PEER_REVIEW_REPORT_Veolia_DWSD_12-19-2014

Lake
St. Clair
Lake
Erie
OAKLAND
COUNTY
MACOMB
COUNTY
WAYNE
COUNTY
MONROE
COUNTY
CITYOF
DETROIT
Detroit Water and
Sewerage Department
Peer Review Report
IMAGE CREDITS: Oakland County, City of Troy, 16miletroy.jpg, by Cadiomals, 16 July 2012, CC-SA 3.0 unported; Macomb County Administrative Building in
Mount Clemens, image from iStock; City of Detroit, from Photo Disc of North American Cities; Wayne County, image from iStock; Map adapted from MGF

PEER REVIEW REPORT
Detroit Water and
Sewerage Department
DECEMBER19,2014
The information contained on each page of this document which has been stamped with
the legend “Draft. Prepared at the request of counsel. Confidential mediation document.”
is confidential and subject to mediation. Judge Cox of the Federal Courts asserts a
confidentiality claim covering all data and information contained on each page of this
document bearing this legend. No such data and information shall be disclosed outside of
the agency to which this document has been submitted or be duplicated, used or disclosed,
in whole or in part, for any purpose other than to support the ongoing mediation.

TOC-1
Table of Contents
Peer Review Report
Page No.
Cover
Transmittal Letter
Title Page
Table of Contents
- Attachment - List of Acronyms
Section 1 – Executive Summary
Peer Review Background and Objectives .................................................................................................................. ES-2
Background........................................................................................................................................................... ES-2
Objectives.............................................................................................................................................................. ES-3
Operations and Maintenance Savings Overview (Lease Charge Analysis) ....................................................... ES-3
Baseline ................................................................................................................................................................. ES-3
Contribution of Potential Savings to Lease Charge .................................................................................... ES-3
- Table ES-1 – Wholesale Identified Savings.......................................................................................... ES-4
- Table ES-2 – Wholesale Identified Savings ......................................................................................... ES-4
- Table ES-3 – Savings Estimate and Expenditures.............................................................................. ES-5
DWSD Today and GLWA Tomorrow........................................................................................................................... ES-9
Findings and Opportunities...................................................................................................................................... ES-9
Investments for Stabilization........................................................................................................................... ES-9
Immediate Priorities........................................................................................................................................... ES-12
Implement of Best Practices to Unlock Savings and/or Improve Performance................................... ES-15
- Exhibit ES-1 – Credit & Collection Benchmarking Performance Data (AWWA)......................... ES-21
Moving Forward.............................................................................................................................................................. ES-24
Implementation Plan ................................................................................................................................................. ES-24
Quick Wins.................................................................................................................................................................... ES-24
- Table ES-4 – Proposed Immediate Initiatives – Quick Wins ........................................................... ES-25
Moving Forward.......................................................................................................................................................... ES-26
Section 2 – Operation & Maintenance Savings Overview (Lease Charge Analysis)
2.1 – Approach ............................................................................................................................................................. 2-1
2.1.1 – Methodology ............................................................................................................................................ 2-1
2.1.2 – Baseline ..................................................................................................................................................... 2-2
- Figure 2-1 – DWSD: Water and Wastewater Departments Budget Subcategories....... 2-3
- Table 2-1 – Departmental Budget - Water .............................................................................. 2-3
- Table 2-2 – Departmental Budget - Sewer.............................................................................. 2-4
- Table 2-3 – Departmental Budget - Combined...................................................................... 2-4
- Figure 2-2 – Spend Allocation..................................................................................................... 2-5
2.1.3 – Contractual/Purchased Services.......................................................................................................... 2-6
- Table 2-4 – Summary of Contractual/Purchased Services.................................................. 2-6
2.1.4 – Future Years Forecasting....................................................................................................................... 2-9
- Figure 2-3 – 2015-2019 Forecast Budget................................................................................... 2-9
- Table 2-5 – Annual Adjustments ............................................................................................... 2-10
- Figure 2-4 – Annual Overtime Savings Ratio.......................................................................... 2-11
- Figure 2.5 – Annual Overtime Savings – Normal %............................................................... 2-11

Table of Contents
TOC-2
Page No.
- Table 2-6 – Line Asset Ratios ...................................................................................................... 2-12
2.1.5 – Capital Expenditures.............................................................................................................................. 2-12
2.2 – Savings Overview .............................................................................................................................................. 2-12
- Table 2-7 – Wholesale Identified Savings................................................................................ 2-14
- Table 2-8 – Wholesale Identified Savings ............................................................................... 2-14
- Table 2-9 – Savings Estimates and Expenditures.................................................................. 2-15
Section 3 – DWSD Today: Findings & Opportunities
Utility-Wide Improvements ......................................................................................................................................... 3-1
3.A – Staffing ............................................................................................................................................................. 3.A-1
3.A-1 – Investing in People................................................................................................................................. 3.A-1
- Figure 3.A-1 – DWSD Retirement Age 65 – Five-Year Profile............................................... 3.A-2
- Figure 3.A-2 – DWSD Retirement – 30 Years of Service – Five Year Profile ..................... 3.A-3
- Figure 3.A-3 – DWSD Overall Staffing...................................................................................... 3.A-4
3.A.2 – Training Objectives................................................................................................................................ 3.A-6
- Table 3.A.-1 – Operations Training ............................................................................................ 3.A-7
- Table 3.A.-2 – Maintenance Training........................................................................................ 3.A-8
- Table 3.A.-3 – Veolia – 2014 EHS&S Training Calendar ........................................................ 3.A-9
3.A-3 – Communications & Public Affairs ..................................................................................................... 3.A-11
- Table 3.A-4 – Recommended Communications/Public Affairs Improvements ............. 3.A-13
3.B – Water Treatment and Quality ....................................................................................................................... 3.B-1
- Table 3.B-1 – Characteristics of the Water Treatment Plants............................................. 3.B-1
- Table 3.B-2 – Water Treatment Recommended Initiatives................................................. 3.B-3
3.B.1 – Personnel & Organizational Development ...................................................................................... 3.B-4
- Table 3.B-3 – DWSD WTP Current Personnel Levels and Metrics ...................................... 3.B-4
3.B.2 - Automation Optimization .................................................................................................................... 3.B-7
3.B.3 - Asset Management ................................................................................................................................ 3.B-9
3.B.4 - Excess Plant Capacity............................................................................................................................. 3.B-9
- Table 3.B-4 - DWSD WTP Production Capacities and Water Demands............................ 3.B-10
- Table 3.B-5 - DWSD WTP O&M Costs per Million Gallons................................................... 3.B-10
3.B.5 - Process Optimization, Energy and Chemicals .................................................................................. 3.B-12
- Table 3.B-6 - Chemical Improvement Ideas............................................................................ 3.B-16
- Table 3.B-7 - Potential Alternative Coagulant Dosages ....................................................... 3.B-17
- Table 3.B-8 - Potential Optimizations in Chlorine Application........................................... 3.B-18
- Table 3.B-9 - Estimated Orthophosphate Dosing & Potential Lead Concentrations.... 3.B-18
- Table 3.B-10 - Potential Optimizations in Orthophosphate Dosing.................................. 3.B-19
- Table 3.B-11 - Process Optimization Ideas................................................................................ 3.B-21
- Table 3.B-12 - Potential Coagulant Dosing Based on Optimal Mixing Conditions.........3.B-23
- Table 3.B-13 - Potential Optimizations in Coagulant Dosing Based on
Optimal Flocculation Mixing.............................................................................3.B-23
- Figure 3.B-1 - Filter Run Time ......................................................................................................3.B-25
- Table 3.B-14 - Potential Optimizations in Washwater Consumption...............................3.B-26
- Table 3.B-15 - Current Filter Run Cycles....................................................................................3.B-28
- Table 3.B-16 - Current Average Filtration Rates .....................................................................3.B-28
- Table 3.B-17 - Gross Water Production .....................................................................................3.B-29
- Table 3.B-18 - Washwater Consumption .................................................................................3.B-30
- Figure 3.B-2 - Example Backwash Duration Curve ................................................................ 3.B-31

Table of Contents
TOC-3
Page No.
- Table 3.B-19 - Filter Backwash Durations................................................................................. 3.B-31
- Table 3.B-20 - Filtration Efficiency.............................................................................................3.B-32
3.B.6 - Laboratory Operations...........................................................................................................................3.B-33
- Table 3.B-21 – DWTP Laboratory Functions.............................................................................3.B-33
3.C – Wastewater Treatment and Quality............................................................................................................ 3.C-1
- Table 3.C-1 - Wastewater Treatment Plant Characteristics................................................. 3.C-2
- Table 3.C-2 - Wastewater Treatment (Current and Future)................................................ 3.C-2
- Table 3.C-3 - Wastewater Potential Optimization Opportunities..................................... 3.C-5
3.C.1 - Plant Operations...................................................................................................................................... 3.C-6
- Figure 3.C-1 – Example Shift Logs.............................................................................................. 3.C-8
- Figure 3.C-2 – Example Unit Process Report........................................................................... 3.C-9
- Table 3.C-4 – Neighboring WWTPs as Potential New Customers..................................... 3.C-10
- Table 3.C-5 – Ferric Chloride Optimization Ideas................................................................... 3.C-12
- Figure 3.C-3 – Soluble Phosphorous Removal by Ferric Chloride Addition...................... 3.C-13
- Table 3.C-6 – Oxygen Capacity vs. Usage................................................................................ 3.C-16
- Table 3.C-7 – Capacity Management........................................................................................ 3.C-17
- Table 3.C-8 – Aeration Process Improvement Ideas.............................................................. 3.C-18
- Table 3.C-9 – Pure Oxygen Mixing Improvement Ideas ...................................................... 3.C-19
- Figure 3.C-4 – Probability of Total Plant Flow Equal to or Less Than................................3.C-22
- Figure 3.C-5 – Plant Influent Flow – PS1 and PS2 Total.........................................................3.C-23
- Table 3.C-10 – Three-Deck vs. Two-Deck Operation Comparison......................................3.C-24
- Figure 3.C-6 – Average DWF Diurnal by Month.....................................................................3.C-25
- Table 3.C-11 – Disinfection Improvement Ideas .....................................................................3.C-27
- Figure 3.C-7 – DWSD P&ID..........................................................................................................3.C-28
3.C.2 - Biosolids Operations...............................................................................................................................3.C-29
- Table 3.C-12 – Biosolids Operating Baseline Assessment: Performance Metrics...........3.C-30
- Table 3.C-13 – Biosolids Mass Balance & Unit Operations:
Relative to Processing Capacity.......................................................................3.C-32
- Table 3.C-14 – Biosolids Ideas .....................................................................................................3.C-33
3.C.3 - Laboratory Operations...........................................................................................................................3.C-36
- Table 3.C-15 – Function of Laboratories ...................................................................................3.C-36
3.C.4 - Industrial Waste Control Operations................................................................................................. 3.C-41
3.D – Maintenance Management........................................................................................................................... 3.D-1
- Table 3.D-1 - Potential Areas for Maintenance Improvements .......................................... 3.D-2
3.D.1 - Asset Management Program Risk Mitigation and Completed Improvements........................ 3.D-3
- Figure 3.D.1 – Veolia’s Asset Management Program Flow Chart....................................... 3.D-5
3.D.2 - Update the Current Oracle WAM Configuration;
Standardize Workflow and Conduct Training................................................................................. 3.D-6
3.D.3 - Reallocate Maintenance Personnel to Optimize Maintenance Capability............................... 3.D-9
3.D.4 - Update Fleet and Heavy Equipment Maintenance Systems........................................................ 3.D-11
3.E – Underground Assets......................................................................................................................................... 3.E-1
- Table 3.E-1 – Underground Asset Recommended Initiatives.............................................. 3.E-2
3.E.1 – Develop and Implement a Plan to Improve GIS Data Integrity.................................................... 3.E-3
- Figure 3.E-1 – Extract of DWSD GIS Map.................................................................................. 3.E-4
- Table 3.E-2 – GIS Data for Water and Wastewater Mains................................................... 3.E-5
- Figure 3.E-2 – Gravity Main Shape File Wastewater Duplicate Pipes............................... 3.E-7
- Figure 3.E-3 – Water Duplicate Pipes........................................................................................ 3.E-7

Table of Contents
TOC-4
Page No.
3.E.2 - Proactive versus Reactive UGAM R&M Strategy ............................................................................. 3.E-9
- Table 3.E-3 – Recorded Work Orders by Type ......................................................................... 3.E-10
- Table 3.E-4 – Water Main Maintenance and Emergency Service Orders......................... 3.E-12
- Figure 3.E-4 – Number of Leaks per Year................................................................................. 3.E-13
- Figure 3.E-5 – Number of Leaks per Pressure Area................................................................ 3.E-13
3.E.3 - Implement an Effective Network Replacement Strategy.............................................................. 3.E-15
- Figure 3.E-6 – Location of Rehabilitated Sewers.................................................................... 3.E-17
- Figure 3.E-7 – 20-Year Strategic Renewal Scenario............................................................... 3.E-18
- Figure 3.E-8 – Population Trends Between 2000 and 2010................................................. 3.E-18
- Figure 3.E-9 – Vacant Housing Trends Between 2000 and 2010....................................... 3.E-19
- Figure 3.E-10 – Vacant Housing Units in 2010 ........................................................................ 3.E-19
- Table 3.E-5 – Length Breakdown Based on Wastewater Master Plan ..............................3.E-20
3.E.4 - Green Infrastructure............................................................................................................................... 3.E-21
- Table 3.E-6 – Status of 2013 Progress Report Administrative Activities ..........................3.E-24
- Table 3.E-7 – Status of 2013 Progress Report Technical Activities ..................................... 3.E-25
3.E.5 - Implement Sinkhole Intervention Program ...................................................................................... 3.E-25
3.E.6 - Develop a Missing-Lid Intervention Program...................................................................................3.E-28
3.F – Energy Management........................................................................................................................................ 3.F-1
- Table 3.F-1 – Energy Management Initiatives......................................................................... 3.F-4
3.F-1 - Staffing and Budget................................................................................................................................ 3.F-5
3.F-2 - Energy Management.............................................................................................................................. 3.F-6
- Figure 3.F-1 – 2014 Total Electrical Cost per Site ($)............................................................... 3.F-7
- Table 3.F-2 – Annual Electrical Consumption by Facility ..................................................... 3.F-8
- Figure 3.F-2 – WWTP FY2014 Electrical Consumption .......................................................... 3.F-9
- Figure 3.F-3 – Lake Huron WTP FY2014 Electrical Consumption ........................................ 3.F-9
- Figure 3.F-4 – Springwells WTP FY2014 Electrical Consumption ....................................... 3.F-10
- Figure 3.F-5 – Northeast WTP FY2014 Electrical Consumption........................................... 3.F-11
- Figure 3.F-6 – Waterworks Park FY2014 Electrical Consumption....................................... 3.F-11
- Figure 3.F-7 – Effective Electricity Cost, Top 10 Consumers................................................. 3.F-12
- Figure 3.F-8 – Water Treatment Plants – Energy Use Index (MWh/MG)......................... 3.F-13
- Figure 3.F-9 – Booster Pump Stations – Energy Use Index (MWh/MG)........................... 3.F-14
- Figure 3.F.10 – Water Treatment Plants – Operations Summary ...................................... 3.F-14
3.F-3 - Energy Procurement............................................................................................................................... 3.F-15
- Table 3.F-3 – Electric Choice – Cap Tracking System (Current as of 10/01/2014) ........... 3.F-16
- Table 3.F-4 – Allotments vs. Enrollments in Queue .............................................................. 3.F-16
- Figure 3.F-11 – Natural Gas Customer Choice Participation Statistics.............................. 3.F-17
3.F-4 - Energy Conservation Measures........................................................................................................... 3.F-17
3.F-5 - Long-Term Strategies.............................................................................................................................3.F-20
3.G – Engineering, Capital Planning and Delivery............................................................................................... 3.G-1
- Table 3.G-1 – Capital Planning Initiatives................................................................................ 3.G-2
3.G.1 - Staffing and Budget................................................................................................................................ 3.G-3
- Figure 3.G-1 – DWSD CIP Organization .................................................................................... 3.G-3
- Figure 3.G-2 – Future DWSD CIP Organization ...................................................................... 3.G-5
3.G-2 - Objectives & Strategy ........................................................................................................................... 3.G-9
- Figure 3.G-3 – Recommended CIP Process .............................................................................. 3.G-9
3.G-3 - Project Delivery Cycle............................................................................................................................3.G-13
- Figure 3.G-4 – Recommended CIP Cycle .................................................................................. 3.G-15
3.G-4 - Systems and Tools .................................................................................................................................3.G-18

Table of Contents
TOC-5
Page No.
3.H – Finance and Budgeting ................................................................................................................................... 3.H-1
3.H-1 - Objectives and Principals for the Finance Department................................................................. 3.H-1
A – Finance Function #1: Performance Recording and Monitoring................................................. 3.H-1
B – Finance Function #2: Rates and Debt.............................................................................................. 3.H-7
C – Finance Function #3: Internal Controls (including spend control) ........................................... 3.H-9
- Table 3.H-1 – Proposed Internal Controls ......................................................................................3.H-10
3.H-2 - Organizational Approach to the Finance Function........................................................................ 3.H-11
- Figure 3.H-1 – CFO Office – Organization Chart...........................................................................3.H-12
- Figure 3.H-2 – Finance Structure – Organization Chart.............................................................3.H-13
- Figure 3.H-3 – Accounts Payable – Organization Chart .............................................................3.H-14
3.I – Customer Service................................................................................................................................................ 3.I-1
- Table 3.I-1 – Customer Service Opportunities......................................................................... 3.I-1
3.I-1 - Call Center, Billing and Collections....................................................................................................... 3.I-2
- Table 3.I-2 – Potential Areas for Customer Service Improvements................................... 3.I-3
- Table 3.I-3 – Initial Customer Service Technology Strategic Plan Strategies .................. 3.I-6
3.I-2 - Metering Operations............................................................................................................................... 3.I-18
- Table 3.I-4 – Water and Sewer Revenues ................................................................................ 3.I-18
- Table 3.I-5 – Meter Operations Improvements...................................................................... 3.I-20
3.I.2.1 - Meter Health Analysis and Replacement Program................................................................ 3.I-20
- Figure 3.I-1 – Meter Performance Comparison....................................................................... 3.I-22
- Figure 3.I-2 – Veolia Meter Lab Meter Flow Rate Profiles.................................................... 3.I-23
- Figure 3.I-3 – Accuracy Profiles from Houston Meter Lab.................................................... 3.I-23
- Table 3.I-6 – Wholesale Meter Type by Quantity/Age......................................................... 3.I-24
3.J – Support Functions.............................................................................................................................................. 3.J-1
3.J-1 – Human Resources.................................................................................................................................... 3.J-1
- Table 3.J-1 – Human Resources Recommended Initiatives.................................................. 3.J-2
3.J-2 – IT and Data Management..................................................................................................................... 3.J-14
- Table 3.J-2 – IT Department Opportunities............................................................................. 3.J-14
3.J.2-1 - Organization................................................................................................................................. 3.J-15
3.J.2-2 - Technology................................................................................................................................... 3.J-16
- Table 3.J-3 – Status and Observations on Key IT Systems................................................... 3.J-17
- Table 3.J-4 – SCADA System Gap Analysis – Wastewater Treatment Plant.................... 3.J-19
- Table 3.J-5 – DWSD Ongoing High-impact IT Projects.......................................................... 3.J-21
3.J.2-3 - Business Processes and Procedures........................................................................................ 3.J-25
3.J.2-4 - Performance Management...................................................................................................... 3.J-26
3.J-3 – Procurement and Subcontracted Services........................................................................................ 3.J-27
- Table 3.J-6 – Summary of Procurement Improvement Recommendations.................... 3.J-28
3.J.3-1 – Staffing and Budget................................................................................................................... 3.J-28
- Figure 3.J-1 – Reduce and Repurpose – Organization Chart................................................ 3.J-30
- Table 3.J-7 – Reduce and Repurpose – Detail.......................................................................... 3.J-30
3.J.3.2 - Objectives and Strategy............................................................................................................. 3.J-31
3.J.3.3 - Policies and Procedures ............................................................................................................. 3.J-33
- Figure 3.J-2 – Typical Procurement Process for Public Agencies ........................................ 3.J-35
- Figure 3.J-3 – Typical Procurement Process for DWSD......................................................... 3.J-35
- Figure 3.J-4 – Reactive DWSD Procurement ........................................................................... 3.J-35
- Table 3.J-8 – Procurement KPI Comparison ............................................................................ 3.J-36
3.J.3.4 - Direct Savings Opportunities - Key Procurement Categories .......................................... 3.J-40
- Table 3.J-9 – Procured Services Key Figures............................................................................ 3.J-42
- Table 3.J-10 – Current Contract Services.................................................................................. 3.J 44

Table of Contents
TOC-6
Page No.
3.J-4 – Health & Safety....................................................................................................................................... 3.J-45
- Table 3.J-11 – Summary of Health and Safety Recommendations..................................... 3.J-46
3.J.4.1 - Staffing and Budget.................................................................................................................... 3.J-46
3.J.4.2 - Policies and Procedures ............................................................................................................ 3.J-48
3.J.4.3 - Training ......................................................................................................................................... 3.J-50
3.J.4.4 - Automated Systems and Tools................................................................................................ 3.J-50
3.J-5 – Security...................................................................................................................................................... 3.J-51
4 – Moving Forward
4-1 – Material & Information Used for this Study............................................................................................... 4-1
4-2 – Pathway to Implementation.......................................................................................................................... 4-2
Approach to Schedule........................................................................................................................................ 4-2
Quick Wins............................................................................................................................................................ 4-3
- Table 4-1 – Proposed Immediate Incentives – Quick Wins.............................................................. 4-3
Performance Management .............................................................................................................................. 4-5
- Table 4-2 – Sample KPIs for Consideration......................................................................................... 4-5
Moving Forward.......................................................................................................................................................... 4-6
Attachment 4-1 – Proposed Implementation Schedule
Appendix A
- DWSD Organization Charts
Appendix B
- Job Descriptions for the Key Finance Group Functions

Table of Contents
TOC-7
ATTACHMENT - List of Acronyms
AC Actual Cost
ACD Automatic Call Distribution
ACH Automated Clearing House
ACO Administrative Consent Order OR Amended Consent Order
ADF Average Daily Flow
AFSCME American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees (labor union)
AHT Average Handle Time
AMI Automated Metering Infrastructure
AMP Asset Management Plan
AMR Automated Meter Reading
APCI Association of Professional Construction Inspectors (labor union)
AWWA American Water Works Association
BDF Biosolids Drying Facility
BFP Belt Filter Press
BGD Billon Gallons per Day
BNA Bureau of National Affairs
BOD Biochemical Oxygen Demand
BOWC Board of Water Control
CAPEX Capital Expenditure
CBA Collective Bargaining Agreement
CBOD Carbonaceous Biochemical Oxygen Demand
ccf Cubic Feet
CCR Consumer Confidence Report
CCTV Closed-Circuit Television
CDC Centers for Disease control
CDL Commercial Driver’s License
CFO Chief Financial Officer
CFS Central Services Facility
CGIS Contracts & Grants Information System
CIP Capital Improvement Program
CIPP Cure in Place Pipe
CMAR Construction Management-at-Risk
CMMS Computerized Maintenance Management System
CMOM Capacity, Management, Operation & Maintenance
COF Central Offload Facility
CPM Capital Program Management
CSO Combined Sewer Overflow
CT Contact Time
CV Cost Variance
DBAR Design-Build-at-Risk

Table of Contents
TOC-8
DEQ Department of Environmental Quality
DMR Discharge Monitoring Report
DMZ District Metering Zone
DO Dissolved Oxygen
DOT Department of Transportation
DPO Days Payable Outstanding
DRMS Data Record Management System
DRO Detroit River Outfall
DTE DTE Energy Company
DWSD Detroit Water and Sewerage Department
EAC Estimate at Completion
EBPP Electronic Bill Presentment and payment
EHS&S Environmental Health, Safety & Security
EIA Energy Information Administration
EM Emergency Manager
EMA EMA, Services Inc.
EPA/USEPA Environmental Protection Agency /United States EPA
ERP Enterprise Resource Planning
ERS Enterprise Resource Services
ERT Encoder Receiver Transmitter
EUI Energy Use Intensity
EV Earned Value
EVM Earned Value Management
EWT Estimated Wait Time
Fe:P Ferric Chloride to Phosphorous ratio
FIS Financial Information System
FTE Full-Time Employee OR Full-Time Equivalent
GDRSS Greater Detroit Regional Sewer System
GI Green Infrastructure
GIS Geographic Information System
GPS Global Positioning System
GSA General Services Administration
GT Gravity Thickener
GWLA Great Lakes Water Authority
GWP Gross Water Production
H&S Health & Safety
HP Horsepower
HPO High Purity Oxygen
HR/HRD Human Resources/Human Resources Department
HRIS Human Resources Information System
I&C Instrumentation And Controls

Table of Contents
TOC-9
I&I Infiltration/Inflow
IDC Indefinite Delivery Contracts
IFB Invitation for Bid
IR Infrared
IPP Industrial Pretreatment Program
IT Information Technology
IUOE International Union of Operating Engineers
IVR Interactive Voice Response
IWC Industrial Waste Control
JiT Just In Time
KPI Key Performance Indicator
LMS Learning Management System
LTIR Lost Time Incident Report
LTSDP Long-Term Solids Disposal Plan
MBTF Mean Time Between Failures
MERC Michigan Employment Relations Commission
MG Million Gallons
MGD Million Gallons Per Day
MHF Multiple-Hearth Furnace
MIOSH Michigan Occupational Health & Safety Administration
MLSS Mixed Liquor Suspended Solids
M/MM Million
MMS Maintenance Management System
MTTR Mean Time to Restore
MOB Main Office Building
MOR Monthly Operating Report
MPSC Michigan Public Service Commission
MRO Maintenance, Repairs, Operations
MSS Manager Self-Service
MWBE Minority and Women Business-OwnedEnterprise
NACWA National Association of Clean Water Agencies
NAICS North American Industry Classification System
NEMA National Electrical Manufacturers Association
NG Natural Gas
NIPC National Infrastructure Protection Center
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPV Net Present Value
NOV Notice of Violation
O&M Operation & Maintenance
OP Ortho Phosphorous
OSHA Occupational Safety And Health Administration

Table of Contents
TOC-10
OWAM/WAM Oracle UtilitiesWork And Asset Management (computer software)
P&ID Piping & Instrumentation Drawing
PACP Pipeline Assessment & Certification Program
PC Personal Computer
PCMP Process Control Management Plan
PCP Process Control Plan
PCS Process Control System
PdM Predictive Maintenance
PIMS Pretreatment Information Management system
PLC Programmable Logic Control
PM PreventiveMaintenance
PMO Program Management Office
PO Purchase Order
PPE Personal Protective Equipment
PPM Parts Per Million
PPS Peer Performance Solutions
PSA Public Service Announcement
PS Pump Station OR Primary Sludge
PSM Process Safety Management
PV Planned Value
RTB Retention Treatment Basins
QA/QC Quality Assurance/QualityControl
R&D Research & Development
R&M Repair & Maintenance
RAS Return Activated Sludge
RCA Root Cause Analysis
RCM Reliability Centered Maintenance
RFP/RFQ/RFI Request for Proposal/Qualifications/Interest
ROI Return on Investment
RTC Real-Time Control
SaaS Software as a Service
SCADA Supervisory Control and Data Acquisition
SCC Systems Control Center
SCM Streaming Current Monitoring
SDS Safety Data Sheets
SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act
SG&A Selling, General & Administrative expense
SLA Service Level Agreements
SME Subject Matter Expert
SOP Standard Operating Procedure
SOW Statement of Work

Table of Contents
TOC-11
SPO Sewage Plant Operator
SV Schedule Variance
TCO Total Cost of Ownership
TMB Theoretical Mass Balance
TNA Training Needs Assessment
TOC Total Organic Carbon
TP Total Phosphorous
TPD Tons Per Day
TRC Total Residual Chlorine
TSF Telephone Service Factor
TSS Total Suspended Solids
UCMR Unregulated Contaminant Monitoring Requirements
UGAM Underground Asset Management
U.S. EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
UV Ultraviolet
VAC Variance at Completion
VCP Vitrified Clay Pipe
VFD Variable Frequency Drive
VPN Virtual Private Network
WAN Wide Area Network
WAS Waste Activated Sludge
WEF Water Environment Federation
WIB Water in Basement
WIMS Water Information Management System
WO Work Order
WQD Water Quality Division
WTP Water Treatment Plant
WWTP Wastewater Treatment Plant

DWSD•PeerReview Report
3
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
3-A.Staffing
4. MOVING FORWARD
SECTIONS
2. OPERATIONS & MAINTENANCE
SAVINGS OVERVIEW
(LeaseChargeAnalysis)
3-B.WaterTreatmentandQuality
3-C.WastewaterTreatmentandQuality
3-D.MaintenanceManagement
3-E.UndergroundAssets
3-F.EnergyManagement
3-G.CapitalProgram
3-H.FinanceandBudgeting
3-I.CustomerService
3-J.SupportFunctions
APPENDIX

PEERREVIEWREPORT
EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY
+Click icons
to navicate
Section1

ES-1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Executive Summary
The City of Detroit and the Detroit Water and Sewerage Department (DWSD) are
part of an unprecedented program to restore City finances. This program aims to
renew quality service to the citizens of southeastern Michigan, transform
problems into opportunities, optimize the use of resources, protect vital assets
and advance sustainable growth. This program projects forward to imagine
alternative ways to invent the future, including the creation of the Great Lakes
Water Authority (GLWA), which bifurcates the existing DWSD. To support this
bold economic and environmental mandate, Veolia was asked to provide this
Peer Review report, which discusses the challenges and opportunities facing
DWSD and the future GLWA.
This report is not a typical engineering report as it provides the perspective of
Veolia’s unique base of experience and expertise.
Veolia’s global footprint in operations and maintenance (O&M) activities sets it
apart from typical engineering consultants, both in terms of diversity of know-how
and responsibility. Because water is a precious asset, Veolia innovates to save
and protect it, convey it to millions of people, and to reduce the costs of
management and supply, which makes it more affordable and accessible.
Full-spectrum O&M activity expertise and responsibility makes Veolia a peer to
DWSD and uniquely able to comprehensively evaluate utility performance.
Added to this, Veolia’s proven track record of optimizing utility performance
makes it a credible partner in recommending innovative solutions that have been
competitively tested.
Commitment of people, rigorous assessment and collaborative process were the
key to this report’s diagnostic value. The City and DWSD committed resources to
engage and provide a snapshot of the existing conditions. Veolia mobilized its
best and brightest operators, engineers and functional experts who represent the
cutting edge of the water and wastewater industry. When they’re not optimizing
Veolia’s own operations across North America, these in-house experts can often
be found on the lecture circuit shaping thought at conferences dedicated to their
disciplines.
Veolia’s assessment process connected its experts with their DWSD peers at
various levels throughout the organization. Together, they collected, documented
and shared data and perspectives that inspired a feedback cycle, which
culminated in roughly 400 formal comments on the initial draft of this report.

ES-2
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
These comments have since been carefully considered and resulted in revisions
and points of clarification made in this final report.
This Peer Review report captures Veolia’s findings and recommendations based
on the best practices from the company’s experience operating utilities at the
highest industry standards.
Veolia also recognizes the considerable assistance and cooperation received
from Director Sue McCormick, her management team and all of the people at
DWSD. Without their enthusiastic engagement, the aggressive timeline to
baseline and ultimately identify improvement recommendations for this report
would not have been possible.
Indeed, to say that there is a lot going on at DWSD is an understatement. The
current management team have initiated changes and made significant
improvements in the last two years under the cloud of an unprecedented
bankruptcy, antiquated systems and processes, a consent order going back
30 years, and the other constraints acknowledged in Judge Cox’s court order.
Progress at DWSD has been further complicated by the recent announcement of
the formation of GLWA.
It goes without saying that this report is intended to build upon the progress
already made by the current DWSD team to date. No doubt, Veolia observed the
hard work and significant accomplishments already underway.
Finally, Veolia shares and similarly aims to support DWSD’s objective to provide
high quality, safe drinking water and wastewater services to its customers each
and every day.
Peer Review Background & Objectives:
Background
As part of the bankruptcy process, Veolia responded to a Request for
Expressions of Interest on April 7, 2014, to manage, operate and maintain
DWSD, which was issued by the Emergency Manager.
This was followed by a Proposal on May 20, 2014, entitled, “Partnering to Build
the New Detroit Water and Sewerage Department”, which was based on different
financial information utilized in this analysis. The use of different financial
information contributed to significant differences in savings potential, but the
objective to enhance performance at reduced cost remained the same. Many of
the concepts in that proposal are included, enhanced and clarified in this report.
While it was ultimately decided not to outsource management of DWSD, Veolia’s
approach and identified efficiencies were of sufficient interest to all involved. As

ES-3
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
a result, Veolia was requested to complete the due diligence process that was
proposed in the response.
The results of the due diligence were extended to a stand-alone Peer Review
Report summarizing the findings and recommendations from the Operations &
Maintenance (O&M) approach that Veolia would have taken under the initial plan.
Objectives
Veolia’s approach has been to identify potential efficiencies in O&M that reduces
costs and contributes to the $50 million Lease charge contemplated in the
Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) regarding the GLWA; but only to the
extent the GWLA and DWSD performance is maintained or improved to the
levels expected of utilities performing these critical services.
Operations and Maintenance Savings Overview
(Lease Charge Analysis):
This section reviews the potential for savings that can enhance GLWA’s capacity
to pay the proposed Lease charge. For clarity, the term "Lease charge," as used
in the GLWA MOU dated 9/9/2014 refers to the $50 million annual payment to be
made by GLWA to the City of Detroit for the lease of the DWSD systems. This
payment is also referred to as the "Control Premium."
Baseline
For the purpose of this review and the discussion that follows, Veolia used the
financial model developed by DWSD in consultation with the Foster Group, LLC.
That model was used to present projections to bond rating agencies and financial
institutions for the recent bond offering (the “Base Model”).
It is important to note that Veolia has not performed an assessment of current
costs, nor verified that the proposed projections fit the 4% revenue increase
requirement. These two tasks were considered to be out of the scope of Veolia’s
assignment.
Furthermore, Veolia understands that during the negotiations for the creation of
the regional authority, the viability of the Lease charge was based on several
sources of funds, including O&M cost savings estimated by DWSD in an amount
between $10 million and $20 million annually. The details of these savings
estimates were not provided to Veolia and, therefore, were not included in the
assessment.
Contribution of Potential Savings to Lease Charge
Veolia’s focus in this section is the identification of possible O&M savings for the
wholesale operations, compared to the O&M costs contained in the Base Model.

ES-4
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
This analysis is based on Veolia’s proven approach to due diligence and price
estimation.
Veolia did not include potential capital expenditure savings in the Lease charge
analysis as such savings would not have a dollar-for-dollar impact on GLWA’s
ability to make a lease payment.
As noted in the Report, there is potential for additional revenue to GLWA from
the enhanced calibration and/or replacement of the large wholesale meters. This
additional revenue could be as high as $30 million a year (water only – not
including wastewater) if the meter inaccuracy is at the high range (about 10%) of
estimates, which Veolia has seen in other jurisdictions. This additional revenue
could also contribute to GLWA’s ability to pay the Lease charge, and it has not
been included in Veolia’s savings analysis.
As profiled on Table ES-1, which follows, Veolia has identified potential O&M
savings in wholesale operations over the next five years.
Table ES-1 – Wholesale Identified Savings
Fiscal Years 5 Year
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Total O&M Savings $7,860,493 $35,814,104 $38,354,973 $39,323,328 $41,400,237 $162,753,134
These savings can be added to the sources of funds available to GLWA to pay
for the Lease charge. Additional sources that could be used for this purpose
(among others that have been mentioned), include savings resulting from the
latest bond refinancing, as well as those from the refinancing/restructuring of
pension plans.
Savings Breakdown
Table ES-2, which follows, offers a distribution of Veolia’s estimated savings
among the main cost categories over the next five years.
Fiscal Years 5 Year
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Projected
DWSD/GLWA
O&M – per Foster
Group LLC
Statements
$232,265,324 $237,355,900 $230,694,100 $233,755,100 $232,601,000 $1,166,671,424

ES-5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Fiscal Years 5 Year
Total2015 2016 2017 2018 2019
Veolia Initiatives
Staffing $975,032 $2,458,091 $2,753,811 $2,975,492 $3,445,155 $12,607,581
Support Functions $3,339,766 $13,029,870 $14,206,417 $14,243,761 $14,875,331 $59,695,145
Energy
Management
($676,101) $8,458,449 $8,840,215 $9,130,761 $9,531,200 $35,284,525
WTP Optimization $2,291,671 $5,695,810 $6,025,452 $6,226,444 $6,502,525 $26,741,904
Maintenance
Management
$108,351 $269,300 $284,886 $294,389 $307,442 $1,264,368
WWTP
Optimization
$1,821,774 $5,902,583 $6,244,191 $6,452,480 $6,738,583 $27,159,611
Total O&M Savings $7,860,493 $35,814,104 $38,354,973 $39,323,328 $41,400,237 $162,753,134
Net O&M Expense $224,404,831 $201,541,796 $192,339,127 $194,431,772 $191,200,763 $1,003,918,290
DWSD’s O&M numbers (top line) were extracted from the Base Model, without
any changes having been made by Veolia.
It is important to note that this model is different from the one provided during the
Request for Information (RFI) process.
The evaluation that Veolia provided for the RFI process utilized the Conway
MacKenzie model, which represents a significantly different estimated savings
analysis than the one provided in this report.
Moreover, the numbers outlined in Table ES-2 are for GLWA wholesale
operations only, following the cost allocation provided in the Base Model.
Table ES-3, which follows, provides explanations to support the savings
estimates noted in Table ES-2 (above). It also indicates the expenditures that
may be necessary in order to realize the efficiencies.
Table ES-3 – Savings Estimates and Expenditures
Veolia Initiative
Estimated
Annual Amount
(first year /
fifth years)
Capital
Required
Explanation
Staffing $970,000/
$3,400,000
None • Savings result from reducing overtime
for operations staff from 20.5% to 10-
15% (depending on the functional

ES-6
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Veolia Initiative
Estimated
Annual Amount
(first year /
fifth years)
Capital
Required
Explanation
area). Also, forecasted overtime did not
recognize staff reductions; rather,
annual overtime costs were the
previous year’s figure inflated by 2.5%,
starting with the baseline figure, year-
by-year.
Support Functions $3.3 M/
$14.9 M
None • Improved chemical procurement
practices (RFP vs. RFQ; correct
product specifications).
• Significant reduction in contracted
services, especially those related to
labor support (not all services were
eliminated).
• Working capital gains through modified
payment terms and early pay
discounts.
Energy
Management
($676,000)/
$9,500,000
$8 M • Improved pump efficiencies throughout
facilities account for 50% of energy
savings (variable frequency drives;
automation; motor upgrades).
• Demand management, renegotiated
rates, and third-party supply account of
35% of energy savings.
• Lighting upgrades across all facilities
account for 5% of energy savings.
• Mixer and aeration improvements at
the wastewater facility account for 5%
of the energy savings.
• Remaining 5% of energy savings from
smaller opportunities identified during
an internal audit of all energy accounts.
Note: No savings in first year due to time
needed to install/ implement energy
saving improvements.
Water
Treatment Plant
Optimization
$2.3 M/
$6.5 M
$200,000 • Approximately 40% of water treatment
savings is associated with the
repurposing of one or

ES-7
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Veolia Initiative
Estimated
Annual Amount
(first year /
fifth years)
Capital
Required
Explanation
more of the five water treatment plants.
• Chemical feed optimization (fluoride;
chlorine; corrosion inhibitor; ozone;
bisulfite) account for 15% of water
treatment savings.
• Process optimization (mixing;
backwash) account for 10% of water
treatment savings.
• Utilization of an alternate coagulant
chemical (e.g. polyaluminum chloride
versus liquid alum) resulting in lower
doses and less sludge generation
account for
35% of water treatment savings.
Maintenance
Management
$108,000/
$307,000
$90,000 • Installation of a fleet-wide GPS tracking
system accounts for 100% of these
savings (fuel and staff productivity).
Wastewater
Treatment Plant
Optimization
$1.8 M/
$3.7 M
$500,000 • Improvements in biosolids handling
account for 42% of the wastewater
plant savings, mostly associated with
drier cake which reduces the volume of
material stabilized and hauled, and
reduced polymer usage.
• Optimized use of aeration deck mixers,
pumps and the number of decks in use
account for 42% of the wastewater
plant savings;
• Chemical feed improvements for
oxygen, chlorination/de-chlorination
and ferric chloride feed account for
16% of the wastewater plant savings.

ES-8
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The savings numbers are further explained as follows:
• These are savings that are deemed attainable in a scenario where the
operator is able to implement best practices as developed and deployed by
premiere organizations around the world. The actual level of savings
achieved will be dependent on GLWA’s ability to access this sort of
knowledge and experience.
• These savings are different from the savings originally provided in Veolia’s
Proposal to the Emergency Manager in response to the O&M Request for
Information. There are several reasons for this, but the most significant are
outlined below:
• The RFI was for the entire system, and the proposed savings outlined in
this analysis are limited to the wholesale operations.
• GLWA’s situation is different from that of DWSD, as understood by
Veolia at the time of the RFI. For example, the parties to the GLWA
MOU have committed to adopting the proposed labor agreements
including a hybrid pension benefit plan, whose costs are more difficult to
predict than for a defined-contribution plan, which was encouraged and
permitted in the RFI process.
• The RFI process did not provide for any anticipated savings by DWSD
itself. The Base Model already assumes significant labor reductions,
which means these savings were not available to Veolia and therefore
not included in Veolia’s calculations as they would have resulted in
double counting. The staffing cost reductions highlighted by Veolia,
therefore, only reflect a reduction in overtime, not in actual positions in
addition to what may have been considered in the Base Model.
Finally, the breakdown, by category, in the savings table provided in this section
is for illustrative purposes. While Veolia believes the overall savings picture is
reliable, the breakdown may shift as the implementation of savings initiatives will
reveal some interactions and conditions that need to be managed on a case by
case basis. This can result in increased costs in certain areas in exchange for
reduced costs in others.
Again, this is normal for Veolia in cases of competitive bidding and would be
reconciled in due course under the operations approach, i.e. Veolia would not be
concerned if some of the line item savings were different as it would be
appreciated there would be gains and losses in the specific line items while fully
expecting the total to be very close to estimated. This may point to a difference
between public and private operations that cannot be reconciled in this report.

ES-9
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
DWSD Today and GLWA Tomorrow:
Findings & Opportunities
Veolia’s findings and recommendations point to three categories of initiatives:
(A) Investments for Stabilization, (B) Immediate Priorities, and
(C) Implementation of Best Practices to Unlock Savings and or Improve
Performance.
Investments for Stabilization:
1. Investing in People
Improve employee morale and performance
The stress brought on by the bankruptcy proceedings and the various
optimization projects can be alleviated by implementing a more proactive
employee mentoring and retention strategy.
Specifically, adding technical support and enhancing skills through training,
recruitment, and select subcontractor support will go a long way in building a
culture of performance.
Veolia observed that the stress and low morale is due in part to a mismatch
between job requirements and skill sets. In some cases Veolia also found
compensation levels to be inadequate to attract the candidates necessary to fill
important positions, resulting in vacant roles or roles filled by outside consultants.
Overall, the organization is not optimally set up to do the important work that it
does, managing a System that has not been adequately maintained nor received
sufficient investment over many years.
The suggested approach would be to mitigate this situation by investing in the
team and providing a clear, easily understood vision to build a high performing
entity.
This investment strategy would include the following elements:
• An employee retention initiative to leverage the talent and knowledge that
currently exists and help people find the right place in the organization
through more proactive mentoring and coaching. With so many people (about
300) eligible for retirement in the next five years and attracting talent being so
difficult, it is critically important that steps are taken to mitigate the risk of the
loss of institutional knowledge and experience.
• A program to communicate to the organization a commitment from
senior management and political leadership that, both in terms of
numbers and qualifications, the future GLWA organization will be designed

ES-10
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
for its new vision and mission, so as to reduce current uncertainty and get
buy-in for the upcoming changes, which Veolia believes would increase
morale and the odds of successful transformation.
• An effort to evaluate the current personnel (needs assessment) in order to
determine where they best fit in the organization and help them find positions
that meet their capabilities, interest and potential. This assessment would
complement work already done and would be designed to take it a step
further and ensure employees fully understand where the opportunities are
for them and how they will be helped to get there. It is also a critical step in
identifying the skill gaps that need to be bridged to get to a high performance
organization.
• Implementation of a training program to upgrade skills and competency to
close the gaps between individual competency and organizational needs.
• Engagement of the technical support needed to supplement current skills
as well as mentor employees as part of the training program. From Veolia’s
perspective this capability is assumed to be available, because Veolia has it
within the company’s organization. DWSD and/or GLWA may need to
engage outside consultants for some of this work or build it within its
organization. This points to a difference in Veolia’s perspectives and realities
that cannot be reconciled through the recommendations in this report.
• Recruitment of additional competent people to add to the team to help fill
gaps in capabilities.
In order to model this recommended investment in people, Veolia has used the
efficiencies and optimization opportunities that were identified, as well as
assumed the technical resources the company has at its disposal would be
available. GLWA may have to assume some investment in outside resources
that have not been able to be determined as part of this analysis.
Veolia’s estimated savings are not net of investments required under GLWA
management, which are best determined by DWSD and GLWA.
2. Investing in Assets
Improve asset reliability and safety
Each Veolia team deployed to assess the functional areas of DWSD personnel,
namely water, wastewater, underground and above-ground asset experts,
indicated that the assets appeared to be in less than ideal condition. Some team
members concluded that important assets were in a very poor state and that
accelerating assessment and repair of critical assets would markedly decrease
risks of asset failures and better assure compliance and continuity of service.

ES-11
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Assessing the condition of all assets (above-ground and belowground) for both
the water and wastewater systems, implementing a state-of-the-art asset
management program and investing as necessary to upgrade asset condition is
an urgent need incorporated into Veolia’s suggested approach.
While the current, WAM computerized maintenance management system
(CMMS) could not support a detailed asset management assessment or detailed
documentation of maintenance activities in the time available, Veolia did conduct
a number of visual inspections and interviews with DWSD. In these evaluations,
Veolia did not reference DWSD’s previous use of the eMPAC CMMS system,
and instead utilized the visual inspections and interviews in the recent past;
Veolia did not review the eMPAC system since DWSD had implemented and was
using WAM at the time of the peer review.
Veolia’s recommended approach to invest heavily (within the affordability
constraints noted) into the assets, is outlined below:
• Centralize the maintenance function at each of the water plants and the
wastewater plant; with maintenance staff configured in teams that reflect the
amount of activity required at these facilities.
• Develop and implement a comprehensive maintenance strategy that is
focused on developing a maintenance culture in the organization and
improving the condition of the assets. This type of a plan could be
significantly enhanced over time as the following activities are completed and
built into the plan, but as a start it could take advantage of Veolia’s and
industry best practices and technical resources.
• Complete a comprehensive condition assessment, which would include
vibration, oil and thermography analysis as well as pump curves. This
assessment would evaluate all above-ground assets, including plants and
pumping stations.
• Perform a “criticality” assessment; as this is urgently needed to identify
equipment and assets that may have severe consequences to the assets or
impact compliance should they fail. Establishing a relative criticality
assessment process would not only allow managers to focus resources,
optimize maintenance spending and provide a better understanding of the
assets’ importance, it would also assist in preparing contingency plans in the
event that critical assets fail. An inventory of “critical spares” for those assets
with long lead delivery times should also be established.
• Implement a Reliability Centered Maintenance (RCM) approach for critical
equipment. RCM is a structured process that can be used to develop an
optimal maintenance approach, to identify the risks associated with asset
failure, and to set actions that will help to mitigate those risks.

ES-12
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
• Evaluate the current CMMS approach and implementation schedule. Having
gone through an Oracle WAM implementation three years ago, Veolia
appreciates the complexity of the CMMS implementation challenge. Veolia
also appreciates the fact that DWSD needs to continue using Oracle WAM in
the areas of inventory and work order management but based on the
difficulties observed with DWSD’s WAM implementation, Veolia recommends
revaluating the current implementation process until: all assets are field
verified and standard naming conventions are adopted; the information
necessary to make the desired repair and replacement (R&R) decisions is
available; business rules, workflows, key performance indicators (KPIs) and
metrics are established; a training program is developed for CMMS use;
maintenance job plans are developed for critical assets; and other
preparatory work to ensure a cost effective and successful implementation is
undertaken. This is critical because the system exists to do cost accounting,
inventory control, purchasing, maintenance history, etc., around assets. The
definition of the asset and the asset hierarchy becomes the glue that binds
the system together. The full power of Oracle WAM as the foundation of a
true asset management program will not be realized if the implementation of
the inventory and work order management modules continues in the absence
of a solid asset hierarchy methodology and population of the system.
• Provide the necessary training to managers, supervisors, planners,
schedulers and end users to implement the asset management plan and use
the CMMS.
Investing in assets would provide assurance that both GLWA’s and DWSD’s
assets are able to perform as expected, the capital investment plan is based on
rigorous information and the useful life of the assets is realized and extended.
Immediate Priorities:
3. Focus on Wastewater
Revitalize wastewater O&M
Both a dedicated maintenance team and decision-maker or supervisor in charge
of the operations of the wastewater plant is critical to improving operability and
compliance. With its history of non-compliance and other challenges, the
wastewater treatment plant is in particular need of asset rehabilitation,
organizational improvement and operational changes to enhance performance.
There were a number of findings at the wastewater treatment plant resulting in
the conclusion that a significant commitment would be necessary to resolve the
issues identified and reduce the potential for non-compliance events. Findings
include: the condition of the facility is poor, to the extent that operability and
performance were compromised; the organization structure provides
opportunities for enhancement; training can bring personnel to a more qualified

ES-13
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
level; and systems and control processes could be readily enhanced and will
significantly help with the management and operations of a plant of this size and
complexity.
A focused commitment would result in an approach including the following steps:
• Reviewing the current operations strategy and updating that strategy to
reflect the optimization and effectiveness recommendations made in this
Report. This would include enhancing automation, optimizing the aeration
process, as well as communicating the best practices to ensure all operators
and managers know the approach. Training may also be necessary and
would be implemented as required.
• Designating a single point of responsibility for operations for each and every
shift so that there is clear leadership and accountability for decision-making.
• Demonstrating a strong commitment to asset management, including all the
aspects noted under “Invest in Assets,” and establishing a centralized
maintenance team at each facility with responsibility for all aspects of
maintenance planning and implementation.
• Reviewing the capital investment plan to ensure appropriate projects are
prioritized to upgrade the current condition of the wastewater treatment plant.
4. Improving Financial Management
Overhaul the financial closing process to provide for accurate
and timely monthly reports
As also identified by the DWSD’s finance team, there are a number of initiatives
that Veolia recommends implementing to improve financial reporting and controls.
In order to ensure robust financial management, Veolia recommends
expeditiously implementing the following specific improvements:
• Performance recording and monitoring: Overhauling the financial closing
process in order to: reinforce the annual and quarterly closes and set a target
date for achieving monthly closes; allow for management to review key
performance indicators and act quickly to mitigate potential risks and
capitalize on opportunities; to develop robust financial reporting processes to
communicate monthly results to internal and external stakeholders; to revamp
the controls around the billing and cash collections process; and to implement
a new enterprise resource planning (ERP) system with integrated modules.
• Rates and debt management: While DWSD has been able to obtain rate
increases and issue debt successfully in a very difficult environment,
implementing improvements to make for more robust practices would reduce
risks. Veolia’s recommends that DWSD formalize its key financial principles,
from which would be derived a rate strategy that would include: internal

ES-14
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
objectives, such as cash reserves, and customer-based objectives, such as
rate differentials among customer categories (for example tiered rates to
manage demand and affordability); and improve the rate making process by
creating a systems-based input into a rate model that would be transparent to
DWSD’s management. Veolia also recommend introducing strict tracking and
planning processes to support the debt issuance process.
• Internal controls: Introducing a series of audit and testing tools to ensure
that the highest levels of financial compliance are met, fostering trust among
internal and external stakeholders.
Veolia recommends re-organizing the finance function to a new structure, which
would take 12 to 15 months with an additional six months to finalize all the new
systems.
5. Right-Sizing Capacity
Reduce the long-term expense of operating and maintaining capacity
surplus to requirements
GLWA’s significant water production over-capacity should be right-sized in order
to reduce both capital investment requirements and operations costs. The
necessary analysis could be done to reach a revised capacity decision in the
next 12 to 18 months and Veolia recognizes that work is already underway in this
regard. It is critical, however, to increase the speed and urgency of executing this
particular initiative.
Indeed, existing discussions about closing one water treatment plant have been
ongoing for many years. With almost twice the capacity of water treatment
required, Veolia considers it both reasonable and responsible to execute this
plan unless an alternative method of utilizing the excess capacity is identified.
One such option includes selling it to other communities.
It is beyond the scope of this report to calculate the net detailed savings that
would result from these approaches; however, the benefits would be significant in
terms of both operational and capital savings, freeing up resources for other
important initiatives.
Veolia recommends expeditiously determining if there is a reasonable possibility
of selling water to other communities, while at the same time evaluating which of
the plants to consider shutting down.
Towards this end, Veolia recommends the following approach:
• Determining the interest that the GLWA Board would have in “right sizing”
the assets, and under what conditions this decision could be made.
Assigning a small team to approach communities within geographical reach
to determine if there is an interest and opportunity to sell water. These

ES-15
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
activities could be concluded within roughly six months. Then, if there is
sufficient interest, GLWA should identify the next steps necessary to
implement the plan.
• Evaluating the viability of closing one or more of the plants through a
detailed engineering analysis that would, amongst other things, involve:
performing a cost benefit analysis (necessary capital investments and
operational expenses) to keep the plant operational; evaluating system
contingency plans for asset failure; performing hydraulic modeling to
determine if and how the other plants could provide water to those currently
supplied by the candidate plant(s); and evaluating other considerations (e.g.,
political) decided by management and the GLWA Board, as these decisions
would not be just about costs.
Right-sizing the assets would likely provide significant financial benefit, when
considered over a 10 or 20 year period. In addition, this approach would reduce
the resources required to operate and keep them operational, which would allow
the team to focus on the assets necessary to provide the service delivery levels
and operating costs expected by customers.
Implementation of Best Practices to Unlock Savings and/or
Improve Performance:
6. Implement Operational Enhancements
Implement best practices to improve performance and cut costs
Veolia’s water and wastewater experts indicated that the limited process control
decision-making and leadership is hindered by the lack of automation of unit
processes. These teams also identified concrete steps that should be taken to
utilize the excess capacity at the water and wastewater treatment plants.
Veolia’s recommendations to unlock operational enhancements and subsequent
savings are as follows:
• Initiating the capital upgrade and/or refurbishment necessary to return
currently failed instrumentation and controls systems required to provide
effective SCADA operations of critical plant systems.
• Training personnel to operate more equipment from the Ovation (SCADA)
system, supplemented with new auxiliary alarms that require the right people
to acknowledge the alarms, to allow operation of the equipment.
• Turning the significant amount of data collected into information that can used
by the shift operators and laboratories for daily process control decisions.

ES-16
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
• Implementing cost-saving initiatives in process optimization through
automation and changes in operational strategies to reduce chemicals and
power usage, resource demand and equipment wear and tear.
• Implementing systems that improve data management and recordkeeping.
This would involve implementing systems such as a Laboratory Information
Management System (LIMS), which would allow DWSD to reduce excessive
manual data handling and reduce the incidence of errors in management and
regulatory reports.
• Restructuring the drinking water and wastewater analytical activities in order
to reduce excessive laboratory overtime and overlap of duties and
responsibilities. This would help reduce the burden of plant-level analyses
and minimize costs.
Implementing operational enhancements that would mobilize the talent and
diversity of personnel so they can adapt to the evolving needs of the organization
and its customers.
7. Prioritize Capital Investments
Build off asset management program to prioritize cost-saving investments
The identification and prioritization of capital projects, as well as the subsequent
execution of approved projects can be significantly improved through:
(1) the augmentation of key information provided by an asset condition survey;
the asset management plan; and (2) a rigorous, but expeditious, evaluation and
selection process performed by a skilled in-house team with the support of local
engineering firms.
Capital delivery of multi-million dollar infrastructure projects for DWSD has
suffered from a continuous track record of failed implementation. Furthermore,
information suggests that projects, which have been implemented, have
achieved suboptimal results in terms of both cost and performance.
These challenges are due in large part to the current lack of internal processes,
in-house resources and leadership. The lack of processes has thus negatively
impacted the proper validation of scope, technical reviews, cost schedules,
resource loading, quality control, project costs and construction management.
Due to past history and the nature of the procurement process, including anti-
competitive local preferences and built-in incentives for price escalation, the
market environment is less than optimal for competitive prices. Overall, the
disparate functional groups are not optimally set up to deliver the infrastructure
projects that ensure compliance and secure the future needs of the utility and the
people that it serves in a timely and cost-effective manner.

ES-17
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Veolia’s suggested approach would focus on bringing DWSD’s Capital Planning
group to a “future state” organization that emphasizes a rigorous capital
improvement program (CIP) quality assurance methodology and performance
management.
This approach would consist of the following:
• Stabilizing the Capital Planning group through organizational capability
enhancements and reorganization in order to encourage transparency and
accountability.
• Blending CIP insights brought from the municipal owner and the private
sector through an Integrated Program Management partnership. The
selected partner would work to improve the Design-Phase execution
process to improve the quality of bidding documents as a more immediate
step.
• Leveraging DWSD’s in-house geographic information system (GIS), once
the attribute data is updated, to map out the asset condition of the
underground distribution and collection pipes in order to pinpoint and plan
future CIP projects effectively.
• Overlaying the capital planning process over a robust asset management
function to reduce execution time frames and limit costs.
• Implementing a proven project management software suite for more real-
time monitoring of project status, costs and schedules to create efficiencies
in project delivery.
Targeting the delivery of capital investment would foster a better relationship
between operations, maintenance and capital planning personnel, and help instill
greater confidence in achieving environmental compliance.
8. Human Resources (HR): Continue Investing in People
DWSD’s HR team has functioned moderately well, despite economic and control
challenges; namely the inability to provide sufficient management and oversight
of many functional HR programs (i.e. hiring, payroll, benefits, staffing, labor
relations and recruitment) that are currently managed by the City of Detroit.
Veolia observed that many levels of staff are stressed due to the extended
duration of the job reclassification and reorganization initiative. Indeed, there are
significant tasks ahead towards fully realizing the benefits of the reclassification
effort.
Furthermore, the HR team has been leading a major initiative to redefine the
organized labor units. Veolia supports DWSD’s current strategy to harmonize
labor agreements (i.e., resolve all the existing contracts into one master
agreement) and would bring best practices, experience and resources to
complete them.

ES-18
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
As discussed earlier, Veolia’s recommendations would primarily focus on
investing in people and include the following additional elements:
• Customizing top-down and bottom-up communications approaches by setting
the tone for open and transparent communications. This would allow
DWSD/GLWA to most effectively reach key audiences face-to-face and
otherwise.
• Implementing a performance management process that aligns compensation
with performance, and defines specific needs for training, job mobility,
succession plans, etc.
• Integrating cross-functional on-the-job training into daily work activities.
Hands-on problem solving and communication that shares insights and
experience can help personnel develop interests and skills in new areas and
promote better collective decision-making.
• Utilizing stand-alone functional HR systems to provide accurate information,
this is in line with the directive of the consent order ruling by Judge Cox.
Veolia recommends outsourcing payroll and benefit services to firms
specialized in managing employee benefits, similar to Veolia’s own global
corporate approach.
Investing in people and training and cultivating labor-friendly relationships would
provide assurance that DWSD and GLWA’s personnel are gaining the
appropriate skill sets and knowledge to transform the utility.
9. Procurement: Move towards greater agility in the marketplace
The unfavorable impact of past procurement policies and practices was apparent
in Veolia’s discussions with various DWSD personnel across the organization.
While the Veolia SMEs found a number of initiatives underway to improve
procurement practices (some as a result of Judge Cox’s orders), there are
numerous other opportunities for additional improvements.
Under a recommended approach, procurement policies and processes would
quickly transform and move away from those currently in place so that staff
would be unencumbered by them. This would produce a procurement function
that is more agile in today's economy. Of course, these practices would still be
compliant with DWSD or GLWA Board’s directions, but Veolia assumes
they would incorporate industry best practices.
Veolia’s recommended approach would include:
• Streamlining the organization and processes to free up resources for
strategic sourcing, supplier management and internal customer service.

ES-19
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
• Centering processes on performance and aligning them with Operations in
order to build a true partnership between procurement and operations and
shift away from fulfillment practices (proactive vs. reactive). Such a process
would reduce procurement cycle-times resulting in the quicker acquisition of
goods and services.
• Developing and integrating sourcing and pricing strategies in active spend
categories to improve savings opportunities.
• Improving inventory control and management practices.
• Conducting market outreach to increase competition in the marketplace for
DWSD and GLWA's businesses.
10. Underground Assets: Focus on building actionable analytics
Actionable analytics for capital projects and a more robust asset management
plan is a suggested approach to extending and renewing the general health of
DWSD’s and GLWA’s water and sewer pipes and lines.
In the next 12 to 18 months, processes, systems and training would need to be in
place to implement this two-prong approach. With aging underground assets
spread over a large geographical area, careful prioritization and efficient
absorption of asset management procedures would help jump-start this approach.
For example, a major shift would be to accelerate the replacement and renewal
rates (0.4% to 0.5% for water, and 0.8% to 0.9% for sewer) to approach the
industry minimum of 1.0% to 1.5%.
As Veolia’s SMEs reviewed asset inventories, hydraulic models, repair and
maintenance records and reports, they found that in many cases, the paper
maps are more comprehensive than the GIS data. There is an overwhelming
backlog of corrective maintenance for sewer/connection blockages and catch
basin cleaning, notwithstanding DWSD’s history of sinkholes and missing storm
grates, manholes and gate valve box covers. For context, the network of water
mains and lines has approximately 2.5 times more leaks than the international
average (0.54 vs.0.23 leaks/mile/day). Bringing green infrastructure to the
forefront of a holistic capital planning and stormwater management program
would also be critical to GLWA’s journey towards an improved compliance record.
Veolia’s suggested approach would promptly lay out the groundwork for smarter
analytics and a more robust asset management plan with the following steps:
• Assigning a cross-functional team to devise strategies and operational
changes to:
• Filling in the missing gaps in GIS;

ES-20
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
• Prioritizing among pressing corrective and preventative maintenance
activities; and
• Relaying better information using actionable analytics for capital planning
moving forward.
• Implementing strategies with pre-defined KPIs and timelines.
• Dedicating crews for preventative maintenance for leak detection and repair,
sewer line cleaning, and sewer closed circuit television (CCTV) inspection
after the work order generation process has been re-engineered.
• Training and mobilizing fast response teams to investigate and resolve water
main breaks, sink-hole and missing lid issues, and to analyze areas prone to
collapse and patterns of repeat/high target areas through inspections and
monitoring of work activities.
Managing underground assets would require dedication, teamwork and training
across the board – from GIS, asset management, field operations, engineering
and capital planning, customer service, to procurement. With concrete steps
along the two-prong approach, DWSD and GLWA would build a preventative and
proactive modus operandi.
Veolia will further discuss underground assets in the follow-up amendment report
dealing with the “Retail” aspects of DWSD.
11. Energy Management: Proactive demand-side management
will unlock recurring O&M Savings
Demand-side management and real-time energy usage monitoring will help
GLWA secure recurring O&M savings. Using a range of low- to high-tech
technologies, competitively procuring commodities, and shifting/shedding energy
loads during power utility peak usage could achieve substantial savings, which
Veolia has estimated to be as high as $10 million per year.
Veolia’s SMEs found that DWSD had difficulty accessing their utility bills and the
internal accounting infrastructure also limited its ability to assess the utility spend.
With close to a $60 million annual spend on energy; an energy management
system with oversight by dedicated personnel pursuing demand-side
management and other strategies is critical.
12. Customer Service: Strong Leadership Can Drive
Strong Performance as well as Billing & Meter Accuracy
Call wait times are well above industry benchmarks and improvements in billing
and metering practices are a high priority to ensure accuracy and accountability.
Customer Service is in need of organizational improvement, business process
optimization, accountability, and accuracy-focused meter programs. Building a

ES-21
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
highly qualified team and adopting an integrated value chain approach are key
enhancements to improve public image and revenue/collections.
From various metrics, Veolia concluded that: the leadership across the value
chain could be improved; there are significant data gaps and accountability
processes in metering, billing and collections; and that there is a lack of systems
and work flows commensurate with Veolia’s expectations for a customer base of
this size.
The recommended approach would be one that addresses all “gray” areas, such
as: unmetered connections; robust meter testing program, repair and
replacement program, transitioning accounts that are in the process of converting
to automatic read; and obtaining best performance; as compared to industry
benchmarks for credit and collections (as shown on Exhibit ES-1, below, the
AWWA Credit & Collection benchmarking performance).
Exhibit ES-1
Credit & Collection
Benchmarking
Performance Data
(Source:
Benchmarking Water
Utility Customer
Relations Best
Practices (91096) –
AWWA Research
Foundation –
Copyright 2006)
Credit & Collection
Key efficiency and effectiveness metrics were calculated from date supplied by 9
utilities, including 6 water utilities. Table 5.3 below contrasts the best performers (those utilities
that had both above average efficiency and effectiveness) with the utility industry and
participating water utilities.
The key metrics chosen to provide a balance between service and efficiency are:
• Delinquent transactions per FTE involved (per month)
• Cost per delinquent transaction processed – direct labor, contractor costs, overtime, and
non-labor O&M; no capital costs, benefits or overheads)
• Net write-offs (% of total revenue)
• ENDRO (Equivalent number of days revenue outstanding)
• Cost of credit (=((Write-Offs + Carrying Costs or Receivables + O&M Expenses +
Unbilled Revenue) – (Service Charges + Net Interest on Deposits)) / Total Revenues)
To maintain a balanced view of performance, utilities were designated as “best
performers” if they exhibit above average performance in both cost and service. Once the “best
performers” were identified, “best performer average” metrics were calculated, as reflected in
Table 5.3 below. In the sample, there were 3 “best performers” identified out of 9 utilities
participating, of which 6 were waste/waste water utilities.
Table 5.3 Credit & collection benchmarking performance
Credit & Collections Benchmarking Performance
All Utilities
Best
Performer
Average
Utility Industry
Average
Water Industry
Average
Average of Delinquent
Transactions Per FTE
6,440 3,835 3,894
Average of Cost Per
Delinquent Transaction
$ 25.32 $ 217.72 $ 338.42
Average of Net Write
Offs
0.36% 0.83% 1.10%
Average of ENDRO 21.9 34.0 30.3
Average of Cost of
Credit
$ 0.49 $ 0.74 $ 0.74
Utilities Participating 3 9 9

ES-22
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The integrated value chain approach would include:
• Training personnel in the various business units of the “customer service
value chain” to recognize and clearly define the role they play in the support
process, as well as understanding how what they do, or do not do, impacts
each of the other business units. This would minimize re-work, which sets
off a domino effect in the support process that leads to potential customer
dissatisfaction.
• Strengthening the core competencies of each business unit by building or
enhancing the necessary programs, processes, and systems and tools.
Continual training would be necessary as personnel begin aligning
themselves to their unit’s competencies.
• Showing a strong commitment to customer service excellence, including
maintaining transparency in meter billing and positive professionalism during
calls. Installing a new IVR system to enhance customer service and
response.
• Implementing meter health and replacement programs to address
deficiencies in meter accuracy and overall wholesale meter accountability.
• Conducting a technology review to ensure that appropriate systems and
tools are in place to serve both retail and wholesale customers.
Adopting an integrated value chain approach would help personnel channel their
expertise, talent and energy into serving the customers effectively and
professionally.
13. IT and Data Management: Move Towards Becoming
an Invaluable Business Partner to Internal Clients
Through interactions with various business users and internal clients in DWSD, it
is apparent that the organization continues to be bogged down by outages, slow
connections and outdated applications and tools. The current staffing level, skill
set and organization are not optimally set up to do the strategic and tactical work
of a true business partner.
The recommended approach would involve: continuing to develop in-house
capabilities and competencies to support critical business applications;
reprioritizing and holding off certain ongoing IT projects based on business
impact and existing capabilities; and developing a mid-term strategic plan with an
enterprise perspective to align various systems through IT life cycle management.
It is also recommended that clear lines of communication be established in order
to obtain the appropriate type and level of stakeholder involvement throughout
the system selection, configuration and maintenance phases.

ES-23
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
14. Health & Safety (H&S): Build the Team and
Work Towards Improving Safety Metrics
Based on site visits and review of documents and records, Veolia found a
stressed and overwhelmed department of only three safety personnel supporting
an organization with 1,500 staff. Put another way, the current safety staff to
employee ratio of 1:466 is well below the Bureau of National Affairs benchmark
of 1:285 – and this is further compounded by DWSD’s geographic spread across
four counties.
While there has been an improvement in DWSD’s safety metrics, its current 2014
year-to-date Lost Time Incidence (LTIR) rate of approximately 2.5 is still high
when compared to the Bureau of Labor and Statistics (BLS) industry rate of 1.8
for North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) code 2213, and the
accepted water/wastewater operations industry standard of 1.0.
Furthermore, DWSD’s safety staff expressed concerns on behalf of field staff
working in areas with public threats, dilapidated conditions, vicious animals and
the like. Today, personnel are not well equipped with protective devices like
mace, nor do they always have security or police escorts in unsafe areas.
Veolia’s conclusion supports a continual improvement approach that includes
steps to:
• Providing further training and developing the existing H&S staff, and refining
roles and responsibilities.
• Enhancing the Safety Management Programs by establishing a Return-to-
Work program, forming a task group to evaluate security options for field
staff, and coordinating injury tracking and management with the City of
Detroit.
• Beginning utilization of DWSD SMEs to build an effective safety training
program.
• Investing in tools and systems that would improve staff and program
productivity.
Veolia recommends expanding the current H&S department to six full-time staff.
With management commitment, employee participation and additional tools for
success, it is reasonable to expect marked improvement within 12 to 24 months.
15. Security: Continue Ensuring both the Safety of all
Personnel and Security of all Facilities
Given DWSD’s geographic footprint, the 1,000+ employee headcount, and the
specific hazards that employees face, Veolia is sensitive to this particular aspect
of DWSD’s and GLWA operations.

ES-24
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Further, Veolia recognizes that providing security services can be accomplished
by a security program that is resourced to protect the sites from outside intrusion
and criminal activity, as well as be consistent with U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA) guidelines concerning critical facility security.
As part of GLWA and DWSD’s overall security program, Veolia recommends
physical security measures at all facilities, in conjunction with assessing H&S
procedural issues for effectiveness with proper enforcement from management.
16. Communications & Public Affairs: Continue Building Towards
the Highest Levels of Industry Best Practices
Veolia’s SMEs recognize the many initiatives already underway with
Communications & Public Affairs and encourage DWSD and GLWA to strive for
best practices in this area. While some disconnect exists between employees
and the inadequacy of communication, many of the same tools and processes
that would be proposed by Veolia are already in place.
In fact, Veolia’s assessment found that there has been a marked improvement in
all aspects of communication in the last two years.
Moving Forward:
Implementation Plan
This Peer Review Report has identified the clear potential for GLWA and DWSD
to invest in its people and assets in order to improve core operations.
Implementing the recommendations would help reach the goal of becoming a
more effective functional and business-oriented enterprise.
Veolia is confident that this program of recommendations has the potential to
transform how DWSD and GLWA operate to deliver cost savings to its retail and
wholesale customers, while improving both compliance and the level of service
quality.
Quick Wins
As stated throughout this Peer Review Report, Veolia’s overarching
recommendations would be: investing in people and assets to stabilize the
organization and systems.
Veolia recognizes that DWSD is working on programs to address these areas,
but would suggest a new focus be brought to these two very important priorities.
With this understanding, Veolia would propose to start the initiatives outlined on
Table ES-4, which follows, immediately in order to seek quick wins that unlock
the highest savings impact. These are the types of initiatives that are procedural

ES-25
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
in nature, involve treatment process changes and/or require little or no capital
investment.
Table ES-4. Proposed Immediate Initiatives - Quick Wins
Facility/Operation Proposed Initiative Efficiency Impact
Water Treatment Plants • Optimize chemical feeds
• Replace alum with aluminum
chlorohydrate or polyaluminum chloride
• Optimize filter backwash cycles
• Increase process automation
$2.3 million
Wastewater Treatment
Plant
• Optimize chemical feeds
• Reconfigure number of aeration decks
• Optimize pure oxygen usage
• In-sourcing hazard response
(HAZMAT) support
$1.8 million
Procurement • Eliminate or renegotiate service
contracts
• Chemical unit price renegotiation
• Optimize payment terms
$3.3 million
Energy • Renegotiate rates with power provider $1.8 million
Network Maintenance • GPS tracking for all vehicles $0.2 million
Note:
(1) Subsequent years’ savings will typically be higher due to full-year of implementation and time
needed to affect change (training; SOPs; capital improvements). As “quick wins” Veolia is
presenting an estimate of Year 1 savings.
In order to support the implementation of these cost-savings efficiencies in the
most timely manner possible, Veolia would recommend that the following efforts
be initiated at the outset:
1. Conducting a criticality assessment of assets at the wastewater treatment
plant immediately. In work to date Veolia saw equipment that appeared to
be of a critical nature that could benefit from the condition assessment that
may eliminate failures from occurring. This criticality assessment would
also provide the detail necessary to drive a proper Asset Management
Program and CIP.
2. Developing Process Control Management Plans (PCMPs) at the WWTP, as
well as at all WTPs. Implementing operational changes with low capital

PEER_REVIEW_REPORT_Veolia_DWSD_12-19-2014

PEER_REVIEW_REPORT_Veolia_DWSD_12-19-2014

Recommended

Recommended

More Related Content

What's hot

What's hot (19)

Similar to PEER_REVIEW_REPORT_Veolia_DWSD_12-19-2014

Similar to PEER_REVIEW_REPORT_Veolia_DWSD_12-19-2014 (20)

PEER_REVIEW_REPORT_Veolia_DWSD_12-19-2014