TRADE WASTE
RISK RANKING PRICING
2
WHY HAS FIXED FEE PRICING CHANGED?
TREATMENT
PLANTS
ASSETS
ENVIRONMENT
WATER
REUSE
OH&S
Cost Better Reflects
Trade Waste...
WHY HAS FIXED FEE PRICING CHANGED?
3
 Consistency/Equity across 3 water retailers
• CWW implemented around 10 years ago
•...
CHANGES IN TW FEE DETERMINATION 2013-2014
4
 On the 1st July 2013 determination of some trade waste prices have changed
•...
TRADE WASTE PRICE INCREASES 2013-2014
5
• Trade waste increase 7.6% compared to average Water & Sewer increase of 24.7%
• ...
HOW HAS FIXED FEE PRICING CHANGED?
6
Application Fees (New and Renewal Agreements/Consent)
• Prices set to be cost neutral...
HOW HAS FIXED FEE PRICING CHANGED?
7
Contract Fees (Agreement/Consent operational management)
• Prices set to be cost neut...
WHO ISAFFECTED BY FIXED FEE PRICING CHANGE?
8
• Out of 6489 customers as at May 2013, only 2.5% will incur a significant i...
RISK RANKING DETERMINATION
9
RISK RANK RISK DESCRIPTOR SITE VISIT FREQUENCY YVW
CUSTOMERS
30 JUNE 2013
1 Extreme 1 month 1...
RISK RANKINGALGORITHM
10
Risk Rank derived from the sum score of 6 risk factors
L + H + V + A + S + C = RR score
 Where;
...
LOCATION COMPONENT
11
 Scoring based on treatment plant vulnerability to trade waste discharge
 TP with higher class wat...
HISTORY COMPONENT
12
 History is determined by the following formula
H = (NC/S) x 100
Where;
NC = Number of non-compliant...
VOLUME COMPONENT
13
 Scoring based on a discharge volume range of consented maximum volume
 Higher the volume the greate...
ACTIVITY COMPONENT
14
ACTIVITY SCORE DESCRIPTOR
Animal Care 1 Caring of animals in the form of meal preparation, grooming,...
SUBSTANCE COMPONENT
15
 Substance is hard coded to the activity score to account for contaminants that pose an
additional...
CLASS COMPONENT
16
 Class is hard coded to the activity score as an extra safety factor for classes of hazardous
substanc...
RISK RANK SCORE
17
RISK RANK SCORE RANGE
1 ≥150
2 120-149
3 90-119
4 50-89
5 <50
L + H + V + A + S + C = RR score
• The Ri...
EXAMPLES
18
Example 1
Commercial laundry discharging a maximum 95kl/day to Eastern treatment plant, has had 2
non complian...
WHAT CAN CUSTOMERS DO TO MAINTAIN OR REDUCE
CURRENT RISK RANKING?
19
 By maintaining compliance over a rolling 3 year per...
THANK YOU
20
• Questions?
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in …5
×

Trade Waste Risk Ranking Pricing

428 views

Published on

0 Comments
0 Likes
Statistics
Notes
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Views
Total views
428
On SlideShare
0
From Embeds
0
Number of Embeds
2
Actions
Shares
0
Downloads
4
Comments
0
Likes
0
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

Trade Waste Risk Ranking Pricing

  1. 1. TRADE WASTE RISK RANKING PRICING
  2. 2. 2 WHY HAS FIXED FEE PRICING CHANGED? TREATMENT PLANTS ASSETS ENVIRONMENT WATER REUSE OH&S Cost Better Reflects Trade Waste Risk To 5 Key Objectives of Integrated Sewage Quality Management System (ISQMS)
  3. 3. WHY HAS FIXED FEE PRICING CHANGED? 3  Consistency/Equity across 3 water retailers • CWW implemented around 10 years ago • SEW implemented 1st July 2013-2014  Polluter pays model  Greater the risk to YVW and metro sewage system, the greater the fee  Financial incentive to better manage trade waste • More non-compliances can increase the fixed trade waste fees • Maintaining compliance can lower or maintain fixed trade waste fees
  4. 4. CHANGES IN TW FEE DETERMINATION 2013-2014 4  On the 1st July 2013 determination of some trade waste prices have changed • Contract Fees • Application Fees Max. Volume Risk Ranking • Volumetric Charge • Quality Charge (BOD, SS, iTDS, TKN) No Determination Change Fixed Variable
  5. 5. TRADE WASTE PRICE INCREASES 2013-2014 5 • Trade waste increase 7.6% compared to average Water & Sewer increase of 24.7% • Overall Trade Waste Charge increases lowest since 2007 bar the price freeze • CPI increase for the following 4 years 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20 08/09 09/10 10/11 11/12 12/13 13/14 %increase %increase Price Freeze
  6. 6. HOW HAS FIXED FEE PRICING CHANGED? 6 Application Fees (New and Renewal Agreements/Consent) • Prices set to be cost neutral overall to YVW customer base • ESC ratified new fees June 2013 (incorporates 7.6% trade waste price increases) Daily Consented Max Volume Charge 2012/13 ≤0.5kl/d $0.00 >0.5kl/d & ≤4kl/d $59.27 >4kl/d & ≤20kl/d $144.94 >20kl/d & ≤50kl/d $335.56 >50kl/d & ≤100kl/d $369.73 >100kl/d & ≤1000kl/d $1456.11 >1000kl/d $2912.86 Risk Rank Charge 2013/14 5 $57.89 4 $113.83 3 $667.29 2 $1193.30 1 $3687.04
  7. 7. HOW HAS FIXED FEE PRICING CHANGED? 7 Contract Fees (Agreement/Consent operational management) • Prices set to be cost neutral overall to YVW customer base • ESC ratified new fees June 2013 (incorporates 7.6% trade waste price increases) Annual Discharge Annual Charge 2012/13 <2500kl/yr $529.46 2500.1-25000kl/yr $1589.81 25000.1-100000kl/yr $5301.42 >100000kl/yr $15905.41 Risk Rank (Dynamic) Annual Charge 2013/14 5 $569.84 4 $1711.07 3 $5705.79 2 $15170.37 1 $17118.61
  8. 8. WHO ISAFFECTED BY FIXED FEE PRICING CHANGE? 8 • Out of 6489 customers as at May 2013, only 2.5% will incur a significant increase 4.8% customers Paying Less 2.5% customers Paying More 92.7% Customers No Significant Change
  9. 9. RISK RANKING DETERMINATION 9 RISK RANK RISK DESCRIPTOR SITE VISIT FREQUENCY YVW CUSTOMERS 30 JUNE 2013 1 Extreme 1 month 10 2 High 2 months 12 3 Moderate 3 months 47 4 Low 6 months 236 5 Insignificant 12 months (selected customers only) 6193 • Devised in 1991 with formation of Melbourne Water from MMBW • System adopted by YVW, SEW and CWW in 1995, in use to this day • Until now system used internally for setting compliance site visit frequency • All current and new YVW customers are assigned a risk ranking
  10. 10. RISK RANKINGALGORITHM 10 Risk Rank derived from the sum score of 6 risk factors L + H + V + A + S + C = RR score  Where;  L is Location (treatment plant specific score)  H is History (compliance history)  V is Volume (specific score for volume range)  A is Activity (specific score for an activity conducted on-site)  S is Substance (for hazardous substances from activity)  C is Class (a score for a safety factor for higher risk discharge)
  11. 11. LOCATION COMPONENT 11  Scoring based on treatment plant vulnerability to trade waste discharge  TP with higher class water reuse and/or smaller catchment has higher score TREATMENT PLANT WATER REUSE SCORE WTP Large System Capacity 0 ETP Large System Capacity 0 Healesville Low system Capacity 10 Monbulk Low System Capacity 10 Upper Yarra Low system Capacity 10 Craigieburn Class B 15 Lilydale Class B 20 Whittlesea Class B 20 Wallan Class C 20 Aurora Class A 25 Brushy Creek Class A 25
  12. 12. HISTORY COMPONENT 12  History is determined by the following formula H = (NC/S) x 100 Where; NC = Number of non-compliant samples in last 3 years to date S = Number of samples taken in last 3 years to date Default Scenarios: New Customers = Score of 10 Customers with less than 4 samples = Score of 10
  13. 13. VOLUME COMPONENT 13  Scoring based on a discharge volume range of consented maximum volume  Higher the volume the greater the consequence of a non-compliant discharge VOLUME RANGE SCORE 0 - <5kl/day 1 5 - <25kl/day 10 25 - <50kl/day 20 50 - <75kl/day 30 75 - <100kl/day 40 100 - < 500kl/day 50 500 - <1000kl/day 75 1000 - <2000kl/day 100 ≥2000kl/day 150
  14. 14. ACTIVITY COMPONENT 14 ACTIVITY SCORE DESCRIPTOR Animal Care 1 Caring of animals in the form of meal preparation, grooming, medical attention Food Manufacture 5 The manufacture of food products Embalming 5 Preservation of bodies, body parts, organs and animals Groundwater 10 Discharge of uncontaminated groundwater to sewer Pulp & Paper Manufacture 25 Processing of wood and recycled paper to produce pulp and paper products Commercial & Hospital laundering 25 Washing / Cleaning of linen from Hospitals, Restaurants, Nappy Services etc Chemical manufacture 50 The reaction of two or more chemicals to produce a product or an intermediate which is used in other processes to manufacture end products, ie vinyl chloride monomers, resins, emulsions, etc Liquid Waste Disposal 75 The treatment of schedule 4 wastewater • 244 Activities describing onsite processes, each is given a score for deemed risk • Higher risk activities incur a higher activity score • Sites with multiple activities, highest score activity used
  15. 15. SUBSTANCE COMPONENT 15  Substance is hard coded to the activity score to account for contaminants that pose an additional risk to the sewage system  The higher risk the activity, the higher the substance score  For multiple substance scores, the highest substance score is used ACTIVITY SCORE SUBSTANCE SCORE 75 50 50 50 25 10 10 10 5 0 1 0
  16. 16. CLASS COMPONENT 16  Class is hard coded to the activity score as an extra safety factor for classes of hazardous substances such as petrochemicals, heavy metals, volatile organic chemicals  Sites with multiple classes, highest class score is used ACTIVITY CLASS SCORE Animal Care 0 Food Manufacture 0 Fuel Dispensing Area 10 Laboratory 15 Metal Pickling 20 Tip Leachate 25 Chemical manufacture 50 Liquid Waste Disposal 50
  17. 17. RISK RANK SCORE 17 RISK RANK SCORE RANGE 1 ≥150 2 120-149 3 90-119 4 50-89 5 <50 L + H + V + A + S + C = RR score • The Risk Rank score is dynamically determined on a daily basis
  18. 18. EXAMPLES 18 Example 1 Commercial laundry discharging a maximum 95kl/day to Eastern treatment plant, has had 2 non compliances in 3 years taken from 25 samples L=0 H=8 V=40 A=25 S=10 C=0 Total=83 RR=4 Contract Fee = $1711.07 Application Fee = $113.83 Example 2 Metal finisher has ‘electroplating – dip’ as activity has started business discharging a maximum 27kl/day to Brushy Creek treatment plant, as it is a new business it has no sample history L=25 H=10 V=20 A=25 S=10 C=25 Total=115 RR=3 Contract Fee = $5705.79 Application Fee = $667.29
  19. 19. WHAT CAN CUSTOMERS DO TO MAINTAIN OR REDUCE CURRENT RISK RANKING? 19  By maintaining compliance over a rolling 3 year period  Ensure volume is correct and maintain compliance to limit  Check activities on site are correct or if they have changed since last agreement
  20. 20. THANK YOU 20 • Questions?

×