Bristol Water mid-year performance in 2019/20

Landscape scene
Dark Cloud Dark Cloud Dark Cloud Dark Cloud Dark Cloud
Raindrop
Raindrop
Raindrop
Raindrop
Raindrop
Raindrop
Raindrop
Raindrop
Raindrop
Raindrop
Hot Air Balloon Hot Air Balloon
Security
of Supply
Index (SOSI)
Raw water
quality
Biodiversity
index
Population at risk
of asset failure
Turbidity at our
treatment works
Emergency
maintenance
Negative water
quality contacts
Customer contacts
about bills
Hosepipe ban
frequency
Percentage of customers
in water poverty
Low pressure
Customer water
consumption
Level of
metering
Customer satisfaction
with service
General satisfaction
from surveys
Total carbon
emissions
Bursts
Waste disposal
compliance
Compliance with water
quality standards
Leakage
Supply interruptions
Ease of contact
Value for money
Average water bill
  • Key:
  • Performance not on track to meet target
  • Performance on track to meet target
  • No target

Average water bill

keyboard_arrow_right
2019/20:
189 £/ year

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

Each year we set our charges, informed by the price controls that are determined every five year by the economic regulator of the water sector, Ofwat. Price controls were set for the period between 2015-2020 following reviews that started in 2014. Charges for our services are either based on how much water our customers use (for a metered charge) or the rateable value (RV) of their property (for an unmetered charge). Few customers have an average bill as many factors determine individual households’ bills. In addition, most customers will receive a combined water and sewerage bill – but the charge for the sewerage service reflects the levels set by Wessex Water. Comparing the average water bill level is however a useful tool for customers to benchmark our charges against our performance and against the average charges of other companies in the water sector.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Customers can compare our average annual water bill against other companies in the industry here.

Biodiversity index

keyboard_arrow_right
Mid-year actual:
17,668 Index points
Year-end target:
17,653 Index points
Year-end target on track?
Yes

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

We monitor our protection and enhancement of the natural environment through an innovative approach that we have called the biodiversity index. This quantifies the environmental value of our sites and creates a "direction of travel" for the way we manage our assets, helping us to protect and enhance the natural environment by using the index to quantify the impact of our actions on the broader environment. It is measured by the cumulative hectares and meters of habitat (e.g. hedges) and the quality of this habitat.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

Our mid-year performance is currently reflecting our position at the end of 2018/19. This is due to the known seasonality of work delivery. Both negative and positive impacts on the BI score will be delivered during the late autumn to spring months. In other words, any changes to the BI score will not materialise until year-end. For example, works which disturbs trees and hedgerow will not take place until after the bird nesting season, which ends in September. The autumn and spring periods are also the optimal time to plant trees and therefore positive impacts are also delivered towards the end of the financial year.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Customers can find out how our social contract initiatives are contributing to biodiversity improvements across our supply area here.

Bursts

keyboard_arrow_right
Mid-year actual:
320 Burst pipes
Year-end target:
950 Burst pipes
Year-end target on track?
Yes

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

This is the total number of burst pipes recorded in the year. A burst pipe is the most common cause of loss of water supply.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

Bristol Water has historically reduced bursts using a bespoke predictive burst model. Over the last year we have sought to improve this predictive modelling capability and will continue to make significant improvements into next year. This takes the form of introducing far more sophisticated models which use many more environmental and asset related factors. This improved planning means we are confident that our investment will reduce the number of bursts below the target level by the end of the year.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Further information on incidents going on in your area, including information on any burst mains, can be found here.

Customers can compare our performance on bursts against other companies in the industry here.

Compliance with water quality standards

keyboard_arrow_right

Also known as:

Mean zonal compliance (MZC)

Mid-year actual:
99.97%
Year-end target:
100%
Year-end target on track?
No

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

Drinking water must meet strict standards that ensure it is safe to drink and the quality is acceptable to consumers. This is a water quality compliance measure based on a series of 39 parameters (e.g. levels of lead, nitrate levels etc.) determined by the Drinking Water Inspectorate. It is calculated based on sampling each parameter at supply points and customer taps in a number of specified zones.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

Our Water Quality team collects samples 365 days a year from across our 2,400 square kilometre supply area to ensure we comply with the sampling regime, with no exemptions applicable for example for weather conditions. The sampling schedule is aligned to a sophisticated computer-controlled programme so that water quality is checked right from source to customers' taps. Regulatory failures for MZC parameters such as lead, taste and odour are often attributed to the customer’s domestic plumbing system and therefore are out of the control of the company. These are the reasons behind are performance to date in 2019; we have very little influence over these results.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Customers can learn more about the issues that may affect your water quality here.

Customers can compare our performance on water quality standards against other companies in the industry here.

Customer satisfaction with service

keyboard_arrow_right

Also known as:

Service incentive mechanism (SIM)

Mid-year actual:
n/a
Year-end target:
87.6 SIM score (out of 100)
Year-end target on track?
No

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

This is the measure used by the economic regulator of the water sector, Ofwat, for comparing the customer service performance of water companies in England and Wales. It includes quantitative measures of the numbers of complaints and unwanted contacts that companies receive and performance in handling telephone contacts. It also includes a survey of customers’ views on the service provided.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

This year the SIM methodology has been significantly revised and the data requirements were not available for a mid-year assessment. We do however expect our SIM performance to improve by the end of the year as we have increased the resource in our contact centre and we are continually working on improvements to give our customers the answers they need as quickly as possible, such as improvements in how customers can contact us online. We are not however forecasting to meet our target, which is to achieve a level of SIM performance that would mean we were ranked at least 5th in the sector.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Customers can compare our performance on customer service against other companies in the industry here.

Ease of contact

keyboard_arrow_right
Mid-year actual:
91.6%
Year-end target:
>96.5%
Year-end target on track?
No

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

This is the percentage of our customers who consider that we are easy to contact over the phone, based on their responses to customer surveys.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

Although we forecast to miss our challenging target, we have delivered a variety of projects to address our performance in the first six months of 2019/20:

  • We have piloted triaging customer contact in the operation contact centre using more customer photos and videos. This enables us to better understand our customers' problems, which helps to speed up the resolution of the issue after the first point of contact.
  • We have also been upskilling and knowledge sharing between our operations and customer teams.
  • We have increased the scope of the Customer Care Team to track customer requests throughout the journey and keep customers fully informed with progress made against their jobs.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Customers can find more information about how to contact us (whatever the problem) here.

Emergency maintenance

keyboard_arrow_right

Also known as:

Unplanned maintenance events

Mid-year actual:
1,687 Events
Year-end target:
3,976 Events
Year-end target on track?
Yes

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

This measures the total number of unplanned maintenance events occurring throughout the year, as a result of equipment failure or reduced asset performance. It typically relates to jobs identified at our treatment works, pumping stations and service reservoirs.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

We use the information from the work orders to better understand our assets and help to implement appropriate measures to ensure reliability. Effective maintenance and management of assets using such information allows us to run our plant in a resilient manner that will consistently produce high quality water. We have a long track record of outperforming this measure and we are again forecasting to outperform against our target, which is an encouraging indicator of the long-term health of our above-ground assets.

Hosepipe ban frequency

keyboard_arrow_right
Mid-year actual:
n/a
Year-end target:
10.2 Days/ year
Year-end target on track?
Yes

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

This measures the likelihood in any one year that temporary usage restrictions, such as on the use of hosepipes, will be implemented. It is reported as the number of expected days of restriction in the year. The commitment is based on the assumption that a restriction would last for five months (153 days), and that we have a one-in-fifteen year probability of an interruption: 153 / 15 = 10.2 expected days.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

This measure is based on annual calculations but we are confident about our future performance; we can predict that for the fifth consecutive year, we will be able to report that our hosepipe ban risk frequency is better than our target. In fact by the end of this reporting year it will have been 30 years since we last introduced a hosepipe ban (in 1990).

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Further information on implementing temporary use bans (including hosepipe bans) and the risk of a drought, can be found on our website here.

Leakage

keyboard_arrow_right
Mid-year actual:
34.4 Megalitres/ day
Year-end target:
43.0 Megalitres/ day
Year-end target on track?
Yes

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

Water is supplied to customers’ homes through thousands of kilometres of underground pipes. For various reasons, including ground movement and degradation of materials, pipes can leak and some water is lost between the treatment works and the home.  This measure is the amount of water that enters the distribution system but is not delivered to customers because it is lost from either the company’s or customers’ pipes.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

The combination of targeted investment in our network, improved monitoring and control activities, and our proactive approach to leakage management and leakage reduction initiatives, such as pressure management, continues to see us actively working to reduce actual leakage levels further. As a result of this, we expect to outperform our annual leakage target. As a result of our work we have been recognised by CCWater as the top performer in leakage, after setting ourselves ambitious targets and working hard to achieve them.

During 2017/18 we agreed with Ofwat a number of changes to how we report on our performance, including on leakage. Without taking into account technical changes, our mid-year leakage performance is 37.3 Ml/day. As this is a higher number than the actual leakage level, we have committed to calculating financial incentives (which reduce customer bills) on this measure of leakage.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Customers can compare our performance on leakage against other companies in the industry here.

Level of metering

keyboard_arrow_right

Also known as:

Meter penetration

Mid-year actual:
57.5%
Year-end target:
65.9%
Year-end target on track?
No

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

Many people regard water meters as the fairest way to charge for water services. We encourage our customers to be more efficient in the way they use water by increasing the number of household customers who are billed based on their actual water consumption. We measure this by meter penetration, expressed as the percentage of household customers who have a water meter installed at their property.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

Our metering programme is driven by customer requests, and installing meters on the change of occupier of a property. In this context, we no longer expect to achieve the end of year target of 65.9% meter penetration. This is due to waning customer demand for meters and a slowing housing market limiting the opportunities for metering. We have designed an extensive marketing programme, including work with Aardman Animations, to help increase metering uptake.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Customers can find out more information on applying for a water meter here.

Low Pressure

keyboard_arrow_right
Mid-year actual:
58 Properties at risk of low pressure
Year-end target:
69 Properties at risk of low pressure
Year-end target on track?
Yes

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

Water pressure determines the water that comes out of our customers’ taps. This is measured as the total number of properties in our supply area which, at the end of the year, have received, and are likely to continue to receive, water pressure below the minimum required level.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

Identifying new properties at risk can arise as a consequence of our proactive monitoring of our network or as a consequence of poor pressure complaints raised by customers. Three properties in Radstock have been removed from our low pressure register in the last six months; these properties now receive a sufficient level of water as they have now been removed from a shared supply pipe that was originally being used to supply ten separate properties. As a result of our improvements we have reduced the number of properties at risk by 38% since 2016/17 and by 18% throughout this reporting period to date.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Customers can compare our performance on low water pressure against other companies in the industry here.

Customer contacts about bills

keyboard_arrow_right

Also known as:

Negative billing contacts

Mid-year actual:
705 Contacts/ year
Year-end target:
2,170 Contacts/ year
Year-end target on track?
Yes

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

This is how we measure the number calls we have received that a customer would prefer not to make, in the sense that they are dissatisfied because they are experiencing a problem or concern, are making a repeat or chase call, or want to complain.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

The decrease in negative billing contacts is, for this year, partly as a direct result of the ‘10 a week program’ that was put into place to proactively ‘clear down’ open customer contact jobs. Following the introduction of this programme we were able to reduce the numbers of customers having to chase us for a resolution of an issue.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Customers can find out more information on their water bill here and further information about online billing here.

Negative water quality contacts

keyboard_arrow_right
Mid-year actual:
1,324 Contacts/ year
Year-end target:
2,221 Contacts/ year
Year-end target on track?
Yes

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

It is important that our water not only meets stringent standards but is also good to drink. We know that the taste and appearance of our customers' tap water is something which they value highly. We therefore measure the total number of customer contacts (telephone, letter and email) about the appearance, taste and odour of the water for the previous calendar year.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

The number of contacts for the appearance of our customers' water remains the greatest proportion of our overall contacts. Despite significant activity on the network, including an ambitious mains renovation programme, the number has reduced compared to the previous year. We have done so through improvements in our network monitoring (such as installing pressure monitors into every district meter area and flow loggers into every waste water meter district); by doing so we able to understand more intelligently how water moves around our network and thus enabling us to take action to reduce areas where there is little water movement. It is in these areas of low water movement that sediment can accumulate, which can then understandably generate customer contacts about the appearance of water.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Customers can learn more about the issues that may affect your water quality here.

Customers can compare our performance on appearance contacts against other companies in the industry here and our performance on taste/odour contacts against other companies in the industry here.

Percentage of customers in water poverty

keyboard_arrow_right
Mid-year actual:
n/a
Year-end target:
1.8%
Year-end target on track?
Yes

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

Water poverty is defined as the percentage of customers within our supply area for whom their water bill represents more than 2% of their disposable income, defined as gross income less income tax. This measure allows us to understand the impact of our bills on our customers. To calculate this we use a population analytics model to estimate the gross percentage of customers in water poverty, and then deduct those customers who we support through our Assist social tariff.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

This measure is based on annual calculations, but we are confident about our future performance based on our outperformance to date. We currently support 17,790 customers through our social tariffs; in the first six months of 2019/20 we have accepted a further 2,170 customers onto our social tariffs:

  • An additional 1347 have been accepted our ‘Assist’ social tariff. This tariff offers significant bill discounts to those customers least able to afford their bill, following a means assessment;
  • An additional 89 have been accepted onto our WaterSure Plus metered tariff. This tariff is for metered customers in receipt of certain benefits and are defined by the government as ‘vulnerable’, either because they have a medical condition or a large family; and
  • An additional 734 have been accepted our Pension Credit social tariff. This tariff gives a 20% discount on water bills to customers who live in a household where all members over the age of 18 are in receipt of Pension Credit.

We are committed to ensuring that those who struggle to pay will be given the help they need.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Customers can find further information and support on the range of social tariffs we have available on our website here.

Customers can find out how our social contract initiatives are contributing to providing extra care services, social tariffs and debt advice here.

Customer water consumption

keyboard_arrow_right

Also known as:

Per capita consumption (PCC)

Mid-year actual:
163.1 Litres/ person/ day
Year-end target:
142.0 Litres/ person/ day
Year-end target on track?
No

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

This is how we measure how much water our customers use every year. It is defined as the average amount of water used by each person each day. By knowing this information, the intention is to encourage behaviours to reduce the amount of water we use, thereby helping customers save money for the future and further adapt to the challenges of climate change.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

One of the biggest challenges we face is customer perception and their understanding of the value of water, and in how we work with customers and other stakeholders to educate them on demand management and the benefits of water efficiency. Our future water availability and keeping water in the environment relies heavily on customers, consumers and communities really understanding the value of water and by working with us to make sure we have a better, more resilient future. We have already instigated the creation of the Resource West partnership with University of West of England (UWE), Bristol Waste, Bristol Energy and other organisations to enhance the promotion of water efficiency in our supply area.

During 2017/18 we agreed with Ofwat a number of changes to how we report on our performance, including on per capita consumption. Without taking into account technical changes, our per capita consumption performance is 160.6 litres per person per day.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Customers can compare our performance on the average amount of water used by each household each day against other companies in the industry here.

Customers can find out how our social contract initiatives are contributing to encouraging customers to reduce their water consumption here.

Further information on reducing water consumption, including on finding our more about our wide range of free water saving products, that could help customers save money, can be found here.

Population at risk of asset failure

keyboard_arrow_right

Also known as:

Population in centres >25,000 at risk from asset failure

Mid-year actual:
9,063 People at risk (Southern Resilience Scheme Completed)
Year-end target:
9,063 People at risk
Year-end target on track?
Yes

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

We aim to provide a resilient supply of water to our customers, all year round. A resilient supply means that we are able to cope with extreme or unusual events, and this is measured by the number of people (in supply areas of more than 25,000 consumers) at risk from the failure of a single source above ground asset, such as a treatment works.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

The successful delivery of the Southern Resilience Scheme in March 2018 (a £27m water infrastructure project) has significantly reduced the number of consumers at risk from 288,589 to 9,063 across our supply area including Weston-Super- Mare, Cheddar, Burnham-on-Sea and Glastonbury and the northern part of Bristol. The scheme involved constructing 30 kilometres of new mains to reinforce and support our southern supply area. The scheme means that if there is an emergency we can get our customers’ water supply back much more quickly.

Raw water quality

keyboard_arrow_right

Also known as:

Raw water quality of sources

Mid-year actual:
-23%
Year-end target:
+/-<+10% for >2 years
Year-end target on track?
Yes

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

The quality of our water sources, particularly in the Mendip lakes, can be impacted due to nutrients and sediment that can enter the watercourses from land and activities in the catchment area of the source.  This measure is an assessment of the quality of our raw water sources that are at risk of deterioration due to increased levels of pesticides and nutrients in their catchments. This is measured as the percentage of the previous reporting period’s baseline aggregate of algal bloom frequency.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

Similarly to last year, we have seen an unusually warm and dry year; normally dry, sunny and warm summer weather would be ideal conditions for algal blooms. However, the mid-year numbers suggests that our catchment management initiatives have been much more successful than expected in improving water quality. This means that water will not be as expensive to treat as would have been the case had algal bloom frequency continue to increase as it did in the previous reporting period. It also means that the ecological condition should be more favourable than would be the case had the algae been allowed to continue to proliferate. This is important as the reservoirs are nationally, and in the case of Chew Valley Reservoir, internationally designated habitats (SSSI and SPA).

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Customers can find further information on our catchment management initiatives here.

Satisfaction from surveys

keyboard_arrow_right
Mid-year actual:
n/a
Year-end target:
>93%
Year-end target on track?
No

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

This measure relates to the percentage of customers responding to our annual satisfaction survey who rate their satisfaction in respect of our service as excellent, very good or good. This is different from our other customer measures as most of the customers surveyed will not have had direct contact with us, apart from receiving their annual bill.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

This measure is based on annual calculations. Despite the challenging target, we are continuing to improve our performance for our annual survey year on year; there has been a continuing upwards trend since 2015 and results from the Consumer Council for Water's report 'Water Matters' are extremely positive. Water Matters in an annual survey which compares our service to other water companies in the UK and we ranked on top of the league table for overall satisfaction with water supply with 97% satisfaction. We have ranked in the upper quartile in the CCWater Matters survey for the last two years.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Customers can find out how our social contract initiatives are enabling us to work collaboratively with community groups to address issues that impact the well-being of the community here.

Security of Supply Index (SOSI)

keyboard_arrow_right
Mid-year actual:
n/a
Year-end target:
100 Index points
Year-end target on track?
Yes

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

One of our customers' most important requirements is an unrestricted water supply. Our performance of this is measured by the frequency of supply restrictions during periods of water shortages, known as the 'security of supply index' (SOSI). This takes into account the supply of water that we have available and the demand from our customers, calculated as the proportion of dry weather demand that can be met by the water available for use.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

This measure is based on annual calculations but we are confident about our future performance; we have reported a SOSI value of 100 for every year to date in this reporting period, indicating a sufficient supply with no restrictions during dry weather. This is due to our effective planning to ensure that available supply meets demand. If a score of less than 100 had been calculated, this would indicate that there is a higher risk of water use restrictions for our customers in that year.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Further information on our future plans to take action to to reduce demand for water can be found in our Water Resources Management Plan here.

Supply interruptions

keyboard_arrow_right

Also known as:

Unplanned customer minutes lost

Mid-year actual:
7.6 Mins/ property/year
Year-end target:
12.2 Mins/ property/year
Year-end target on track?
No

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

This measures the total number of minutes that customers have been without a supply of water in the year, through unplanned interruptions, divided by the total number of properties served by the company in the year. Keeping water flowing is an essential part of our role as a water company and by using this measurement we aim to minimise supply interruptions to our customers.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

The mid-year reported figure of 7.6 minutes includes a contribution of 1.6 minutes for a single incident on the Royate Hill Trunk main in July 2019. Throughout 2019 we have instigated a new strategy, designed to focus responses to supply interruptions on keeping customers in supply instead of our old approach, which was to prioritise the repair of the faults that lead to the supply interruptions. As part of this strategy, new techniques and equipment have been successfully deployed on a number of unplanned events, avoiding interruptions to supply, including direct infusion through tankers, as well as the temporary deployment of 'Arlington' tanks which enable pumping of water directly to a number of customers.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Customers can compare our performance on supply interruptions against other companies in the industry here.

Total carbon emissions

keyboard_arrow_right
Mid-year actual:
11Kg/CO2e/ person
Year-end target:
20Kg/CO2e/ person
Year-end target on track?
Yes

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

This represents the total carbon emissions produced by the Company and contractors working on our behalf. We calculate our carbon emissions through the electrical energy we use in our operations, our consumption of gas and the fuel we use for transport, plant operation and site heating.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

Our performance is predominantly driven by the change in the national grid electrify factor used to compute emissions, which is outside the Company’s control. However other influential factors include the wet weather over the past year causing a reduction in business demand, preferential use of sources from which water can be transported gravitationally, reduced leakage and our energy optimisation programme, have all helped to reduce carbon emissions. As a result we are forecasting to meet this year’s target.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Customers can compare our performance on operational greenhouse gas emissions against other companies in the industry here.

Turbidity at our treatment works

keyboard_arrow_right
Mid-year actual:
0 Incidents
Year-end target:
0 Incidents
Year-end target on track?
Yes

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

Turbidity is a measure of the cloudiness of water, normally caused by suspended minerals. It is an important water quality control parameter at our water treatment works. Factors such as turbidity affect the effectiveness of disinfection.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

Water quality is at the heart of our monitoring and maintenance of our treatment works, to ensure high standards are maintained in our assets. We have a long track record of achieving zero turbidity events. We are forecasting to again be successful in ensuring consistently good treated water enters our supply system by preventing any turbidity failures this year.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Customers can learn more about the issues that may affect your water quality here.

Value for money

keyboard_arrow_right
Mid-year actual:
76%
Year-end target:
72%
Year-end target on track?
Yes

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

This measure relates to the percentage of customers who consider that we provide good value for money, based on their responses to customer surveys.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

Value for money is an important concept in measuring whether customers consider that the service that we provide is worth what they pay for it. We are pleased to report we anticipate that will meet our target for this year. Regardless of our promising performance in the first half of the year, we are continuously reviewing all causes of customer dissatisfaction and this has helped us to find areas that we can improve on, such as the introduction of real time feedback, ‘Live Chat’, a redesign of our bill and the increased use of social media to keep customers informed of incidents and planned works.

Waste disposal compliance

keyboard_arrow_right
Mid-year actual:
98%
Year-end target:
100%
Year-end target on track?
No

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

This measures the number of Bristol Water samples taken of discharged trade effluent (poisonous, noxious or polluting matter) from designated Company sample points that comply with the consent requirements in the Environment Agency (EA) permits. Trade effluent, if not controlled, can have harmful effects, which include harm to the environment, particularly our surrounding rivers, streams and estuaries.

Performance

keyboard_arrow_right

Our performance is significantly impacted by the introduction of a discharge consent (which came into force from 1 February 2018) at Blagdon fisheries (downstream of the trout rearing pens). Compliance for samples collected at this site has proved challenging, particularly with respect to ammonium, dissolved oxygen and phosphate parameters. We are continuing to work with the EA to assess how to measure the environmental need at this site, which is subject to significant seasonal changes in the quality of the various inflows which supply the pens, including Blagdon Lake and a number of springs. The introduction of this consent has meant that the number of compliance failures has increased, even though improvements at other major treatment sites such as Purton have reduced the number of failures elsewhere.

close

Loading...

Also Known As:

Generating...

The content is loading.

The content you requested is loading, please wait...