To access any of the PDF documents included in this page, please use this free Adobe Acrobat Reader as needed.

Water Trade Sector Minutes - Edmonton, in PDF Format, 66 KB

If you encounter any difficulty in accessing the content on this or any other page please contact us for assistance.

February 17 & 18, 2004

Opening Remarks:

James Welsh, Water Trade Sector Review (WTSR) Team Leader, opened the session. He welcomed the group of stakeholders and thanked them for taking out from their busy schedule to attend the session. He introduced the Water Trade Sector Review Team, Measurement Canada guests and had the stakeholders introduce themselves. The agenda for the consultation session was presented and explained. Gilles Vinet, Vice President of the Program Development Directorate at Measurement Canada (MC) and member of the Senior Management Committee, welcomed the group. Mr. Vinet explained how sector reviews are an important initiative for Measurement Canada and stakeholder participation plays a vital role in the process to improve the future of fair trade measurement for all Canadians.

Measurement Canada/Trade Sector Review Introduction Presentation:

James Welsh delivered the introduction presentation:

Measurement Canada Introduction
Water Trade Sector Background
Water Trade Sector Review Introduction
- Purpose of review
- Criteria of the review
- Review acceptance
- Measurement Canada’s commitment
- Session expectations

Option consommateurs Presentation:

Option consommateurs’ presentation was delivered by Ms. Geneviève Reed:

Who is Option consommateurs
Regulations in the United States
Focus Group Sessions
National Survey
Explanation of funding

Discussions and Recommendations

Recommendations:

The recommendations were derived through consensus which implies that the vast majority of stakeholders agree with the recommendations. There may continue to be stakeholders who would have preferred a different recommendation. The recommendations listed are from the Edmonton meeting only and they may not reflect the final recommendations as the final recommendations will be a compilation of all stakeholder consultation meetings.

1. Approvals

Recommendation 1.1

Measurement Canada to require that all water meters, used in water utility metering, must be Type Approved (including updates and revisions) before they may be used in trade. This will apply at all levels of trade.

Recommendation 1.2

The Type Approval process will include the provision for testing the prototype water meter to ensure that it meets the applicable standard.

Recommendation 1.3

The Type Approval process will only apply to new water meter prototypes that are submitted for approval after a certain date (to be determined). Existing water meter models used in trade will be exempt from the type approval process.

Recommendation 1.4

Measurement Canada to form a joint working group, with representation from all applicable stakeholders, to establish the detail of the requirements for the Type Approval of water meters.

Comments and Discussions:

Stakeholders want Measurement Canada to ensure that the Type Approval process does not add significant costs, limit new technology or deter innovation. Stakeholders are concerned that the cost of type approval could be prohibitive for large meters because of the low number of meters in service.

Stakeholders expressed understanding that Canada has to abide by International and NAFTA (North American Free Trade Agreement) trade agreements. Stakeholders are concerned about adopting OIML (International Organization of Legal Metrology) standards if they are lower than AWWA (American Water and Wastewater Association) standards.

Stakeholders were informed of NIST (National Institute of Standards & Technology) Handbook 44 Section 3.36. This is the national standard for water meters in the United States with regards to trade measurement.

Meters exist which are not covered by AWWA standards (ex: Mag Meters)

Most of the manufacturers apparently manufacture water meters that meet the AWWA Standard because it’s a default standard. They all sit on the committee that establishes the AWWA Standard. Stakeholders indicated that there may not be any testing done other than by the manufacturers to demonstrate compliance with AWWA meter design standards.

Measurement Canada should not be the only device approval laboratory. Other authorized locations could be acceptable if they meet the recognized standard.

Measurement Canada should recognize devices approved by other jurisdictions, provided they meet the requirements. (consensus)

Most of the stakeholders at the meeting felt the Type Approval evaluation process hould not be performed by manufacturers. (consensus)

AWWA is the recommended criteria for approval testing but other standards should also be studied.

OIML R-49-1 should also be looked at since new meters, manufactured outside of North America, may be introduced in the future.

2. Initial Inspection

Recommendation 2.1

Measurement Canada to require that all water meters, used in water utility metering, must pass a mandatory initial inspection before being used in trade. This will apply at all levels of trade.

Recommendation 2.2

Initial inspections may be performed by any person or organization provided they meet the established requirements. Initial inspections could be conducted at the factory or in-situ depending on the type of meter and/or the type of installation.

Recommendation 2.3

The requirement for initial inspection will only apply to new water meters. Water meters already in-service will be exempt from the initial inspection requirement.

Recommendation 2.4

The municipalities or water utilities will be responsible for the inspection of the installation of the water meter. They will follow manufacturer specifications, local plumbing codes and any other requirements needed to ensure the meter is measuring accurately.

Recommendation 2.5

Measurement Canada to form a joint working group, with representation from all applicable stakeholders, to establish the detail of the initial inspection requirements.

Comments and Discussions:

It was strongly suggested by some stakeholders that the meter manufacturers be responsible to have the meters initially inspected before they are sold. The advantages and disadvantages of this proposal were discussed. In the end, the majority of stakeholders agreed that as long as the requirement was met it did not matter when and where the initial inspection occurred.

Some stakeholders asked why the federal government was getting involved in a municipal matter. It was explained that under the Canadian Constitution the federal government has the authority for all Weights and Measures matters. Agencies and organizations from all levels of Canadian (Federal, Provincial and Municipal) government in Canada are subject to the requirements of the Weights and Measures Act and Regulations if they are engaging in trade measurement.

It was suggested that perhaps Measurement Canada could accept the calibration test results as being valid for initial inspection if established requirements are met. This could possibly reduce the cost of the initial inspection process. The joint working group should look at inspection procedures that are traditionally not acceptable to MC (e.g. testing meters and register seperately). Perhaps these procedures could be acceptable to a majority of stakeholders.

The use of sampling should be considered when developing initial inspection criteria.

Discussions were also made about whether a security seal needs to be affixed to all or some of the water meters used in trade.

Several stakeholders said that incorrect installation of ICI (Industrial, Commercial and Institutional) meters can have a huge impact on measurement (i.e. 130 to 180 percent) for large meters. Also the use of wrong registers can have an effect on the accuracy of the registration.

3. Re-verification Inspections

Recommendation 3.1

Measurement Canada to require that all water meters, used in water utility metering, be subjected to a mandatory re-verification inspection. This will apply at all levels of trade.

Recommendation 3.2

Re-verification inspections may be performed by any person or organization provided they meet the established requirements. Re-verification inspections could be conducted in-situ or at a meter shop (water utility, meter manufacturer or 3^rd party meter service organization).

Recommendation 3.3

Measurement Canada to form a joint working group, with representation from all applicable stakeholders, to establish the details of the re-verification inspection requirements. This will include re-verification periods, meter replacement, sampling plans, re-verification vs. replacement of meters.

Comments and Discussions:

This topic generated the most discussion at the meetings. While a consensus was reached at the end of the meeting that there should be regulations put in place to require water meter re-verification or meter replacement, some attendees felt that it should be done on a voluntary or best practices basis. Stakeholders expressed an opinion that by having a regulation in place, utility managers felt more empowered to ask their superiors for funds to re-test their meters.

An overlying concern with any re-verification requirements is the cost to the municipality and their taxpayers. It was felt that many of the larger municipalities are already re-testing their meters and the costs would be minimal. Smaller municipalities may not have the resources to be able to re-test their meters.

Another issue raised was the strong belief that the meters are always under-registering and therefore no customers were being overcharged. The question of inequity within the water system caused by inaccurate meters was discussed. Several stakeholders acknowledged that their customers would not be happy to know that they were paying more then their neighbour even though they were consuming the same amount of water. Again the issue of the costs to rectify this problem were raised. Nobody wants to spend $5 to solve a $1 problem.

The question was also raised about whether or not the composition of water (turbidity) should be a factor in setting any re-verification periods. It was agreed that this should be a concern but it was also noted that it would be difficult to implement given the huge number of water utilities in Canada.

Stakeholders also mentioned that the volume that passes through the meter should be considered when setting re-verification periods. This was especially true for ICI meters. For many municipalities it may not be practical to administer the tracking of volume for 5/8 inch meters. There is also a concern that meter records in the past may not always have been well maintained. This is especially true at some of the smaller municipalities.

The following re-verification periods were recommended at the Edmonton session.

5/8 to 3/4 inch (residential meters)
re-verification or replacement after 20 years (sampling acceptable)

1 to 2 inch (commercial meters)
re-verification or replacement after 15 years (sampling acceptable)

3 to 4 inch (commercial meters)
re-verification or replacement after 10 years (sampling acceptable)

4 to 6 inch (commercial meters)
re-verification or replacement after 5 years (sampling acceptable)

6 inch and larger (industrial meters)
re-verification or replacement every year after initial 2 years (sampling acceptable

Stakeholders also recognized that these are initial re-verification periods and it’s understood that further re-verification periods would possibly need to be shorter.

Some stakeholders felt that the periods should be different for different types of meters. There is a concern expressed by the water utility stakeholders in Edmonton that they have agreed with a 20 year seal period for residential water meters but other regions may ask for 15 years because their water composition is different.

Stakeholders also expressed a concern over any transition period that may arise out of the WTSR. There needs to be a long transition period if > 20 years old meters need to be replaced.

NOTE:

After the meeting, Mr. Welsh contacted the AWWA to find out how they set their recommended re-verification periods. He was told that they were set by a special committee. This committee is comprised of equal representation from meter manufacturers, American water utilities and engineering consultants. The time periods were established based on state regulations, meter data and the committee member’s experience in the water meter industry.


		Created: 2005-08-04 Updated: 2005-12-02	Top of Page	Important Notices