Project acronym: WATERLOSS

Project full title: Management of water losses in a drinking water supply system

Project code: 2G-MED09-445

D4.1.1: 1 DATABASE OF NON REVENUE WATER MANAGEMENT

MEASURES

D4.1.2: 1 SET OF QUANTIFIED TARGETS FOR NON REVENUE WATER

REDUCTION STRATEGY

Component: CO4: Development of a DSS tool for appropriate NRW reduction

strategy

Phase: 4.1 Preparation of a database of NRW management methods

Lead Partner: Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Greece

Coordinating Partner: Department of Herault, France

University
of Ljubljana

Version: Final Version

Date of deliverable: 31/08/2012

Page 1 sur 86
PREAMBLE

In the WATERLOSS application form the presentation of Component 4 introduces the main objectives
for the preparation of a database of Non-Revenue Water management methods.

The following tasks have been requested: A database with conventional and new methods for Non
Revenue Water control will be prepared considering existing and future leakages. NRW reduction
measures will be classified (short or long term, constructive or non-constructive) and evaluated with
emphasis on the operating conditions prevailing in each area, as they affect implementation (e.g.
continuous or intermittent flow, seasonal variations, etc). The feasibility of measures will include both
financial requirements and physical application and consider internal WSS specific parameters as well
as broader water management indicators from national River Basin Management plans. Rational and
quantified goals for the studied WSSs will be set up, representing the targets for a NRW reduction
strategy.

So, the main focus of the following deliverable, after the definition of the Performance Indicators, is
to design a global method, based on questionnaires and data provided by each water utility, towards
a set of actions to be taken.

The main difficulties came from the large variety of local environment, in terms of availability of
measures and thresholds. So the work team had to sort out the Non-Revenue Water reduction
measures in different lists, depending on their frequency, their order of magnitude, their importance
and the ratio implementation cost/ efficiency.

On this groundwork, a hierarchical tree has been proposed, allowing the working team to propose a
logical tree which can be considered as the corner stone of the Decision Support System (DSS).

Each knot of the logical flow (a 5 steps process) is based on fundamental data that stem from the
water balance and the different variables at the disposal by each partner. Consequently, additional
information was requested to make the logical tree effective and operational. Those data have been
gathered by special questionnaires and sent to all partners.

Furthermore, as the main objectives consist in reducing the water losses, a target set has been asked
from all partners (and potentially to all users of the decision support system). This will allow the
definition of a departure state and a final one, to let each utility implement a global strategy towards
sustainable goals.
 TABLE OF CONTENT

1. INTRODUCTION TO WATERLOSS ......................................................................................................... 5

1.1 Project details .................................................................................................................................... 5
1.2 Axe ..................................................................................................................................................... 5
1.3 Theme of the project ......................................................................................................................... 5
1.4 Geographic coverage ......................................................................................................................... 6
1.5 Summary of the project..................................................................................................................... 6
1.6 The current and the next component concerned ............................................................................. 7
2. Presentation of Phase 4.1. and meetings organization....................................................................... 9
2.1 Description of phase 4.1 .................................................................................................................... 9
2.2 Organization and sequence of meetings ......................................................................................... 10
3. Developing the NRW reduction measures lists ................................................................................. 12
3.1. Literature review in brief ................................................................................................................ 12
3.2. Methodology developed within the WATERLOSS .......................................................................... 12
3.2.1 Definition and objectives of the hierarchical tree ................................................................... 12
3.2.2 Classification of the measures ................................................................................................. 13
3.2.3 Evaluation of operational measures ........................................................................................ 17
3.2.4 Presentation of the entire NRW reduction measures, the hierarchical tree........................... 19
4. Implementing NRW reduction measures: Waterloss partners' experience ..................................... 27
4.1 Objectives of the first questionnaire ............................................................................................... 27
4.2 Sending the first questionnaire ....................................................................................................... 27
4.3 Analysis of the results of the first questionnaire ............................................................................ 46
4.3.1 Analyse des rsultats du premier questionnaire ..................................................................... 46
4.3.2 Time period studied and continuity of service ........................................................................ 47
4.3.3 What system is examined? ...................................................................................................... 47
4.3.4 Summary concerning the water balance by the IWA ........................................................... 49
4.3.4 Summary concerning the modified water balance .............................................................. 53
5. Linking the NRW reduction measures with the DSS under development ........................................ 55
5.1 Construction of the Decision Tree ................................................................................................... 55
5.1.1 Goals of the decision tree ........................................................................................................ 55
5.1.2 Method of constructing the decision tree ............................................................................... 55
5.1.3 The decision tree ...................................................................................................................... 57
5.1.4 Choice of variables, context information and performance indicators ................................... 58
5.2 Construction of the questionnaire regarding thresholds ............................................................... 60
5.3 Application of the decision tree to the SIE of Lodve ..................................................................... 61
5.3 .1 STEP 1 : Preliminary assessment of NRW............................................................................... 61
5.3.2 STEP 2 : Preliminary assessment of NRW component ............................................................ 62
5.3.3 STEP 3 : In component real losses ............................................................................................ 64
6. Target as a different way to set objectives ....................................................................................... 68
6.1 Data gathering methodology .......................................................................................................... 69
6.2 Waterloss partners' NRW reduction targets ................................................................................... 75
6.2.1. The definition of targets ......................................................................................................... 75
6.2.2. The method employed for collecting targets ......................................................................... 76
6.2.3. Targets for pilot sites .............................................................................................................. 76
6.2.4. Conclusion ............................................................................................................................... 82
7 Bibliography........................................................................................................................................ 83

Page 3 sur 86
 List of figures

Figure 1: Time schedule......................................................................................................................... 12

Figure 2: The IWA best practice standard water balance [IWA, 2010] ........................................... 14
Figure 3: The four pillars of a successful leakage management strategy [Farley et al., 2008, p 47].... 16
Figure 4: Map showing the towns and cities that returned a completed copy of the questionnaire
(Source: Google Earth) .......................................................................................................................... 47
Figure 5 : Assessment period of cities ................................................................................................... 47
Figure 6: A drinking water distribution system [SAGE 33, 2004] .......................................................... 48
Figure 7 : System output volumes for each case study in 2010 (m3/year) and diagrams of NRW for
each case study ..................................................................................................................................... 49
Figure 8: System output volumes for each case study in 2010 (% of the SIV) ...................................... 50
Figure 9 : Comparison of SIV and number of service connections for each case study ........................ 50
Figure 10 : Graph of 2nd modified water balance for the 6 cities (m3/year) ......................................... 53
Figure 11 : Graph of 2nd modified water balance for the 6 cities (% of SIV) ........................................ 54
Figure 12 : Example of performance indicators values and thresholds used in the decision tree ...... 56
Figure 13 : Pathway in Hierarchical tree allowed by questions in Decision Tree ........................ 57
Figure 14 : STEP 1 in Decision tree ..................................................................................................... 58
Figure 15 : Non Revenue Water Volume by System Input Volume = NRW / SIV (Fi46) (%).................. 61
Figure 16 : Real losses per connection (Op27) ...................................................................................... 62
Figure 17 : Real losses per mains length (Op28) ................................................................................... 63
Figure 18 : Unbilled authorised annual consumption per system input volume (Fi53) (%).................. 63
Figure 19 : Apparent losses per system input volume (Op26) (%) ........................................................ 64
Figure 20 : Infrastructure Leakage Index ILI (Op29) .............................................................................. 65
Figure 21 : Calculation of ILI with 2 hypothesis on average connection length.................................... 67
Figure 22 : Pressure management Index (PMI) (Op69) ......................................................................... 68
Figure 23 : Graph for current NRW in % of the SIV......72
Figure 24 Graph for NRW component...72
Figure 25: Graph for current values in m3/year.73
Figure 26 : Graph of current values in m3/km/year.74
Figure 27: Graph for current values.74
Figure 28: graph of NRW in liters per connections and per day..75
Figure 29: Graph for NRW targets...76

Page 4 sur 86
 1. INTRODUCTION TO WATERLOSS

WATERLOSS Project: Management of water losses in a drinking water supply system 10/134
INTRODUCTION CHAPTER 1: The WATERLOSS project in brief

1.1 Project details

The WATERLOSS-Management of water losses in a drinking water supply system project, submitted
during the 2nd call of the programme MED, is a European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) co-
financed MED project (Project 2G-MED09-445), further info: www.waterloss-project.eu). Title
WATERLOSS-Management of water losses in a drinking water supply system Acronym
WATERLOSS Approval No
2G-MED09-445 (under the 2nd call of the MED programme) Info
www.waterloss-project.eu

1.2 Axe
2. Protection of the environment and promotion of a sustainable territorial development through
involvement of Med bodies ensuring the valorisation of water resources Objective
2.1. Protection and enhancement of natural resources and heritage through efficient use of water
resources Approval No
2G-MED09-445 Duration
36 months (1 June 2010 31 May 2013) Total budget
1,846,788.00 ERDF contribution
1,436,841.00 Lead Partner
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki / Department of Chemistry Coordinator
Professor Anastasios Zoumboulis (zoubouli@chem.auth.gr)

1.3 Theme of the project

WATERLOSS follows the EU Water Framework Directive (WFD 2000/60/EC) to develop an integrated
and sustainable water management policy, and to implement appropriate measures ensuring the
conservation of water resources of sufficient quality. The target of WATERLOSS is the protection and
enhancement of water resources. The means to achieve this target is the development of a
methodology for the reduction of water losses in drinking water supply systems, leading to water

Page 5 sur 86
saving activities. The project focuses on the integration of water loss reduction principles in the
management plans of drinking water authorities, with particular attention to MED countries where
water scarcity and low quality have become major issues during the last years.

1.4 Geographic coverage

As water is one of the most valuable natural resources and commodities in the world, water losses
represent a serious international problem. Especially within the specific geographic and climatic
context of the Mediterranean, particular attention needs to be paid to water resources in order to
safeguard a sustainable future water supply in the times of climate change. The project partners are
coming from representative urban and semi-urban areas with differences in the availability of water,
the size of the distribution networks and the methods currently used to reduce water losses,
therefore providing wide coverage of different conditions found in the Mediterranean.

1.5 Summary of the project

The projects target is the development and demonstration of an integrated approach for monitoring
and controlling water losses in drinking water supply systems. WATERLOSS will assist regional actors
to face the emerging issues of water management and shortage that came up recently as a result of
long droughts in many Mediterranean territories. The project will also contribute to setting up
appropriate water pricing schemes in the MED area, as required by the EU Water Framework
Directive. The WATERLOSS primary output will be a Decision Support System (DSS) tool for reducing
water losses. The tool will consider all potential non-revenue water parameters (non-revenue
water represents inefficiency in water supply systems and, for several operations, may account to a
sizeable proportion of total water supply), i.e. apparent and real losses, authorized and non-
authorized consumption, etc. The tool will cover the whole water supply system, from water
entrance to the system up to the customers meter. The projects duration is three years, including
three main components in addition to management and dissemination:
Monitoring the performance of Water Supply Systems and evaluation of water losses. This includes
an assessment of the performance of water supply systems in partners areas through effective
performance indicators, assisted by water analyses and preparation of water balances for each area.
Development of a DSS tool and establishment of appropriate water loss reduction strategy. This
includes the preparation of a database of available water management measures, together with
suggestions on their implementation.
Demonstration of the DSS tool and of the corresponding water loss reduction measures in the
partners areas, and critical evaluation of the results.
Nine partners from six MED countries (Greece, France, Cyprus, Slovenia, Spain and Italy), participate
in WATERLOSS (Table 1), including two Universities (AUTH, UL), three Drinking Water Suppliers
(WBN, DEYAK, AMB) and three public authorities & a development centre with direct influence in
their regions water supply and management systems (PO, LG, DH, RDC).
Lead partner is the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki that has a long standing experience in the
management of transnational projects, and also possesses the technical know-how to guide the
other partners into real world implementation of water loss reduction measures.
An extended dissemination component will take place, including a web site, CD-rom, online and
printed material for the implementation of the project results in various facilities and for the
development of water loss reduction standards. Training activities will take place to ensure that the
suggested measures become part of the partners operations.

Page 6 sur 86
A laymans guide will assist consumers to support the projects activities through creating awareness
on the need for water loss reduction

1.6 The current and the next component concerned

CO4: Development of a DSS tool for appropriate NRW reduction strategy
The specific Component includes the two interlinked phases that follow:
Phase 4.1: Preparation of a database of NRW management methods
o Responsible Partner: Dpartement de l'Hrault (PP9-DH)
o Duration: 1/5/2011 31/8/2012
o Contents:
- database with conventional & new methods for NRW control
- NRW reduction measures will be classified (short or long term, constructive or non-constructive) &
evaluated
- feasibility of measures will include both financial requirements & physical application and consider
internal WSS specific parameters as well as broader water management indicators from national
River Basin Management plans
- rational and quantified goals for the studied WSSs will be set up, representing the targets for a NRW
reduction strategy
o Deliverables:
- D4.1.1_1 Database of Non Revenue Water management measures
- D4.1.2_1 Set of quantified targets for Non Revenue Water reduction strategy

Phase 4.2 Development of the DSS tool

o Responsible Partner: University of Ljubjlana
o Duration: 1/5/2011 30/11/2012
o Content:
- DSS tool for controlling water losses & improving WSS performance, resulting in a prioritized list of
activities according to how the required reduction can be most cost effectively achieved.
- the DSS tool will integrate:
1. The system of PIs weighted by certain factors to account for the regional characteristics
2. The proposed NRW strategies delivered from the database
3. The corresponding targets for NRW control, considering the utilitys other goals or policies
- resulting to a comprehensive system taking into account pipe failures, water interruption,
customer complaints, water demand, water quality, etc.
o Deliverables:
- D4.2.1_1 Set of Performance Indicators weighting parameters
- D4.2.2_1 DSS tool for Non Revenue Water reduction strategy

Page 7 sur 86
CO 5: Demonstration of the DSS tool into specific WSS
The specific Component includes
Phase 5.1: Demonstration of the DSS tool into specific WSS
o Responsible Partner: Municipal Enterprise for Water Supply & Sewerage in Kozani (PP6-DEYAK)
o Duration: 1/5/2012 31/5/2013
o Contents:
- application of the DSS in the partners WSSs
- suggestions for measures for the implementation of a NRW reduction strategy & identification of
budget requirements
- demonstration of measures by GIS tools
- provide an insight into the decision making process, possible scenarios, and results
- pilot application will take place in areas substantial enough to ensure that corresponding conditions
will be representative and can be replicated when activities are going to be applied throughout the
entire network
- validation of the assumptions, re-adjustment of the parameters and certification of the DSS, by
comparison of actual and predicted NRW reduction values
o Deliverables:
- D5.1_6 Lists of prioritized measures for partners' WSSs from the application of the DSS tool
- D5.2_6 Reports from the demonstration of the DSS tool in small areas of the corresponding WSSs

Page 8 sur 86
 2. Presentation of Phase 4.1. and meetings organization

2.1 Description of phase 4.1

In the application form the presentation of this component gives the main objectives about the
preparation of a database of NRW management methods

A database with conventional and new methods for Non Revenue Water control will be prepared
considering existing and future leakages. NRW reduction measures will be classified (short or long
term, constructive or non-constructive) and evaluated with emphasis on the operating conditions
prevailing in each area, as they affect implementation (e.g. continuous or intermittent flow, seasonal
variations, etc). The feasibility of measures will include both financial requirements and physical
application and consider internal WSS specific parameters as well as broader water management
indicators from national River Basin Management plans. Rational and quantified goals for the studied
WSSs will be set up, representing the targets for a NRW reduction strategy.

The following document will present mainly 3 parts, with:

- Developing the NRW reduction measures list,

- Implementing NRW reduction measures: Waterloss partners' experience
- Setting NRW reduction targets

At the end of the current report, there is the bibliography and the annexes.

Page 9 sur 86
Several meetings have allowed a continuous and regular monitoring of the work and the mutual
understanding in order to ensure a structure of the database fitting the need of the forthcoming
Decision Tool to be as operational as possible.

2.2 Organization and sequence of meetings

Numerous meeetings took place either on the spot either by means of phone conferences as
described here after.

- Friday, June 8, 2012 :

Face to face in the building of DH

- Thursday, July 24, 2012

Video-conference between

IRSTEA Bordeaux

Universit of Ljubljana

- Wednesday, July 25, 2012

Meeting in Ljubljana

- Thuesday, August 2, 2012

Video conference

IRSTEA Bordeaux

University of Ljubljana

- Tuesday, August 21, 2012

Video conference

IRSTEA Bordeaux

University of Ljubljana

- Wednesday, August 22, 2012

Video conference

IRSTEA Bordeaux

University of Ljubljana

- Thursday, August 23, 2012

Page 10 sur 86
Video conference

IRSTEA Bordeaux

University of Ljubljana

- Thursday, August 30, 2012

Video conference

IRSTEA Bordeaux

University of Ljubljana

- Thuesday, September 4, 2012

Video conference

IRSTEA Bordeaux

University of Ljubljana )

- Monday, September 17, 2012

Video conference

IRSTEA Bordeaux

University of Ljubljana

A summary can be overlook on the following scheme:

juin-12 LEGENDE
8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 Meeting face to face
Meeting with CG34 Visioconference

juil-12
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Meeting CG34+UL+AUTH+WBN

aot-12
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31
Meeting with UL

sept-12
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
Meeting with UL

Page 11 sur 86
 Figure 1: Time schedule

3. Developing the NRW reduction measures lists

3.1. Literature review in brief

The main bibliographic references come from Farley [Farley et al., 2008]. A lot of information can be
found on this topic in scientific literature nevertheless a detailed review is at disposal at the end of
the report.

Besides, the University of Ljubljana has also done a specific review that can be found in the decision
support tool. For further details you can directly visit the web site, all information is at disposal.

3.2. Methodology developed within the WATERLOSS

3.2.1 Definition and objectives of the hierarchical tree

The hierarchical tree constitutes the database of measures which the partnership must produce
within the framework of the Waterloss project (see Table 6).
Its objectives are to:

- categorise, sort and arrange the operational measures which will enable volumes of
Non Revenue Water (NRW) to be reduced ;

- evaluate their relevance, effectiveness and efficiency.

Page 12 sur 86
3.2.2 Classification of the measures

During the meeting which took place in Ljubljana in 2012, a request was put forward to the CG34 to
divide the operational actions into the following categories:

- Components for volumes of Non Revenue Water (NRW)

- Subcomponents for volumes of Non Revenue Water (NRW)

- Strategies = objectives of these measures

- Operational description of the measure

The result of this categorisation was the creation of an Excel file named Hierarchical tree, 2012.

A) Components of Non Revenue Water (NRW) in the hierarchical tree

Based on [Waterloss, 2012a ; IWA, 2010], five components were determined for Non Revenue Water
(NRW):
1. Unbilled authorised consumption

2. Apparent losses

3. Real losses

4. General measures for all components

5. Water billed not payed

The first three components are taken directly from the IWA water balance [IWA, 2010] (see red circle
on Figure 2).

Page 13 sur 86
 Figure 2: The IWA best practice standard water balance [IWA, 2010]

Many of the actions aiming to reduce these volumes are applicable to more than one of the 3 first
components. This is the case, for example, with all of the actions consisting in training/educating
staff. This is why a fourth component was created named general actions which may appear in all
components.

Finally, in order to take into account the work carried out as part of the Waterloss project
[Waterloss, 2012a] which has led to the IWA water balance being modified twice, a 5th component
was created to include the actions enabling the money for un-paid water bills to be collected.

B) Sub-components of NRW in hierarchical tree

It was not possible to 100% use the categories of the IWA water balance [IWA, 2010] to determine
the subcomponents of the hierarchical tree. In fact, the IWA water balance consists in dividing up the
volumes of water using an accounting/financial method.

However, we received a request to combine the concrete measures of the different areas with the
technical volumes.

Consequently, the components were divided up into 1 to 5 subcomponents (see table 1), in
accordance with the following bibliography:

- [IWA, 2010], of a financial nature

- [Farley et al. 2008], of a more technical nature, more suited to concrete actions.

Page 14 sur 86
 Table 1 : Details of components and subcomponents in table 6

For example, in order to determine the 4 subcomponents of Real Losses, we copied exactly the four
steps to combating real losses by [Farley et al. 2008] (see Figure 3).

Page 15 sur 86
 Figure 3: The four pillars of a successful leakage management strategy [Farley et al., 2008, p 47]

C) Strategic approaches of measures for NRW reduction

The subcomponents for the volumes of Non Revenue Water (NRW) were then divided up according
to the objective of the operational actions to reduce the volumes of Non Revenue Water (NRW) (see
table 1).

Table 2 : Details of all strategic approach to measure for the sub-component speed and quality of
repair in the component Real losses.

Page 16 sur 86
D) Operational description of the measure for NRW reduction

Once the objectives were defined, the concrete measures were then described (see table 3)

Table 3 : Details of all operational measures in strategic approach to measures Improve speed of
repair.

Nota Bene: OM ID is a reference code enabling the origin of the measure to be traced:
- DSS: measures listed by AUTH, on the site of the DSS tool, web page DSS.

- RM: measures listed by UL (University of Ljubljana), on the site of the DSS tool, web
page NRW Reduction Measures

- Ljub: measures created during the meeting in Ljubljana in 2012

- DH: measures created by the DH

3.2.3 Evaluation of operational measures

Assessment method
Each operational measure is evaluated according to six criteria using a scale of 1 to 5 stars (see
table 4).

Page 17 sur 86
 Table 4: Assessment system of each operational measure

The higher the number of stars, the more advantageous the measure is for the manager.

The results of the evaluation

In order to obtain the results of the evaluation, we used:
- firstly, the 6 responses to the questionnaire (see Annexe 1 Part A) we received from
the partners. This notably includes the section in which they indicate whether the
measure was relevant or not relevant.

- secondly: our knowledge on the subject.

The result is presented as follows:

Table 5: Example of assessment of one operational measure.

Page 18 sur 86
3.2.4 Presentation of the entire NRW reduction measures, the hierarchical tree

Page 19 sur 86
Page 20 sur 86
Page 21 sur 86
Page 22 sur 86
Page 23 sur 86
Page 24 sur 86
Page 25 sur 86
Table 6: NRW reduction measures (or the Hierarchical tree)

Page 26 sur 86
 The hierarchical tree is a list of actions to take to reduce volumes of Non Revenue Water (NRW)
arranged into a number of categories. Having presented the hierarchical tree (see Table 6), we will
now provide detail on partners experiences on NRW reduction measures.

4. Implementing NRW reduction measures: Waterloss

partners' experience

4.1 Objectives of the first questionnaire

The aim of the first questionnaire (see $4.2 or Annex1 Part1), sent to all of the projects partners, was
to:

eliminate inaccuracies in the water balances sent during the previous stage of the
Waterloss project (see the first two parts of the questionnaire, beginning Additional information);

find out,

- what action the projects partners are taking to reduce the volume of Non Revenue
Water (NRW),

- what impact this action has had,

- how this action was evaluated,

(see part of the questionnaire entitled NRW reduction measures);

listen to the opinions of the projects partners concerning the action taken to reduce the
volume of Non Revenue Water (NRW). (see relevant/not relevant question) ;

gather proposals for new action put forward partners.

4.2 Sending the first questionnaire

Sending of 1st version: Friday 8th June 2012 (Questionnaire 1st version)

Sending of 2nd version: Monday 2nd July 2012 (Questionnaire 2nd version + table of measures) see
below and Annex 1 Part A).

Page 27 sur 86
Page 28 sur 86
Page 29 sur 86
Page 30 sur 86
Page 31 sur 86
Page 32 sur 86
Page 33 sur 86
Page 34 sur 86
Page 35 sur 86
Page 36 sur 86
Page 37 sur 86
Page 38 sur 86
Page 39 sur 86
Page 40 sur 86
Page 41 sur 86
Page 42 sur 86
Page 43 sur 86
Page 44 sur 86
Page 45 sur 86
4.3 Analysis of the results of the first questionnaire

4.3.1 Analyse des rsultats du premier questionnaire

We received six responses to the questionnaire (see Annex 1 PartA) and subsequently summarised
these (see Annex 1 Part B):

- City of Nicosia by WBN

- Town of Argels-sur-Mer by the PO (Pyrnes-Orientales)

- Town of Castellbisbal by AMB

- SIE of Lodve by DH (Hrault County).

- Melito di Napoli by LG

- Kozani by DEYAK

Page 46 sur 86
 Figure 4: Map showing the towns and cities that returned a completed copy of the questionnaire
(Source: Google Earth)

4.3.2 Time period studied and continuity of service

H1 H2
City Is the assessment period the billing Assessment Intermittent supply ? Time system is
period ? period (day) pressurised (hours
in a year)
Castellbisbal No. Assessment period is 2010. Billing 365 No 8760
period is every 2 months.
SIE Lodve Yes. 2010 365 No 8760
Nicosie No. Assessment period is the days of the 365 Continuous supply was re- 8760
year 2010. installed during the
assessment period year 2010
(after intermittent sypply from
4/2008-1/2010).
Argels-sur-Mer No. Assessment period is 2010. Billing 365 No 8760
period is every 6 months.
Melito di Napoli Yes, it has been assumed the period 180 No 8760
since utility is in charge of the network
management
Kozani Assesment has been performed in 365 No 8760
annual basis 2010.

Figure 5 : Assessment period of cities

In most cases, the data studied is annual, except for the city of Naples (6 months). All of the water
utility services are continuous (no intermittent supply).

4.3.3 What system is examined?

Does the system input volume (SIV) include raw water ?

Page 47 sur 86
 Figure 6: A drinking water distribution system [SAGE 33, 2004]

City SIV ? Cercle ?

Argels-sur-Mer There is no treatment plant, Circle green = Circle red
just a gas chlorine

Castellbisbal SIV starts after treatment Circle red

plant

Nicosie There is no raw water in SIV Circle red

SIE Lodve SIV includes raw water Circle green

Kozani There is no raw water in SIV Circle red

Melito di Napoli There is no raw water in SIV Circle red

Table7 : Synthesis of what is the SIV for the 6 cities

In general, the system examined includes only the water distribution system, excluding the SIE of
Lodve where the system examined also includes the raw water conveyance system.

Page 48 sur 86
4.3.4 Summary concerning the water balance by the IWA

Synthisis regarding the water balance of IWA

VAR-IWA VAR-IWA VAR-IWA VAR-IWA VAR-IWA VAR-IWA VAR-IWA
A3 A8 A9 A11 A12 A16 A17
SIV System Output Volumes (m3/year)
Meter under-
System Input Billed non- Unbilled Unbilled non-
Billed metered Unauthorised registration
Volume City metered metered metered Real losses
consumption consumption and data
(m3/year) consumption consumption consumption
handling error
2 445 454 Castellbisbal 2 194 336 0 0 9 782 9 782 29 345 202 209
1 436 640 SIE Lodve 557 134 0 0 3 000 2 000 6 025 868 481
23 838 611 Nicosie 14 467 783 13 310 1 490 6 760 103 570 414 290 8 831 408
2 123 191 Argels-sur-Mer 1 695 092 0 0 7 160 2 260 26 350 392 329
4 193 300 Melito di Napoli 2 658 000 0 0 10 483 10 483 41 933 1 472 401
5 688 642 Kozani 2 369 301 0 0 113 773 56 886 236 930 2 911 752

Table 8: Synthesis of normal IWA water balance for the 6 cities (m3/year) in 2010

In yellow : figures are the same as [Waterloss, 2012 a]

In orange : figures are different from [Waterloss, 2012 a]

System Output Volumes
NRW : Nicosia

30 000 000

Real Losses
25 000 000

Metering inaccuracies =
Meter under-registration and
20 000 000 data handling error

Unauthorised consumption NRW

m3/year

NRW : Kozani

15 000 000 Unbilled non-metered

consumption

NRW : Argeles-sur-Mer NRW : Melito di napoli Unbilled metered

10 000 000 NRW : Castellbisbal NRW : SIE Lodve
consumption

Billed non-metered
consumption
5 000 000
Billed metered consumption

0
Castellbisbal SIE Lodve Nicosia Argels-sur- Melito di Kozani
Mer Napoli

Figure 7 : System output volumes for each case study in 2010 (m3/year) and diagrams of NRW for
each case study

Page 49 sur 86
 System Output Volumes

100%

90%
Real Losses

80%
Metering inaccuracies =
70% Meter under-registration and
data handling error

60%
Unauthorised consumption NRW
% of SIV

50% Unbilled non-metered

consumption

40%
Unbilled metered
consumption
30%
Billed non-metered
20% consumption

Billed metered consumption

10%

0%
Castellbisbal SIE Lodve Nicosia Argels-sur- Melito di Kozani
Mer Napoli

Figure 8: System output volumes for each case study in 2010 (% of the SIV)

The water utility service with the highest percentage of Non Revenue Water (NRW) in relation to
System Input Volume (SIV) is the SIE of Lodve (see figure 8). In this respect, it is the SIE of Lodve
that has achieved the worst performance out of the 6 water utility services that are partners of the
Waterloss project.

However, the water utility service with the highest volume of Non Revenue Water, in absolute terms
(m3/year), is the Water Board of Nicosia (see figure 7). In fact, Nicosia is the largest utility service for
its number of service connections and therefore for its diverse volumes (see Figure 9).

30 000 000 70 000

60 000
25 000 000
No. of service connections

50 000
20 000 000
SIV (m3 in 2010)

40 000
System Input Volume
15 000 000
Service connections
30 000

10 000 000
20 000

5 000 000
10 000

0 0
Castellbisbal SIE Lodve Nicosia Argels-sur- Melito di Kozani
Mer Napoli

Figure 9 : Comparison of SIV and number of service connections for each case study

Page 50 sur 86
The water utility service with the lowest percentage of Non Revenue Water (NRW) in relation to
System Input Volume (SIV) is the town of Castellbisbal (see Figure 8). In this respect, it is the town of
Castellbisbal that has achieved the best performance out of the 6 water utility services that are
partners of the Waterloss project.

Next, for the Waterloss projects 6 case studies, of the different volumes of Non Revenue Water
(NRW), the highest volume is that which corresponds to real losses (see brown colour on the
diagrams of Figure 7). The volume of real losses should therefore be a priority focus.

Nevertheless, these results are to be modified slightly. In fact, the following volumes are not actually
calculated, they are simply estimations:

- Billed non-metered consumption (A9)

- Unbilled authorised non-metered consumption (A12)

- Unauthorised consumption (A16)

- Meter under-registration and data handling error (A17).

The following table (see table 8) shows us the diverse nature of the methods employed by the
partners of the Waterloss project for estimating these volumes.

For example, for the unbilled non-metered authorised consumption volume (A12), the estimations
range from 0.25% for the water entering the mains for Naples, to 2% for Kozani (see Table 4). This
makes the estimation for Kozani 8 times higher than that for Kozani!

The same goes for the unauthorised non-metered consumption volume (A16); the method used by
Argels-sur-Mer gives a result that is 10 times lower than that of Kozani!

The method employed has a significant impact on the results in the IWA water balance and prevents
any really direct comparison from being made between one water utility service and another.

Page 51 sur 86
 VAR-IWA VAR-IWA VAR-IWA
A12 A16 A17

Unauthorised Meter under-registration and data

City Unbilled non-metered consumption
consumption handling error
Castellbisbal 0,4% of SIV 0,4% of SIV 1,2% of SIV
Expert Expert It is considred empirically that (values taken from the
averages observed from our calibration database).
Over 15 years of age under-value by an average
of 15 % x Q
SIE Lodve Between 12 and 15 years of age under-value by
an average of 10 % x Q
Between 9 and 12 years of age under-value by
an average of 5 % x Q

1) Flushing : An estimation concerning the time the hydrant was left Internal statistical Statistical analysis and bench testing
open and an average flow calculation. data
Nicosie
2) Fire fighting and training : Fire brigade provides a monthly
consumption estimate.
1) Flushing : Roads service of the territory: 0,1% of SIV Meter inaccuracies because of meter ages. We are
Information on water storage capacity (washer truck)* nb of refills*nb using as reference a study from water agencies.
of day in service
2) Fire fighting and training :
Reference ASTEE for training : nb of training
(Hydrants)*duration(10min)*flow rate(60m3/h)
Estimation for fire fighting (extract from our external expertise) :
Argels-sur-Mer about 20 m3/fire intervention
3) Other :
Reference ASTEE for networks purge : purge
nb*duration(2h)*2,5m3/h
Reference ASTEE for disinfection of pipe ans connection after
work : 8 times pipe volume or connection*0,2m3
Reference ASTEE for pumps leakage volume (internal) : 90
m3/year/pump
0,25% of SIV Estimation have Estimation have been done assuming literature data.
been done
Melito di Napoli
assuming literature
data.
Kozani 2% of SIV 1% of SIV 10% of billed authorised consumption.

Table 8: Estimation of tree non-metered system output volumes by 6 cities.

In the previous component (C03) of the Waterloss project, the IWA water balance was modified
twice. Added to the volumes of Non Revenue Water (NRW) of the IWA was the volume of water that
had been billed but not paid for. Then, subtracted from the volume of Non Revenue Water (NRW) of
the IWA was a volume called Minimum Charge Difference (MCD) which represents the volumes that
were not consumed but were billed due to the fixed part of the water rate applied. We will now
describe for each partner the volumes indicated in the first questionnaire concerning these two
notions.

Page 52 sur 86
4.3.4 Summary concerning the modified water balance
From VAR-IWA
ID A3
System
Input Water billed
year City MCD
Volume not paid
(m3/year)
2010 Castellbisbal 2 445 454 0 0
2010 SIE Lodve 1 436 640 0 0
2010 Nicosie 23 838 611 3 331 144 8 500
2010 Argels-sur-Mer 2 123 191 317 463 0
2010 Melito di Napoli 4 193 300 670 000 903 720
2010 Kozani 5 688 642 2 311 834 156 827

Table 9: Synthesis of 2nd modified water balance for the 6 cities (m3/year)

30 000 000

25 000 000
System Input Volume
20 000 000 (m3/year)
(m3/year)

MCD
15 000 000

10 000 000 Water billed not paid

5 000 000

0
Ko l i
ve
Lo l

ie

ni
o
ba

r
ito Me

ap
os

za
d
is

N
ge Nic
ll b

-
ur

di
te

s
E

s-
as

SI

l
C

el
M
Ar

Figure 10 : Graph of 2nd modified water balance for the 6 cities (m3/year)

Page 53 sur 86
 45%
40%
35%
% of SIV

30%
25% MCD
20% Water billed not paid
15%
10%
5%
0%
ve

er

ni
al

sie

li
po
r -M

za
isb

co

Na

Ko
Lo
lb

su
Ni
el

di
s-
E
st

SI

ito
Ca

ge

el
M
Ar

Figure 11 : Graph of 2nd modified water balance for the 6 cities (% of SIV)

The volumes in the IWA water balance are the actual annual volumes, whereas the two volumes in
the water balance modified twice by the Waterloss project are:

- for the MCD, a very abstract volume

- for water billed, not paid volumes, generally multi-annual volumes.

Consequently, they cannot be represented graphically alongside the volumes of the IWA water
balance. They cannot be compared with the rest of the data.

Having carried out a global analysis of the 6 responses to the first questionnaire entitled NRW
measures questionnaire, we will now provide detail on how to construct the decision tree.

The decision tree enables you to select from the hierarchical tree a small group of actions that are
suited to the context of the water utility service. Its goal is to link the NRW reduction measures with
the DSS tool under development.

Page 54 sur 86
 5. Linking the NRW reduction measures with the DSS under
development

5.1 Construction of the Decision Tree

5.1.1 Goals of the decision tree

The decision tree is the heart which will be implemented in the decision-making tool (see Annex 2
Part B).

The objective of the decision tree is to enable a given water utility service to determine which groups
of operational measures in the it should put in place as a priority in order to decrease its volume of
Non Revenue Water (NRW).

5.1.2 Method of constructing the decision tree

In order to take into account the specific characteristics of each water utility service, we use the
values of variables (Vs) and context information (CI), from which performance indicators (PIs) are
then calculated.

Depending on where the value of the performance indicator is situated (see Figure 12) in accordance
with the previously defined thresholds, the progression in the decision tree will not be the same, and
the groups of operational measures selected within the hierarchical tree will also be different.

Therefore, in the example below (see Figure 12), if the performance indicator is below the low
threshold (low threshold line in blue), the action in the Decision Tree will be STOP. This will result
in the selection of a number of operational measures in the Hierarchical tree.

On the other hand, if the performance indicator is above the low threshold, the action in the
Decision tree will be Go to next STEP. Several questions will therefore be asked in order to
calculate other indicators. At the end of the progression through the Decision tree, a different group
of operational measures will be selected from the Hierarchical tree.

Page 55 sur 86
 Stop Go to next STEP

Figure 12 : Example of performance indicators values and thresholds used in the decision tree

The progression through the various measures of the Hierarchical tree takes place over a maximum
of five steps (see Figure 13).

Page 56 sur 86
 Preliminary assessment of NRW
STEP 1

STEP 2 Preliminary assessment of NRW

component (cpt)

STEP 3 In cpt Real Losses In cpt unbilled authorized In cpt apparent losses
consumption

In subcpt In subcpt In subcpt In subcomponent

STEP 4 In subcpt speed & In subcpt asset unauthorised
pressure active leakage Metering inaccuracies
quality of repair management consumption
management control water losses

Services
STEP 5 Mains
connexion

Figure 13 : Pathway in Hierarchical tree allowed by questions in Decision Tree

5.1.3 The decision tree

Figure 14 presents the beginning, i.e. STEP 1, of the decision tree.

According to the responses given to the questions (yes or no), the next branch of the decision tree
will be:

- either 3-figure codes in blue which correspond to the reference code of the group of
measures with the same strategy (strategic approach to measures) in the
[Hierarchical tree, 2012] (see Figure 14).

- codes consisting of letters and figures in green which correspond to a specific

reference code of a measure in the Hierarchical tree, preceded by the reference code
of the strategic approach to measures.

- another question.

Page 57 sur 86
 Figure 14 : STEP 1 in Decision tree

5.1.4 Choice of variables, context information and performance indicators

As a priority, the variables (Vs), context information (CIs) and performance indicators (PIs) were
chosen in the following order from the following sources:

1) IWA + Waterloss Vs & PIs [Waterloss, 2012b]

2) IWA CIs [IWA = Alegre et al., 2010]

3) DH questionnaire Cis (see Annex 1 PartA)

4) If necessary, new PIs and CIs

Further information regarding variables, context information and performance indicators is available
in the file (Annex 2 part B Synthesis of variables, context information and indicators used at each
step).

Source Meaning
V-IWA Variable from IWA [IWA = Alegre et al., 2010]
V-WAT Variable from Waterloss project [Waterloss, 2012 b]
CI-IWA Context Information from IWA [IWA = Alegre et al., 2010]
CI-DH Context Information from DH
PI-IWA Performance Indicator from IWA [IWA = Alegre et al., 2010]
PI-DH Performance Indicator from DH
Table 50: Sources of variables, context information and indicators used in Decision tree

Page 58 sur 86
Page 59 sur 86
 Table 6: Detail of main indicators of the DSS tool

Having presented the decision tree, we will now provide details on how to construct the
questionnaire regarding the decision thresholds, entitled thresholds questionnaire. It helps to
finish to build the decision.

5.2 Construction of the questionnaire regarding thresholds

The transition (or not) from one step to the next in the decision tree depends on whether the
performance indicator calculated is above or below a decision threshold.

Certain thresholds can be found in international literature (see [Trow, 2009; Liemberger et al., 2007]
for thresholds concerning the ILI indicator). Nevertheless, most decision thresholds do not appear
in literature. These should instead be set in accordance with the local context and the performance
objectives of policies.

This questionnaire (see Annex 2 Part C) was therefore created in order to enable the partners of the
Waterloss project to set decision thresholds for each indicator used in the Decision Tree:
- low

- medium

- high

Having presented the essence of the decision support system (DSS tool), we will now apply this
method to the pilot case of the Hrault County, and namely the SIE of Lodve.

Page 60 sur 86
5.3 Application of the decision tree to the SIE of Lodve

Nota Bene: As of yet, the various thresholds (low, medium, high) for the Waterloss project have not
been set as we are awaiting responses to the thresholds questionnaire. Therefore, in order to set
the thresholds below, we took inspiration from [Kingdom et al., 2006; Liemberger et al., 2007;
Pearson and Trow, 2011]

5.3 .1 STEP 1 : Preliminary assessment of NRW

The SIE of Lodve is able to determine its A3, A8 and A9 variables.

It is therefore possible to calculate performance indicator Fi46 (Non Revenue Water Volume by
System Input Volume) (see Figure 15).

Fi46 Low Medium High

Kozani

Melito di Napoli

Argels-sur-Mer

Nicosia

SIE Lodve

Castellbisbal

0 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Figure 15 : Non Revenue Water Volume by System Input Volume = NRW / SIV (Fi46) (%)

The SIE of Lodve has 61.2 % Non Revenue Water (NRW) in relation to System Input Volume (SIV),
which is above the high threshold (35%). Consequently, this SIE has a very high volume of Non
Revenue Water. It must therefore move on to STEP 2.

Page 61 sur 86
5.3.2 STEP 2 : Preliminary assessment of NRW component

A) Real losses

Op27
Low Medium High

Kozani

Melito di Napoli

Argels-sur-Mer

Nicosia

SIE Lodve

Castellbisbal

0 200 400 600 800 1 000 1 200

L/connection/day when system is pressurised

Figure 16 : Real losses per connection (Op27)

Page 62 sur 86
 Op28 Low Medium High

Kozani

Melito di Napoli

Argels-sur-Mer

Nicosia

SIE Lodve

Castellbisbal

0 10 000 20 000 30 000 40 000 50 000 60 000 70 000

L / km / day when system is pressurised

Figure 17 : Real losses per mains length (Op28)

The SIE of Lodve has a very high level of real losses per connection (see Figure 16) and a high level
of real losses per mains length (see Figure 17). It must therefore continue on to step 3 of the real
losses component.

B) Unbilled authorised consumption

Fi53 Medium
Low High

Kozani

Melito di Napoli

Argels-sur-Mer

Nicosia

SIE Lodve

Castellbisbal

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Figure 18 : Unbilled authorised annual consumption per system input volume (Fi53) (%)

The SIE of Lodve has a low level of unbilled authorised consumption (see Figure 18). Consequently,
it is not necessary to continue on to the next steps within this component.

Page 63 sur 86
C) Apparent losses

Op26 Medium
Low High

Kozani

Melito di Napoli

Argels-sur-Mer

Nicosia

SIE Lodve

Castellbisbal

0 5 10 15 20 25 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100

Figure 19 : Apparent losses per system input volume (Op26) (%)

The SIE of Lodve has a low level of apparent losses (see Figure 19). Consequently, it is not necessary
to continue on to the next steps within this component.

5.3.3 STEP 3 : In component real losses

A) Infrastructure Leakage Index

A1 - using the DSS tool

The SIE of Lodve does not know the average length of its connections (average service connection
length). It is therefore not possible to calculate the ILI (Infrastructure Leakage Index) indicator (see
Figure 20).

Page 64 sur 86
 ILI
Low Medium High

Kozani

Melito di Napoli

Argels-sur-Mer ?

Nicosia

SIE Lodve ?

Castellbisbal

2
0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32 36 40

Figure 20 : Infrastructure Leakage Index ILI (Op29)

The SIE of Lodve must therefore put in place strategic group measures (401, 402, 411 and 413) (see
table 12).

Page 65 sur 86
 Table 12: Measures group which must be implemented by SIE Lodve

Of these 23 operational measures, as a priority the SIE of Lodve must put in place measures of a
level 5 importance, i.e. the following 8 operational measures (see table 13).

Page 66 sur 86
 Importa Organizatio Constructiv Cost
Timeframe Duration nal e/ non efficiency
OM ID Operational measures
(stars) (stars) nce Complexity constructive Ratio
(stars) (Stars) (Stars) (Stars)

4 4 5 4 3 4
DH-MA01 Volumetric accuracy checked using a second meter
Calibration of water meters, managing inaccuracy of 4 4 5 4 3 4
RM-04 water meters, age of water meters
3 5 5 3 3 5
RM-28 Metering of revenue water
Establishment of guidelines for WB volumes 4 5 5 5 5 5
DH -MA05 calculation
4 5 5 4 5 5
Document management and archives in the
management company (archiving the documents on
RM-36 construction, service connections, permits etc.)
Ljub-4131 Education of staff on operational procedures taking 4 5 5 4 5 5
into consideration existing affirmated practices

HRM company culture (every drop counts), 4 5 5 4 5 5

RM-45 permanent, targeted education of employees,
HRM adequate staffing for different processes, 4 5 5 4 5 5
RM-46 adequate tools, equipment, education

Table 13: Operational measures which must be implemented in priority by SIE Lodve

As soon as the SIE of Lodve finds out the average length of its connections, it will be possible for it
to progress further through the DSS tools decision tree.

A2) To go a step further than the DSS tool

The average length of a connection is generally between 2 and 20 metres.

Regardless of which end of the scale in this hypothesis (min and max), the ILI always works out very
high for the SIE of Lodve (see Figure 21).

ILI
Low Medium High

min

SIE Lodve max

0 4 8 12 16 20 24 28 32

Figure 21 : Calculation of ILI with 2 hypothesis on average connection length

This ILI value indicates that the use of raw water resources is highly inefficient, highlighting the poor
maintenance of the mains and the poor condition of the system in general.

Page 67 sur 86
This means that the SIE of Lodve must, as a priority, put in place measures to actively look for leaks,
starting, for example, with the task of dividing its network up into sections in order to monitor its
night flow. In fact, the night flow can be defined, during an initial simplistic phase, by the leakage
volume. This will enable the SIE to locate more precisely where the leaks are. It will subsequently be
able to put in place actions to repair these leaks as best and as quickly as possible.

Finally, the renewal of mains should only be envisaged when the SIE of Lodve has better knowledge
of its network!!

B) Pressure Management Index

PMI
Low Medium High

Kozani

Melito di Napoli

Argels-sur-Mer

Nicosia

SIE Lodve

Castellbisbal

1,5 2,5 3,5

0 1 2 3 4 5

Figure 22 : Pressure management Index (PMI) (Op69)

The PMI level for the SIE of Lodve is low which means that the pressure in this network is not too
high. There is not enough room for manoeuvre to reduce this pressure. It is therefore not necessary
to move on to the next step (STEP 4) in the pressure management component.

6. Target as a different way to set objectives

Page 68 sur 86
6.1 Data gathering methodology

The useful information has been gathered with the following template.

PARTNER NAME
PARTNER No
CASE STUDY
Base Year
Population Served
SIV
Km of pipes
No. of water
No. of customers'
connections

Current Value (base year: ) Target Value (target year: 2013) REDUCTION
SETTING THE NRW REDUCTION C in m3 per
3 D in litres per
B in m per Km of as % of
A as % SIV connection per A B C D A B C D
TARGETS year mains per
year
Current Value
year
UNBILLED METERED
CONSUMPTION
UNBILLED AUTHORIZED
UNBILLED UNMETERED
CONSUMPTION
CONSUMPTION
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
UNAUTHORIZED
CONSUMPTION
APPARENT LOSSES METERS ERRORS
METERING ERRORS
NRW TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
LEAKAGE IN MAINS
LEAKAGE IN SERVICE
CONNECTIONS
REAL LOSSES TANKS OVERFLOWS
BACKGROUND LEAKAGE
BREAKS
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TOTAL 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Current Target IMPROVEMEN Achiev

other relative targets/goals Value Value T wished (rate ed
(base year: (target or value) Value
average operating pressure (in bars)
Break incidents reported (in mains)
Km of mains inspected per year (Active Leakage Control)
Km of watermains inspected per year
No of water meters replaced per year

Current Target
Value Value
SETTING THE NRW REDUCTION TARGETS (base (target Reduction
year: year:
) 2013)
UNBILLED
NRW AUTHORIZED
CONSUMPTION

Page 69 sur 86
 B13 Meter Management
personnel (No.)
D35 Water interruption
(persons*hours)
D42 Customer meter
readings (No.)
D44 Operational meters
(No.)
D45 Meter replacement
(No.)
E6 Direct customer meters
(No.)
E9 Bulk customer meters
Variables (No.)
C26 Roof tanks number
(No.)
C28 Domestic water meters
aged less than 5 years (No.)
C29 Domestic water meters
aged between 5-10 years
(No.)
APPARENT C30 Roof tanks volume (m3)
LOSSES
C37 Domestic water meters
aged more than 10 years
(No.)
D69 Flow meters replaced
(No.)
Pe14 Meter management
personnel (No./1000
meters)
Ph10 District meter density
(No./1000 service
connections)
Op6 Hydrant inspection
Performance (/year)
Indicators Op7 System flow meters
calibration (/year)
Op8 Meter replacement
(/year)
Op25 Apparent Losses (%)
Op26 Apparent Losses per
SIV (%)
Op38 Operational meters

Page 70 sur 86
 (%)
Op51 Apparent Losses per
roof tank (m3)
Op52 Apparent losses per
roof tank volume (%)
Op53 Apparent losses per
water meter (m3/water
meter)
Op54 ALI
Op64 Meter replacement
(%)
Ph18 Under 5 years old
Domestic water meters rate
(%)
Ph19 5 to 10 years old
Domestic water meters rate
(%)
Ph20 Over 10 years old
Domestic water meters rate
(%)
B8 Operations &
maintenance personnel
(No.)
C8 Mains length (Km)
C9 Distribution mains
length (Km)
C12 Pressure meters (No.)
C24 Service connections
(No.)
C25 Average service
connection length (m)
REAL LOSSES Variables D8 Network inspection (Km)
D9 Leakage control (ALC)
(Km)
D10 Leaks repaired due to
ALC (No.)
D20 Mains rehabilitation
(Km)
D21 Mains renovation (Km)
D22 Mains replacement
(Km)
D24 Service Connection
rehabilitation (No.)

Page 71 sur 86
 D28 Mains failures (No.)
D29 Service connection
failures (No.)
D34 Average operating
pressure (Kpa)
D52 Water quality tests
carried out (No.)
D57 Water quality tests
required (No.)
F13 Connections repair time
(days)
F14 Connections repaired
(No.)
C27 Average building height
(m)
C32(a-i) Pipes length of the
same material (Km)
C33(a-i) Pipes length of the
same diameter (Km)
C34(a-i) Pipes length of the
same material and diameter
(Km)
C35 Pipes length of the
same age (Km)
C36 Pipes roughness
coefficient
D66 Minimum operating
network pressure (m)
D67 Maximum operating
network pressure (m)
D70 Time to respond to
repair leakage events
(hours)
D71 Total number of repairs
occurred (No.)
D79(a-i) Number of failures
of mains of the same
material (No.)
D80(a-i) Number of the
same type of failure in
mains and fittings (No.)
Performance Pe9 Operations &
Indicators maintenance personnel (%)

Page 72 sur 86
Pe12 Transmission, storage
and distribution personnel
(No/100km)
Op3 Network inspection
(%/year)
Op4 Leakage control
(%/year)
Op5 Active Leakage control
repairs (No./100 Km/year)
Op16 Mains rehabilitation
(%/year)
Op17 Mains renovation
(%/year)
Op18 Mains replacement
(%/year)
Op19 Replaced valves
(%/year)
Op20 Service connection
rehabilitation (%/year)
Op27 Real Losses per
connection
(lt/connection/day)
Op28 Real Losses per mains
length (lt/Km/day)
Op29 ILI
Op31 Mains failures
(No./Km/year)
Op32 Service connection
failures
(No./1000connections/year)
Op33 Hydrant failures
(No./1000 hydrants/year)
QS13 Water interruptions
(%)
QS18 Quality of supplied
water (%)
QS25 Connection repair
time (days)
Op45(a-i) Real Losses per
pipe material (m3/Km)
Op46(a-i) Real losses per
pipe diameter (m3/Km)

Page 73 sur 86
 Op47(a-i) Real losses per
pipe material and diameter
(m3/Km)
Op48(a-i) Real Losses per
pipe age (m3/Km)
Op49(a-i) Real losses per
roughness coefficient
Op50 Real losses - pressure
(m3/m)
Op60(a-i) Mains failures per
type of main (No./Km/year)
Op65(a-i) Assessment of
failures according to type of
material and fittings in
mains and service
connections
Op66 Elasticity of losses
related to operating
pressure (m3/m)
Op67 Elasticity of failures
occurrence rate related to
the operating pressure
(failures/m)
Op68 Number of days to
respond to repair leakage
events (days/repairs)
H1 Assessment period
(days)
H2 Time system is
pressurized (hours)
Variables
A25 Minimum Charge
Difference (m3)
A26 Accounted for NRW
(m3)
GENERAL
Op23 Water Losses per
connection
(m3/connection/year)
Performance Op24 Water Losses per
Indicators mains length (m3/Km/year)
Op39 Unmetered Water (%)
Fi46 NRW by volume (%)
Fi47 NRW by cost (%)

Page 74 sur 86
 Op55(a-i) Water losses per
water resources (%)
Op58 NRW per connection
(lt/connection/day)
Op59 NRW per mains
length (lt/Km/year)
Fi48 MCD per Real Losses
(%)
Fi49 MCD per connection
(m3/connection/day)
Fi50 Accounted for NRW
per NRW (%)
Op56(a-i) Water losses %
water use (%)

Table 14

6.2 Waterloss partners' NRW reduction targets

A specific document has been completed in the project based on goals and steps to get set by each
water utility. The deliverables are in the Annex 3 and correspond to the Component 4.1.2 : quantified
targets for Non Revenue Water reduction strategy.

6.2.1. The definition of targets

The work carried out within the framework of component 3 enabled the local context of each of the
pilot sites to be specified: the quantitative level of leaks, the quality of leaks, the tools already
currently put to use to manage current leaks and to anticipate future leaks.
The optimised management of networks involves putting to use a range of operational tools that are
both preventative and curative.
The chosen strategies should take into account multiple demographic, geological and technical
factors. The targets for these strategies depend on a number of economic factors: the effect of the
international economic crisis will probably slow down building investments and reduce staff
numbers.
The target for the reduction of water losses in a drinking water network also depends greatly on
resources: economic advantage via the reduction of volumes treated and/or environmental
advantage (decrease in the withdrawal of the resource).
Like in every decision-making process, any action must be preceded by a diagnosis and followed by
an evaluation.

Page 75 sur 86
The work carried out within the framework of component 3 therefore enabled more information to
be provided concerning the management of the drinking water service and impacted the level of
revenue lost.
In parallel with component 4.1 and prior to the launch of component 5 relating to the
implementation of the strategies for reducing loss of revenue, it is essential that targets are defined
for every pilot site. These target values enable us to set out the level to reach for each sub-
component in detail and then aggregated for each component and finally for system as a whole.

6.2.2. The method employed for collecting targets

A questionnaire was completed by all of the partners responsible for monitoring pilot sites.
This table will also enable the results of the implementation of these strategies to be evaluated.

The values to be filled in were broken down into three groups:

- A detailed table of variables and performance indicators for each of the 4 components of the
NRW system:

- * UNBILLED AUTHORISED CONSUMPTION

- * APPARENT LOSSES

- * REAL LOSSES

- * GENERAL

- A table summarising the important characteristics indicative of the management of the

system: the average pressure level, the number of network breakages recorded, the length
of the network of pipes inspected annually, the length of the network of pipes renewed
annually.

- A general table giving orders of magnitude for the 3 components of the NRW and each of
their sub-components: UNBILLED AUTHORISED CONSUMPTION, APPARENT LOSSES, REAL
LOSSES.

6.2.3. Targets for pilot sites

The 8 pilot cases represent a population of 461 547 inhabitants. The range is very large : the smallest
one is 3021 and the biggest one is 349 760.
The total linear of pipe is 2004 km.
All the datas have been gathered for the 2010 year. Except for WBN of Nicosia which gathered datas
for 2011 year.

The main NRW datas and targets associated are analysed bellow: % SIV, m3/year, m3/km/year,
l/connection/day.

Page 76 sur 86
NRW in %SIV

Table 15 synthesis for NRW in %

In 2010, NRW varies from 10 to 60% of SIV.

Figure 23: Graph for current NRW in % of the SIV

In the NRW (current values 2010) :

- most of the UNBILLED AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION dont exceed 2 % of SIV (excepting DH),
- The APPARENT LOSSES vary from 1 to 5%
- The REAL LOSSES are in majority close to 50% but some of them are very low (under 20%).

Page 77 sur 86
Figure 24 Graph for NRW component

For 2013, the targets are not filled except for 3 pilot cases: two are below 7 % and the other one is
close to 35 %.

In the NRW :
- The target for UNBILLED AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION vary from 0.04% to 7,6% reduction,
- The APPARENT LOSSES vary from0.20% 0,49%
- The REAL LOSSES vary from 2% to 28% reduction.

NRW as current values (m3/year)

Table 16 synthesis for NRW in current values

In 2010, the current values are for the most of them below 200 000 m3/year.

Page 78 sur 86
 Figure 25: Graph for current values in m3/year

For 2013, the targets are not filled except for 3 pilot cases. They are 11%, 18% and 66 % of reduction.

NRW in m3/km/year

Table 17 Current values in 2010

In 2010, the NRW vary from 1 500 to 25 000 m3/km/year

Page 79 sur 86
 Figure 26 : Graph of current values

In the NRW (current values 2010) :

- Majority of the UNBILLED AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION are below 200 m3/km/year (except
two of them closed to 1000 m3/km/year)
- The APPARENT LOSSES are all under 1000 m3/km/year (except one of them closed to 2500)
- The REAL LOSSES are in majority below 10 000 m3/km/year (except two of them closed to 25
000).

Figure 27: Graph for current values

For 2013, the targets are not filled except for 3 pilot cases :
- the % reduction for UNBILLED AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION are from 0, 14 and 100 %.
- the % reduction for APPARENT LOSSES are 13, 13 and 16%.
- the % reduction for REAL LOSSES are 18, 11 and 65%.

Page 80 sur 86
NRW in liters/connection/day

Table 18 Synthesis for NRW in liters per connection and per day

In 2013, the NRW varies from 50 000 to 400 000 liters/connection/day.

Figure 28: graph of NRW in liters per connections and per day

In the NRW (current values 2010) the NRW target is 11 % of reduction:

- Majority of the UNBILLED AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION are below 15 000
liters/connection/day. (except one of them close to 30 000)
- The APPARENT LOSSES are all under 15 000 liters/connection/day (except one of them close
to 35 000)
- The REAL LOSSES are in majority below 150 000 m3/km/year (except one of them close to
300 000).

Figure 29: Graph for NRW targets

For 2013, the targets are not filled except for 3 pilot cases :
- the % reduction for UNBILLED AUTHORIZED CONSUMPTION are from 0, 14 and 100 %.
- the % reduction for APPARENT LOSSES are 13, 13 and 16%.
- the % reduction for REAL LOSSES are 18, 11 and 65%.

Page 81 sur 86
6.2.4. Conclusion

The connection between the strategy and the impacts is very important. In order for partners to
make their comments they need data regarding the presuppositions and also the results.

The data also show a huge variety of situation that makes comparison ineffective; data have to be
considered in a context that explains mainly those differences.

Page 82 sur 86
7 Bibliography
[AGHTM, 2002]
AGHTM. (2002) Diagnostic des rseaux deau potable (Diagnosis of drinking water networks) TSM
folder, no.6, June 2002. p. 31-40.
Ajuste C., Berland J-M., Celrier J-L. (2004). Rhabilitation/Remplacement des rseaux deau potable
en zone rurale (The restoration/replacement of drinking water networks in rural zones) FNDAE
technical document, special edition no.10. p. 10-70.

[Cambrezy and Cousin, 2009]

Cambrzy M., and Cousin A.C. (2009). Intgration de la dmarche damlioration des pertes en eau
dans une dmarche de gestion patrimoniale (Integrating the approach to improving water losses
into an asset management approach) January 2009, No. 318 - Leau, lindustrie, les nuisances (water,
industry and nuisances). pp 37-45.

[Coussy, 2008]
Coussy E. (2008). Amlioration du rendement et de la qualit de leau dun rseau deau potable,
syndicat de basse Dheune (71) (Improving the yield and quality of the water in a drinking water
system, Basse Dheune water association). Placement essay, ENGEES and Lyonnaise des Eaux SUEZ,
100 p.

[Farley et al. , 2008]

Farley M., Wyeth G., Ghazali Z.B. M., Istandar A. and Singh S. (2008). The Managers Non-Revenue
Water Handbook. A Guide to Understanding Water Losses. USAID, 110 p.

[IWA, 2010]
IWA : Alegre H., Baptista J.M., Cabrera E., Cubillo F., Duarte P., Hirner W., Merkel W. and Parena R.
(2010). Performance Indicators for Water Supply Services. First published 2006, Reprinted 2007,
Reprinted 2010, 2nd Edition. Manual of Best Practice, IWA Publishing. 289p.

[Kingdom et al., 2006]

Kingdom B., Liemberger R. and Marin P. (2006). The Challenge of Reducing Non-Revenue Water
(NRW) in Developing Countries. How the Private Sector Can Help: A Look at Performance-Based
Service Contracting. World bank group, Water supply and sanitation sector board and Public- private
infrastructure advisory facility. Washington, 52 p.

[Liemberger et al., 2007]

Liemberger R., Brothers K., Lambert A., McKenzie R., Rizzo A. and Waldron T. (2007). Water Loss
Performance Indicators. Waterloss, Conference proceeding, 13p.

[MED, 2010]
MED. (2010). Application Form, Priority-Objective 2-1, Axis 2: Protection of the environment and
promotion of a sustainable territorial development, Objective 2.1: Protection and enhancement of
natural resources and heritage, WATERLOSS, Management of water losses in a drinking water supply
system, Submitted version, version 5. 80 p.

Page 83 sur 86
[Oertl, 2011]
Oertl E. (2011). Rduction des pertes en eau dans les rseaux de distribution. Terminologie,
mthodes et instruments (the reduction of water losses in distribution networks. Terminology,
methods and instruments) GWA, (9) 2011, Suisse, pp.665, 674.

[Pearson et Trow, 2011]

Pearson D. and Trow S. W. (2011). Comparing Leakage Performance using the Frontier Approach. 10
p.

[SAGE 33, 2004]

SAGE nappes profondes de la Gironde (the deep water tables of the Gironde). (2004). Rendement des
rseaux deau potable, dfinition des termes utilises (the output of drinking water networks,
definition and terms used) Bordeaux, 23 p.

[Trow, 2009]
Trow S.W. (2009). Development of a pressure management Index. Waterloss, Conference
proceeding, Cape Town, 26-29 April 2009, 9p.

[Waterloss, 2012 a]
Waterloss. (2012) a. Management of water losses in a drinking water supply system C03: Monitoring
of the performance of Water Supply Systems & Evaluation of NRW. Phase 3.1 Overview of Water
Supply Systems & performance assessment. Project report D3.1.1 & D3.1.2: Water balance
assessments, GIS Plots. By LG, Italy, 135 p.

[Waterloss, 2012 b]
Waterloss. (2012) b. Management of water losses in a drinking water supply system C03: Monitoring
of the performance of Water Supply Systems & Evaluation of NRW. Phase 3.2. Establishment of an
efficient performance indicator system. Project report, D3.2.1 & D3.2.2: Database of performance
indicators, Group of appropriate performance indicators adapted to regional conditions. By WBN,
Cyprus, 186 p.

Page 84 sur 86
 Annex list
Annex 1 : NRW reduction measures.1
Part A : Answers of Waterloss project partners at DH questionnaire on NRW
measures...1
1. Answer of AMB : Castellbisbal...2
2. Answer of DEYAK : Kozani..20
3. Answer of DH : SIE de Lodve..38
4. Answer of LG : Melito di Napoli..56
5. Answer of PO : Argels-sur-Mer.74
6. Answer of WBN : Nicosia...95

Part B : Synthesis of project partners answers at DH questionnaire on NRW

measures113

Annex 2 : Decision tree building..140

Part A : Decision tree..140

Part B : Synthesis of variables, context information and indicators used at each

STEP..153

Part C : DH questionnaire on thresholds166

Part D : Thresholds guide..174

Part E : Answers of Waterloss project partners at DH questionnaire on

thresholds177
1. Answer of AMB : Castellbisbal178
2. Answer of PO : Argels-sur-Mer....184

Annex 3 : NRW reduction targets, answers of Waterloss project

partners at LP questionnaire on thresholds185

1. Answer of AMB : Castellbisbal.186

2. Answer of DEYAK : Kozani..193
3. Answer of DH : SIE de Lodve198
4. Answer of LG : Melito di Napoli..203
5. Answer of PO : Argels-sur-Mer 208
6. Answer of PO : Baho213
7. Answer of PO : Thuir..218
8. Answer of WBN : Nicosia.223

Page 85 sur 86
Page 86 sur 86