Belgian plant finally gets the go-ahead

But the new Brussels North wastewater scheme - one of Europe's biggest BOOT projects - is facing a challenge in the courts from an unsuccessful contender in the race for the $320M project as Alan George reports from Brussels.


Continue Reading

Login or register for unlimited FREE access.

Login Register

The Aquiris consortium, headed by French-based Vivendi Water and including

Japan’s Marubeni and a range of Belgian companies, has been selected to develop

the much-needed Brussels North wastewater treatment plant.

The plant will occupy a 7.5 ha site in the Haren district on the right bank

of the Canale Maritime (the canalised River Senne) which extends broadly north-south

through the Belgian capital.

The project also includes the construction of a 6.8km pipeline which will run

along the left bank of the canal before crossing beneath it to reach the treatment

plant, and the connection of sewage pipes. The canal will account for about

one third of the overall costs.

Maximum flow for full treatment will be 8.2m3/sec, while that for pre-treatment

and initial clarification only, will be 16.4m3/sec. Flows above that level will

be diverted into the Senne without treatment.

The client is the Brussels Region and the consultant is Exlime, itself a joint

venture linking France’s Merlin (the lead partner) and Excoser and Libost, both

of Belgium. The Brussels law firm of Stibbe & Simont is the client’s legal

and financial adviser, with Belgium’s Banque Degroof as the financial sub-consultant.

Court proceedings

The selection of Aquiris in May is being challenged in the courts by Hydronor,

one of the losing contenders for the project, which claims that the winning

offer did not meet the specifications in the tender.

The client is mystified by the claim from Hydronor – linking companies in the

French-Belgian Suez-Lyonnaise des Eaux-Tractebel group – that the wet air oxidation

technique for sludge treatment which formed part of the Aquiris offer violated

a tender requirement not to employ any form of sludge incineration.

‘I don’t understand it,’ said Marie Derick, Water Adviser to Didier Gosuin,

Environment Minister in the Brussels Regional Government. ‘It’s obvious that

they have no chance of winning on this allegation.’

While Hydronor is sueing the Brussels Region, Aquiris has launched its own

action against Hydronor insisting that the latter’s allegations were ‘false

and intended only to eliminate Aquiris from the competition.’

Slow start to treatment

Brussels and its region lie in the drainage basin of the River Senne, which

has been designated as an ecologically sensitive zone. Until the inauguration

of the Brussels South treatment plant last year, all the city’s wastewater was

discharged without treatment directly into the Senne.

The Senne hydrographic basin has three sub-basins: North, South and Woluwe.

Brussels South, sited in Anderlecht on the city’s southern edge, serves 360,000

people in the southern third of the city and in a neighbouring part of the Flanders

Region and has an average daily dry-weather flow of 65,100m3. It handles discharges

from the South sub-basin. Flows from the North and Woluwe sub-basins will go

to the Brussels North plant.

In all, Brussels North will treat flows from fifteen Brussels districts and

seven neighbouring municipalities in Flanders.

In November 1998 five groups were shortlisted for the scheme. Apart from Aquiris

and Hydronor, the shortlisted groups were Bouygues, of France; BSUB (linking

Besix and Seeghers, both of Belgium, Britain’s United Utilities and Bechtel

of the USA); and a group linking Hochtief, RWE Aqua and SHW, all of Germany.

However, four days before the closing date the Hochtief group withdrew, with

the claim that the pressure of work had prevented it from preparing a full proposal.

One reason for Aquiris’ success was the efficacy of its proprietary Athos wet

air oxidation sludge treatment process.

‘This produces a final residue which is inert, and therefore the volume of

materials which must be transported from the plant are very low compared to

those required in the other bids,’ she said.

‘For us, this is very important because it means fewer lorries, and because

we have no landfills in Brussels where residue could be dumped,’ said Ms Derick.

As the residue is inert there will be no need for it to be taken for final

incineration elsewhere, as was the case with the other bids.

The tender stipulated final water quality standards in line with those called

for in the EC’s Water Directive. For nitrogen, however, a higher standard was

required in order to compensate for the lack of tertiary treatment at the Brussels

South plant.

‘The Directive says that either you must treat nitrogen at all plants, or you

must achieve a combined reduction of 75% at all plants taken together,’ explained

Ms Derick.

A 22-month period has been earmarked for studies and obtaining necessary permits,

including approval from the Institut Bruxellois de Gestion de l’Environnement.

Construction will take 36 months and commissioning is scheduled for the first

half of 2006.

The client will pay nothing until the end of the first year of operation. Aquiris

will operate the plant for twenty years, for each of which it will receive an

annuity of E49.58M.

Brussels has lagged far behind the rest of Europe in the development of sewerage

facilities and last July the EC threatened Belgium with proceedings in the European

Court for breaching the 1991 EC directive which required all European cities

to be fully served by effective sewerage systems by the end of 1998. The delay

stemmed largely from administrative changes in Belgium.

New administration

‘When the Brussels Region was created in 1989, there were no treatment plants

and no funds earmarked for sewerage,’ recalls Marie Derick.

‘Brussels South came first because it was a smaller project and therefore less

expensive, and because it had been the most studied. ‘But we had to create a

strong and capable ministry. We had to restructure the whole administration.’

Funding constraints were the main reason for opting for a BOOT formula for

Brussels North but managerial simplicity was another important consideration.

Brussels South was developed conventionally but it took longer than anticipated

because of complications arising from the division of responsibilities between

various contractors.

‘So many people were involved that, in terms of responsibilities, it was very

hard for us to manage,’ said Ms Derick.

‘We wanted to avoid all of that absolutely on Brussels North. To have one company

responsible for studies, construction and operation was absolutely crucial.

They have the total responsibility and we pay if it’s correctly operated.’

In 1997, the Brussels Capital Region government formally decided that the BOOT

approach was the right one for Brussels North.

‘We had to select legal and technical consultants who together with the Environment

Ministry, wrote the tender. But it was time-consuming and we had to do a huge

amount of work before being able to designate the project leader – and we didn’t

waste time,’ said Ms Derick.

© Faversham House Ltd 2022 edie news articles may be copied or forwarded for individual use only. No other reproduction or distribution is permitted without prior written consent.

Action inspires action. Stay ahead of the curve with sustainability and energy newsletters from edie

Subscribe