Industries · Water & wastewater utility

Water & wastewater utility

A regulated utility is 14 months from its next price submission. It has CCTV grades on a third of the gravity network, break history on the potable mains, and a board that has been told twice that "the network is ageing" without being shown which parts.

Book a pilot on your data →How the solution works

Who this is for

Three people, one budget argument

👷

Network planner

Owns the plan and answers for it. Everything on screen is built to make that week easier.

💷

Asset data lead

Holds the budget line and carries the valuation. Cares about defensibility before features.

🏛️

General manager, infrastructure

Signs, and is the one asked the awkward question in public. Needs one page, not a tour.

Asset classes

What AIPP scores in this industry

Pipe Potable Sewer Gravity Sewer Rising Mains Water Pumps Reservoirs Tanks Water Treatment

📐

Configured for this industry out of the box: condition on the NASSCO_PACP scale, the WATER weighting profile, budget shown as 5-year renewals envelope, and the instruments it answers to (ISO24516, AWWA_M77, NASSCO_PACP, WSA_CODES) named on every score. All of it is yours to change — the weights are sliders, not our opinion.

The honest bit

6 of 36 assets will not score

That is the demo register for this industry, and the gaps are deliberate. AIPP refuses to rank an asset the evidence does not support — it will not apply a curve, a zero or a middle grade to a thing nobody has inspected. 17% of this register comes back unranked, with the reason named.

⚖

6 of 36 assets carry NO condition evidence and NO age. That is deliberate. A demo register where everything scores teaches a prospect nothing about what happens to the two-thirds of their own register that will not — and it is exactly where most tools quietly invent a zero. Open the demo on these.

How it runs

From export to defensible programme

Planner uploads the mains register and the CCTV export. PACP grades convert to IIMM automatically; the pipes with no CCTV are listed, not guessed.

Break history drives likelihood on potable; structural grade drives it on gravity. Every score names which.

Weighting is set to the utility's own service-continuity emphasis, and the top 50 re-ranks live.

The renewals envelope is applied. The optimiser reports the mains that do not fit and the customer-minutes that buys.

The submission pack exports with the provenance of every figure and the deferred list stated explicitly.

What you will see

The screens that matter here

The unscored thirdBefore anything else — this is what you cannot yet defend. These pipes have no CCTV and no break history, so nothing scores them. Most tools would have shown you a zero here and put them at the bottom of your risk list.

What actually ranks firstNow the ones you can defend. The top of this list is not the oldest pipe — it is the one whose failure lands on the most customers for the least renewal cost.

Why this numberThis is the question your regulator asks. Break rate measured, structural grade from PACP grade 4, consequence from customers downstream — and the coefficient we used, which is ours until you calibrate it against your own failures.

The envelope bitesHere is the envelope you actually have. Fourteen of these do not fit. This is the list your board needs to see — not because it is comfortable, but because deferring them is a decision somebody is making whether or not it is written down.

The balance testISO 55000 asks you to demonstrate you are balancing cost, risk and performance. This is that demonstration in one screen — and it will tell you if your programme is quietly spending its money away from its risk.

Fair questions

What this industry actually asks us

We already have a hydraulic model and a GIS. Why this?

Neither ranks your renewals against a budget or produces the defence. A hydraulic model tells you what happens if a main fails; AIPP tells you which mains to renew first given the money you have, and shows the working.

Our CCTV coverage is poor. Does that break it?

No — it makes the gap visible. Uncovered pipes are reported as unscored with their replacement value, which is itself the business case for the next CCTV programme.

Can you do AWWA J100 / RAMCAP?

No. J100 is referenced, not implemented — it is listed in the standards registry as a reference, not a capability. What AIPP does is risk-rank and constrain; a RAMCAP assessment is a separate exercise.

Run it on your own worst class

Bring one export — the class with the missing condition data and the costs from 2019. If AIPP tells you the truth about it in twenty minutes, that is worth a conversation. If it scores everything and looks clean, tell us so.

Book a paid pilot →See pricing