Ofwat has waived Tideway’s procurement obligations in respect of the development and piloting of an autonomous tunnel investigation system for use on the Thames Tideway Tunnel – the eighth Waiver Notice the regulator has issued to Tideway.

In June 2020, Ofwat received a draft application from Tideway for a specific waiver in respect of the procurement of the following services:

• feasibility and cost assessment of implementing 10-year tunnel inspections using an autonomous tunnel inspection system (ATIS) through the preparation of a development plan, a pilot plan and a 10-year inspection plan (phase 1 services); and
• developing and running a pilot programme to test ATIS (phase 2 services).

Following receipt of a formal application from Tideway on 29 July 2020, on 28 August 2020 Ofwat agreed to grant the waiver, effective from 1 September 2020.

Setting out its reasons for granting the request by Bazalgette Tunnel Ltd, which trades as Tideway, Ofwat explained that once the Thames Tideway Tunnel is built, Tideway will have an obligation to carry out 10-year inspections on the tunnel, with the first inspection due in 2025.

The regulator said that Tideway has investigated a number of options from manual inspections to the use of different technology-based solutions.

The company had concluded that manual inspections would be possible but were not a cost effective solution and would require an extensive period of isolation and lock down of the Thames Tideway Tunnel, the Lee Tunnel and the Thames Water sewer network.

It had also rejected ‘off the shelf’ technical solutions, such as drone technology - drone technology generally relies on wi-fi, and is best sited for above ground inspections.

Following a field trial, Tideway considered that the optimal solution was ATIS which employs:

• a remote operational vehicle equipped with software which provides data acquisition;
• onboard analysis using artificial intelligence;
• visualisation and dissemination of the survey data.

Tideway has advised Ofwat that the use of such technology is likely to require less down time of the sewer systems, resulting in less overflow into the River Thames and will considerably reduce the health and safety risks associated with manual inspections.

Tideway also considers that ATIS will be more cost effective than manual inspections.

Based on the field trial results, Tideway is now seeking to procure work to more fully understand the feasibility and cost of implementing the 10-year inspection programme using ATIS.

Prior to the field trial, the company approached 14 potential participants of which only two were viable test options. Tideway said that of the two, only one (SCYSIS - now CGI IT UK Ltd (CGI)) was able to demonstrate that the necessary components worked appropriately for the context.

Tideway’s view is that CGI is currently the only viable provider in terms of the software component but it expects to have further information to validate (or otherwise) this view via the outcome from phase 1.

Ofwat has now agreed to the request to waive its procurement obligations for phases 1 and 2 of the project. Depending on the outcome of phase 1, phase 2 could potentially be competitively procured or Tideway could enter into a further contract with CGI for phase 2, with Ofwat’s consent.

By the time phase 3 is required, the first of the 10-year tunnel inspections using ATIS, Tideway considers that there may be other solutions that it can procure in the market.

Ofwat commented:

“We are satisfied that Tideway has justified its request for a waiver on value for money terms and, having tested the market, on the basis that the contract can only be provided by a particular economic operator.

“We noted that Tideway approached 14 potential suppliers for a field trial but only one of those had the technical capacity for the task. We also accept Tideway’s commercial decision that an autonomous tunnel inspection system is preferable to manual inspections for health and safety and environmental reasons.”

“We did not consult before making this decision as we did not consider that a consultation would serve any purpose.”

“Given the specialist nature of the relevant contract and the fact that Tideway has already tested the market, we did not think that consultation was necessary.”