period Billing Water Water Hydrant Water used Number of Water Lost from Well No. 8 Well No. 14 Central Bulk Unaccounted % of
2004 Date Produced1
Metered2
Flushing3
Fire Fighting4,5
Main Breaks6
Water Main Breaks7
WTP Losses8
WTP Losses8
WTP Losses9
Sales Water Unaccounted
Gal. Gal. Gal. Gal. Gal. Gal. Gal. Gal. Gal. Gal.
January/February March 127,138,000 79,275,000 0 1,386,000 22 4,219,000 884,640 0 3,880,800 139,000 37,353,560 29.38%
March/April May 134,979,000 95,533,000 13,200,000 1,386,000 3 1,050,800 1,107,930 43,500 3,863,880 459,000 18,334,890 13.58%
May/June July 146,484,000 109,538,000 0 1,386,000 3 1,600,000 1,081,740 514,380 3,731,160 482,000 28,150,720 19.22%
July/August Sept. 157,102,000 114,130,000 0 1,398,000 12 4,261,000 1,600,650 319,770 3,723,560 459,000 31,210,020 19.87%
September/October Nov. 140,149,000 88,736,000 13,200,000 1,386,000 8 2,302,600 69,240 1,461,330 3,565,280 1,014,000 28,414,550 20.27%
November/December Jan. 119,563,000 94,388,000 0 1,386,000 12 1,562,000 28,380 915,060 3,524,600 1,001,000 16,757,960 14.02%
Total 825,415,000 581,600,000 26,400,000 8,328,000 60 14,995,400 4,772,580 3,254,040 22,289,280 3,554,000 160,221,700 19.41%
2004 Water Loss SummaryVillage of Montgomery, Kane and Kendall Counties, Illinois
2004-2007
Page 7
Non-Revenue Water Reduction:
Audit, Meter Testing, and Beyond
August 7 2014
7
• Regional Water Loss Calculation/Form
• “Unaccounted for Water” = 15-16%
Water Loss Prior to 2011
Advantages:
• WTP vs Distribution Losses
• Benchmark w/ Local
Utilities
2008-2010
Challenges:
• No Data Validity
• Subjectivity in Unaccounted For
Water
• No Universal Benchmarks
• Financial Impact?
AWWA Auditing:
Dawn of a New Era
• Common Terminology
• Benchmarking
– Village & Other Utilities
• Financial Impact
• Data Validity of Data
• “Buckets” of Water Loss
– Real Losses
– Apparent Losses
Page 8
Non-Revenue Water Reduction:
Audit, Meter Testing, and Beyond
August 7 2014
8
NON-REVENUE WATER (NRW)
NRW = Water Loss + Unbilled Consumption
Common Terminology
Unaccounted ForWater
Imprecise, Inconsistent, and Unreliable
=
AWWA Auditing:
Dawn of a New Era
Findings & Benchmarks“The Buckets of Water Loss”
AWWA WLCC Free Water Audit Software: Water Balance Water Audit Report For: Report Yr:
Village of Montgomery 2012
Water ExportedBilled Water Exported
0.000
Billed Authorized Consumption
Billed Metered Consumption (inc.
water exported)Revenue Water
664.933
Own Sources Authorized Consumption 664.948 Billed Unmetered Consumption 664.948
(Adjusted for known errors)0.015
676.560Unbilled Authorized Consumption
Unbilled Metered Consumption Non-Revenue
Water (NRW)0.453
892.713 11.612 Unbilled Unmetered Consumption
11.159
Water Supplied Unauthorized Consumption 227.765
Apparent Losses 2.232
892.713 22.460 Customer Metering Inaccuracies
13.579
Systematic Data Handling Errors
Water Losses 6.649
Water Imported 216.153Leakage on Transmission and/or
Distribution Mains
Real Losses Not broken down
0.000193.693
Leakage and Overflows at Utility's
Storage Tanks
Not broken down
Leakage on Service Connections
Not broken down
Non-Revenue Water =
Page 9
Non-Revenue Water Reduction:
Audit, Meter Testing, and Beyond
August 7 2014
9
• Real Loss
– Physical losses = Leakage + Tank Overflows
– Value = Marginal Production Cost
Impact = increase in operational expense
• Apparent Loss
– Paper Losses = Customer Metering
Inaccuracy + Theft + Data Handling Errors
– Value = Retail Rate (Decrease in Revenue)
Common Terminology
AWWA Auditing:
Dawn of a New Era
Findings & Benchmarks“The Buckets of Water Loss”
AWWA WLCC Free Water Audit Software: Water Balance Water Audit Report For: Report Yr:
Village of Montgomery 2012
Water ExportedBilled Water Exported
0.000
Billed Authorized Consumption
Billed Metered Consumption (inc.
water exported)Revenue Water
664.933
Own Sources Authorized Consumption 664.948 Billed Unmetered Consumption 664.948
(Adjusted for known errors)0.015
676.560Unbilled Authorized Consumption
Unbilled Metered Consumption Non-Revenue
Water (NRW)0.453
892.713 11.612 Unbilled Unmetered Consumption
11.159
Water Supplied Unauthorized Consumption 227.765
Apparent Losses 2.232
892.713 22.460 Customer Metering Inaccuracies
13.579
Systematic Data Handling Errors
Water Losses 6.649
Water Imported 216.153Leakage on Transmission and/or
Distribution Mains
Real Losses Not broken down
0.000193.693
Leakage and Overflows at Utility's
Storage Tanks
Not broken down
Leakage on Service Connections
Not broken down
Real Losses = 193.69 MG
Page 10
Non-Revenue Water Reduction:
Audit, Meter Testing, and Beyond
August 7 2014
10
Findings & Benchmarks“The Buckets of Water Loss”
AWWA WLCC Free Water Audit Software: Water Balance Water Audit Report For: Report Yr:
Village of Montgomery 2012
Water ExportedBilled Water Exported
0.000
Billed Authorized Consumption
Billed Metered Consumption (inc.
water exported)Revenue Water
664.933
Own Sources Authorized Consumption 664.948 Billed Unmetered Consumption 664.948
(Adjusted for known errors)0.015
676.560Unbilled Authorized Consumption
Unbilled Metered Consumption Non-Revenue
Water (NRW)0.453
892.713 11.612 Unbilled Unmetered Consumption
11.159
Water Supplied Unauthorized Consumption 227.765
Apparent Losses 2.232
892.713 22.460 Customer Metering Inaccuracies
13.579
Systematic Data Handling Errors
Water Losses 6.649
Water Imported 216.153Leakage on Transmission and/or
Distribution Mains
Real Losses Not broken down
0.000193.693
Leakage and Overflows at Utility's
Storage Tanks
Not broken down
Leakage on Service Connections
Not broken down
Apparent Losses = 22.46 MG
• Data Validity
– Accuracy/Confidence Level in the numbers?
– Based on a 1-100 scale.
Common Terminology
64
Findings & Benchmarks
Page 11
Non-Revenue Water Reduction:
Audit, Meter Testing, and Beyond
August 7 2014
11
ILI =
Findings & BenchmarksInfrastructure Leakage Index (ILI)
Current Annual Real Losses (CARL)
Unavoidable Annual Real Losses (UARL)
UARL = Lowest Technically Achievable Annual Real Losses for
a Well-Maintained, Well-Managed System
2.99
• Production/Operations Costs
– Electrical
– Chemicals
– Sludge Removal
• Retail Costs
Findings & BenchmarksFinancial Impact
$231,424
Page 12
Non-Revenue Water Reduction:
Audit, Meter Testing, and Beyond
August 7 2014
12
Findings & BenchmarksPriority Areas
Key Performance Indicators FY2011 FY2012
North American
Data Set (Average)
Financial Indicators
Non-Revenue Water as Percent by Volume of Water Supplied: 25.6% 25.5% 22.6%
Non-Revenue Water as Percent by Cost of Operating System: 6.1% 5.5% 10.0%
Annual Cost of Apparent Losses: $ 104,904 $ 111,179 N/A
Annual Cost of Real Losses: $ 114,403 $ 120,245 N/A
Operational Efficiency Indicators
Apparent Losses Per Service Connection Per Day (gallons/connection/day): 6.8 6.7 15.0
Real Losses Per Service Connection Per Day (gallons/connection/day): 59.0 57.6 63.3
Unavoidable Annual Real Losses (UARL) (million gallons/year): 64.7 64.7 N/A
From Above, Real Losses = Current Annual Real Losses (CARL) (million gallons/year): 198.64 193.69 N/A
Infrastructure Leakage Index (ILI) [CARL/UARL]: 3.07 2.99 3.57
Validity Score 64 64 75
Findings & Benchmarks
Page 13
Non-Revenue Water Reduction:
Audit, Meter Testing, and Beyond
August 7 2014
13
• Why Master Meter Testing?
– Water Loss = Water Supplied – Water Consumed
Testing Leads to Accurate Water Loss Calc
Action PlanMaster Meter Testing
Master Meter Adjustment = Assumption
• Test Meters In Place– Test meters at typical flow
rates
– Accounts for piping
configuration and other
location-specific variances
– Compare meter reading to
a separate measurement
of volume or flow in a pipe
(i.e. Pitot Test) - NOT
simply checking electronic
calibration of a transducer
Action PlanMaster Meter Testing
Page 14
Non-Revenue Water Reduction:
Audit, Meter Testing, and Beyond
August 7 2014
14
Action PlanMaster Meter Testing
Distribution Source LocationsLSTP Effluent = +3.0%Wells #14&15 WTP Effluent = -4.3%Well #8 WTP Effluent = NA
Action Plan
• How to Handle Master
Meters in AWWA Water
Audit Form– Only one entry for meter error
adjustment - Must “do the math”
for a single volumetric
adjustment for the year
– Master Meters Are For Supply
and Meters That Measure Large
Export Flows
Master Meter Testing
Page 15
Non-Revenue Water Reduction:
Audit, Meter Testing, and Beyond
August 7 2014
15
Action PlanLeak Detection
Action Plan
0.0
10.0
20.0
30.0
40.0
50.0
60.0
70.0
80.0
90.0
100.0
110.0
120.0
130.0
140.0
150.0
Nu
mb
er
of
Bre
ak
s P
er
10
0 M
ile
s o
f M
ain
Year
Village
Boulder Hill
* Resource: AwwaRF Report 91165, "Main Break Prediction, Prevention and Control," Neil S.
Typical water mains break25 to 27 times per 100 miles of water main
annually*
Water Main Break Analysis
Page 16
Non-Revenue Water Reduction:
Audit, Meter Testing, and Beyond
August 7 2014
16
Action PlanWater Main Break Analysis
Year No. of Breaks
Breaks Per 100 Miles
2010 9 330
2011 6 220
Action PlanTargeted Water Main Replacement
• Water Main Breaks
• Water Quality
• Water Main Age
Page 17
Non-Revenue Water Reduction:
Audit, Meter Testing, and Beyond
August 7 2014
17
Action Plan
• Preliminary Cost Estimates
– 18,900 LF New Pipe
– 109 New Hydrants
– 121 New Valves
– 282 New Service Lines
Action Plan
Funding – Conventional vs IEPA PWS Loan
– Conventional
– IEPA Public Water Supply Revolving Loan
Page 18
Non-Revenue Water Reduction:
Audit, Meter Testing, and Beyond
August 7 2014
18
Action Plan
• Test and Replace 50-
100 Meters Based On:
– Location
– Age
• Calculate Repayment
Period
Customer Meter Testing
FY2013Variable Production
Cost = 575.94$ per MG = 0.58$ per 1,000 Gallons
(Variable Production costs include electric, sludge removal, and water chemicals.)
Incorporated Rate = 4.90$ per 1,000 Gallons
Unincorporated Rate = 6.03$ per 1,000 Gallons
Residential
FY2012 Billed
Water Use
(1,000 Gallons)
Meter
Inaccuracy
Water Not Being
Billed Due to
Meter Inaccuracies
(1,000 Gallons)
Variable
Production
Cost
# of Meters to
Be Replaced @
$300/Meter
Lost Revenue
Based on
Rates
# of Meters to
Be Replaced
@ $300/Meter
Incorporated 355,075 1% 3551 2,045$ 6.8 17,400$ 58.0
Unincorporated 154,930 1549 892$ 3.0 9,340$ 31.1
Incorporated 2% 7102 4,090$ 13.6 34,800$ 116.0
Unincorporated 3099 1,785$ 5.9 18,687$ 62.3
Incorporated 3% 10652 6,135$ 20.4 52,195$ 174.0
Unincorporated 4648 2,677$ 8.9 28,027$ 93.4
Incorporated 4% 14203 8,180$ 27.3 69,595$ 232.0
Next Steps
• Perform Annual Audits and Track Progress
• Master Meter Testing
• Customer Meter Testing
• Leak Detection
• Water Main Break Analysis
– Evaluate Water Main Leak/Break Report
• Water Main Replacement
Page 19
Non-Revenue Water Reduction:
Audit, Meter Testing, and Beyond
August 7 2014
19
In 2010, the Chicago region lost 70± million gallons of Lake Michigan
water per day(26 billion gallons a year)
Q&A
Mike Pubentz, P.E.
Director of Public Works
Village of Montgomery
[email protected]
Michele L. Piotrowski, P.E., LEED AP
Project Manager
Engineering Enterprises, Inc.
[email protected]
