|
Following the Flint disaster, lead contamination in water systems has
become a big concern across the country. Other contaminants associated with iron
piping are also making headlines. Iron pipe networks often require the use of
orthophosphates to reduce corrosion and lead concentrations in water.
Orthophosphates can harm the environment by contributing to algal blooms. Less
discussed are the dangers of exposure to iron and manganese that leach out of
iron pipe. A recent article by journalist Sara Jerome sheds light on this
unregulated threat and provides water utilities with even more to think about
when it comes to the risks posed by iron pipe.
Below are excerpts from the
article by Sara Jerome, “Are The Dangers Of Iron In Water Being Ignored,” which
appeared in Water Online.
“Iron in drinking water may pose more health risks than federal water regulators
currently acknowledge. Marc Edwards, an environmental engineering professor at
Virginia Tech, says that iron may have played a critical role in the Flint
lead-contamination crisis…“What we've discovered in the last, say, five or ten
years is a legitimate public health concern about having too much iron and
manganese in the water,” he said. Edwards helped uncover the severity of the
lead crisis in Flint…“
Click here to read article.
Corrosion-Prone Iron Pipe Costly,
Threat to Public Health
 Water
industry expert Bonner Cohen, Ph.D. provides insight into the root causes of the
Flint disaster by examining the link between corrosion and closed bidding in,
“Flint’s Water Fiasco: The Detroit Connection,” published in The Daily Caller.
The article also discusses the many health and safety issues associated with
metallic pipe networks:
“Flint’s water system was a disaster waiting to happen, and Detroit’s decrepit
iron piping network, fraught with health and safety issues of its own, helped
spark the crisis…the Detroit Water and Sewer Department (DWSD) has had its share
of water-quality violations and underground infrastructure problems, which have
been passed on to ratepayers throughout its network, including those in
Flint…the Motor City utility routinely exceeded the federal action level for
lead in drinking water as early as the 1990s… Published reports on threats to
public health resulting from the utility’s outdated water treatment and
distribution systems urged DWSD to replace its aging piping systems, which are
often the breeding ground for water-borne diseases…In a misguided effort to deal
with the growing number of water-main breaks and other water-quality concerns,
DWSD replaced its corroding infrastructure with more corrosion-prone iron
piping. The resulting higher costs continued to be passed along to Flint and
other communities.”
“While many other states across the U.S. confronted similar challenges, DWSD
continued to charge their higher-than-necessary rates by preventing the use of
any corrosion-resistant alternative pipe material. Ductile iron pipes,
manufactured with thinner walls and still subject to internal and external
corrosion, were used to replace the thick old iron pipes at a significantly
higher cost (30-50 percent) than alternative non-metallic pipe material…The U.S.
Conference of Mayors published a report in 2009 warning about the higher costs
utilities will pay due to a lack of open competition in bidding on underground
water infrastructure. It also pointed to major health issues associated with
rusty pipes…”
Click here to read article
Mayor of Gulfport (MS) Says Open
Bidding Fundamental Right of Local Governments, AWWA Wrong to Oppose
 “[It]
is with some consternation that I learned of the American Water Works
Association’s (AWWA) opposition to competitive bidding for water and sewer
piping materials (Click
here for AWWA legislative alert) which could save states and municipalities
millions of dollars. This is the same anticompetitive position held by the
Ductile Iron Pipe Research Association, which lobbies on behalf of iron pipe
producers. I find this pursuit of commercial interest very unsettling
considering the AWWA touts itself as an independent professional organization of
public utility engineers. As well, it begs the question whether AWWA’s
activities in this area involve restriction of trade.”
“Responsible elected officials, financial professionals and utility engineers
must support and promote open competition and the need for alternative products
and materials in bidding processes for underground infrastructure. Moreover,
this is a fundamental right and responsibility of all municipal governments. To
oppose this right and threaten to mobilize AWWA’s resources against a
municipality that is considering opening up its bidding processes to competition
is disquieting. DIPRA and the iron pipe industry do not support competitive
material bidding, preferring instead iron pipe-only specifications, which
increases costs and deprives citizens of access to the most suitable
products...Finding that best type of pipe can only be decided by open and fair
competition for pipe materials.”
“The AWWA legislative alert is also very misleading in suggesting that
competitive procurement “forces” utilities to specify piping materials “the
utility may think unsuited for a particular application” and “has the effect of
forcing the selection of materials, to be based solely on price.” On the
contrary, open competition preserves the autonomy of the design engineer since
all pipe materials are qualified and selected based on sound engineering
principles. Moreover, by allowing contractors to bid on alternate pipe materials
that meet technical performance criteria, the municipality will instill
accountability in the procurement process which will reduce costs for all piping
purchased, improve quality, and foster innovation.”
Click here for a
copy of Gulfport (MS) Mayor Hewes’ open letter.
Study: Iron Pipe More Expensive
in Closed Bids, Open Bidding Increases Choice, Lowers Costs of Iron Pipe by 36%
 Contrary
to claims by the ductile iron pipe industry that fair and open procurement
reduces choice, open bidding in fact increases choice and lowers costs for
taxpayers. A report by BCC Research comparing water main pipe installation
lengths and costs in North and South Carolina showed that open bidding lowered
the cost of iron piping by 36%.
Below are excerpts from the
report:
“Key findings…indicate that the City of
Charlotte, which does not restrict pipe competition to a particular material as
long as pipe materials meet City specifications, enjoys the lowest cost, on
average, for pipeline capital costs. Raleigh, which restricts water pipe
materials to ductile iron, received and accepted bids having a higher average
pipe cost than those located in Charlotte…Pipe costs…in Raleigh were, on average
across all pipe diameters, 80% higher than in Charlotte…Based on 2014 data, pipe
capital costs in Raleigh were found to be $304,800 per mile ($57.73 per foot)
for 8” to 12” diameter pipe, compared to $148,900 per mile ($28.21 per foot) on
average in Charlotte. Thus per-mile costs were, on average, $155,900 higher in
Raleigh than in Charlotte, for 8” to 12” diameter pipe in 2014. This is
equivalent to a cost savings of $29.53 per foot, or over 50% on average for
Charlotte in comparison to Raleigh. Based on these averages, Charlotte would
save nearly $1.6 million on the installation of 10 miles of pipeline, in
comparison to Raleigh. Last, we were also able to use the data collected to
compare 8” ductile iron pipe cost for Raleigh – $46.69/foot – to 8” ductile iron
pipe cost for Charlotte – $30.08/foot. Therefore, even for ductile iron alone,
8” pipe costs in Charlotte were found to be over $16 per foot lower than
Raleigh, equivalent to a pipe capital cost savings of 36%.”
Click here
for report.
Regards,
Bruce Hollands
Executive
Director | Uni-Bell PVC Pipe Association
 2711 LBJ Freeway, Suite
1000 | Dallas, TX 75234
T. 972.243.3902 ext. 1019 | F.
972.243.3907
www.uni-bell.org
  
|
