The high failure rate of the City’s current Automated Meter Infrastructure (AMI) system is one of the most misunderstood issues being discussed in the community. Water Utilities Director Terry Lauritsen answers the most frequently asked questions on the topic in today’s Director’s Cut.
City Beat: What does an AMI system do, and what is the problem with the system we have?
Lauritsen: The system automatically reads and reports data from water meters at predetermined intervals to the City. So ideally, this provides an automated reading of water usage, hour by hour, and it can detect leaks relatively quickly so they can be addressed. Our system was installed in 2013, replacing manually-read meters. Unfortunately, the system has been flawed from the start. To date, we have had a 98 percent failure rate with the meter transmitters. This has resulted in the replacement of the transmitters on 16,086 of the City’s total 16,403 meters.
Does that mean people are being charged for water they didn’t use?
Not at all. It just means the meters have to be manually read, which requires additional staff. It also means we’ve lost the ability to detect leaks as we cannot break down hourly usage.
How much is it costing us to replace these transmitters?
It hasn’t cost anything so far. We had a 10-year full-cost warranty on the system, and the manufacturer, Mueller Water Projects, has honored the warranty.
Then what’s the problem?
We will soon enter the pro-rated portion of the warranty, which means the City will have to pay a percentage of the costs going forward. This is problematic because this system has not performed as promised from the start.
How much would it cost to continue with the system we have?
Between 2023-2028, it is anticipated the current system would cost an additional $300,000 per year to continue replacing the meter transmitters. This would be in addition to the $350,000 it would take for a necessary upgrade. A new system with Mueller would cost approximately $1.5 million; however, while the company has verbally agreed to guarantee the system’s performance, it declined to do so in writing. Essentially, we believe it’s more cost effective to install an entirely new system using a different manufacturer with a proven track record than it would be to continue with the system we have.
How much did this system cost, and what is the cost to replace it?
The cost of the current system was $3.8 million. To replace it at today’s costs, we anticipate it will be in the $7.5 million range.
How will this be funded?
It will be funded though Water Capital Investment Fees, which is included on monthly utility bills. These funds, which exist not only for Water but also Wastewater, are used to fund City utility infrastructure needs.
Is this why our utility bills are going up?
Not entirely. The expected lifespan of an AMI system is about 15 years, so we would essentially be looking at replacement of this system in a few years anyway.