Bristol Water performance in 2017/18

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
Negative
billing
contacts
Hosepipe ban
frequency
Percentage of customers
in water poverty
Low pressure
Per Capita
Consumption (PCC)
Level of
metering
Customer satisfaction
Satisfaction from surveys
Total carbon
emissions
Bursts
Waste disposal
compliance
Compliance with water
quality standards
Leakage
Supply interruptions
Ease of contact
Value for money
  • Key
  • Target Missed
  • Target Met

Biodiversity index

keyboard_arrow_right
Target:
17,651 index points
Actual:
17,657 index points
Target met?
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 enhancing the natural environment by using the index to quantify the impact of our actions on the broader environment. This calculation and method is a tool we will continue to develop , using it to measure our performance on habitat protection and enhancement.

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

We have met our target for this year for this measure. There has been an improving trend in our biodiversity improvement since we created this measure in 2014-15. Working with our partners such as Avon Wildlife Trust, local schools and land owners we have created new habitats which will improve the biodiversity and support wildlife across a wider stretch of the landscape we serve.

Bursts

keyboard_arrow_right
Target:
950 burst pipes
Actual:
1,222 burst pipes
Target met?
No

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.

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

As a result of the adverse weather conditions during late February/early March, a significant impact on the outbreak of burst mains was seen in a relatively short period. This resulted in over 250 burst mains in March 2018, of which more than 70% occurred in the first week alone. As a comparison, the 5-year average for burst mains in the month of March is 68.

Without these additional bursts due to the severe weather, we estimate that mains bursts would have been at 1,043 (rather than the 1,222 total for 2017/18) and at a similar level to the previous year.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

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)

Target:
100%
Actual:
99.93%
Target met?
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. We measure this via Mean Zonal Compliance (MZC), a measure that the Drinking Water Inspectorate (DWI) uses to assess overall water quality compliance. It is based on 39 individual parameters that cover various aspects of risk to public health.

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

Our Water Quality team collects samples 365 days a year from across our 2,400 square kilometre supply area to ensure that water quality is checked against the stringent legal standards from source to customers' taps.

During 2017 our sampling at customer properties identified four nickel failures associated with internal plumbing deficiencies (nickel is used in the chromium plating process for taps and can leach into the water supply). Although these failures were solely attributable to plumbing issues within customer properties, they had the effect of reducing our MZC figure from 99.98% down to 99.93%.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

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

Customer satisfaction

keyboard_arrow_right

Also known as:

Service incentive mechanism (SIM)

Target:
86.0/100
Actual:
83.4/100
Target met?
No

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

This is Ofwat’s measure 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.

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

Our performance is below the level where we would have expected to be when we started the year, primarily due, to four significant incidents (Sea Mills burst, Willsbridge burst, Clevedon precautionary boil water notice and the freeze/thaw related supply interruption incidents at the end of the year) which have impacted significantly on this measure. We estimate that we received an additional 10,837 contacts as a result of these incidents alone. We have worked throughout the year on a number of projects to drive improvement for the 2017/18 results but the impact was not enough to mitigate the effects of these incidents.

We undertook a range of lessons learnt research after the incidents to understand how we can improve our response to similar events in future. This research showed that customers were generally satisfied with our response. Customers who were dissatisfied with our response to the bursts at Sea Mills and Willsbridge cited the need to improve the distribution of bottled water to those in need. We took this into account when responding to the precautionary boil water notice in Clevedon and found that this improved customer satisfaction.

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
Target:
96.5%
Actual:
93.1%
Target met?
No

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

This is the percentage of our customers who consider that we are easy to contact over the phone.

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

In 2017/18, 93.1% of consumers surveyed considered that it was easy to contact us by phone.

Our analysis suggests that our score was adversely impacted by the precautionary boil water notice in Clevedon in January 2018,. This may have been due to the high volume of calls from the weeks following our incident in January.

To score highly in this measure, customers expect us to have quick and accurate information so we are working on improvements to make information more easily available to our employees so they can answer questions consistently and correctly the first time.

Emergency maintenance

keyboard_arrow_right

Also known as:

Unplanned maintenance events

Target:
3,976 events
Actual:
3,279 events
Target met?
Yes

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

This is the total number of unplanned maintenance events occurring throughout the year as a result of equipment failure or reduced asset performance.

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

We recorded 3,279 unplanned maintenance events during 2017-18, which is successfully lower than our target of 3,976. This is an indicator of the long-term health of our assets.

Hosepipe ban frequency

keyboard_arrow_right
Target:
10.2 days
Actual:
3.1 days
Target met?
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.

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

We have for the third consecutive year, reported a hosepipe ban risk frequency that is better than our target. It has been 28 years since we last introduced a hosepipe ban (in 1990) and we continue to outperform our target for this measure.

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
Target:
45 mega litres/day
Actual:
49.6 mega litres/day
Target met?
No

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

Water is supplied to our customers’ homes through thousands of kilometres of underground pipes. For various reasons, 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.

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

We have set ourselves challenging leakage targets; to reduce leakage by 12% between 2015 and 2020. The actual leakage level for 2017/18 was 46.6 Ml/day.

This year we have seen an unusual increase in the number of small leakage events, such as at customer stop-taps, and responding to this required a change of approach. Leakage levels significantly increased in March due to initial cold and snowy weather conditions in the first couple of days of the month, which had an impact on response times and burst mains, followed by a rapid thaw period, which had a significant impact on the outbreak of burst mains in a relatively short period. However the combination of targeted investment in our network, improved monitoring and control, and our proactive approach to leakage reduction initiatives, such as pressure management, continues to see us actively working to reduce leakage levels further.

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 leakage performance is 49.6 Ml/day. As this is a higher number than the actual leakage level, we have committed to calculating financial incentives 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

Target:
58.8%
Actual:
52.7%
Target met?
No

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

We encourage our customers to be more efficient in the way they use water by increasing the number of customers who are billed based on their actual consumption of water. We measure this by meter penetration, expressed as the percentage of customers who are billed based on a water meter installed at their property.

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

During 2017-18 properties and population numbers have continued to increase at a steady rate (1% p.a.). At 4,912, household new property connections have been at their highest rate for the last 7 years (an average annual rise of 13%). Meter optants, which is when a customer requests the installation of a meter, have dropped by 14% on last year (5,263 in 2016/17 and 4,551 in 2017/18), despite targeted initiatives to promote domestic metering, such as our ‘Beat the Bill’ campaign. Selective metering, on change of occupier, has shown a dramatic increase on the previous year of 175% (from 3,712 to 10,202) and reflects escalation of our efforts to meet its meter penetration commitments for the period.

We have also set up a dedicated project “Meter 66” to provide the increased focus that delivering our challenging metering target for the next two years requires. This team will continue the work we have already done to improve our metering processes, as we now work towards installing over 70,000 meters to meet our March 2020 target of 65.9%.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

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

Low Pressure

keyboard_arrow_right
Target:
69 properties at risk of low pressure
Actual:
65 properties at risk of low pressure
Target met?
Yes

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

Water pressure determines the water flow from customer taps. This is measured as the total number of properties in our area of water supply which, at the end of the year, have received, and are likely to continue to receive, a pressure or flow below the required minimum level.

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

It is unlikely that customers will experience water pressure below the minimum standard. There were a total of 94 properties identified as receiving low pressure last year. We have successfully reduced this number to 65, which is below our target for this year.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

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

Negative billing contacts

keyboard_arrow_right
Target:
2,315 contacts/year
Actual:
2,300 contacts/year
Target met?
Yes

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

Our customers want bills that are accurate, clearly presented and easy to understand. We monitor this by measuring a subset of the number of ‘unwanted’ billing contacts we receive. ‘Unwanted’ is the term used by Ofwat in its quantitative SIM measures for calls which the 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.

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

We received 2,300 contacts in 2017-18, which is a significant improvement on the number of complaints (3,096) we received last year. We increasingly use new contact channels as customer expectations are shaped by new technology, whilst still providing a great service for those who want to contact us through traditional routes. We plan to reduce complaints further by meeting individual customer needs first time, and provide a great experience however they get in touch.

Negative water quality contacts

keyboard_arrow_right
Target:
2,322 contacts/year
Actual:
1,711 contacts/year
Target met?
Yes

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

We know that the taste and appearance of our customers’ tap water is something which they value highly. This measures the number of customer complaints we receive each year in relation to the taste, odour and appearance of water supplied.

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

We received 1,711 negative water quality contacts during 2017, which is better than our target of 2,322. There has been a reducing trend in the number of contacts we have received over the last few years.

Our performance has benefitted from our trunk mains relining/ replacement programme, which started in 2015, and the associated systematic flushing of the distribution mains supplied from these trunk mains. The renovation of the trunk mains reduced the amount of corrosion debris seeding our network and the associated systematic flushing programme has removed historic corrosion debris, both of which cause discoloured water. Consequently, we are getting a cleaner network and a much-reduced risk of discoloured water contacts when there is any disturbance to water flows caused by burst mains.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

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
Target:
1.9%
Actual:
0.0%
Target met?
Yes

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

This 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.

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

As a result of our work we are proud to report that 0% of our customers are in water poverty. By using the results of this measure, we have been able to offer advice, assistance schemes and capped tariffs, known as ‘social tariffs’ (including our Assist tariff, WaterSure Plus and Pension credit tariff) to customers who fall within this category.

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.

Per capita consumption (PCC)

keyboard_arrow_right
Target:
143.6 litres/person/day
Actual:
146.3 litres/person/day
Target met?
No

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

This is defined as the average amount of water used by each person each day. It measures how much water we use every year. 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.

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

We want to help customers to reduce water consumption, through supportive and voluntary measures. However, we recognise that we have to do more to help customers reduce water consumption in line with our long-term ambition to reach 110 litres per person per day by 2045.

In order to improve on our performance, our household customers receive a seasonal newsletter called Watertalk that offers advice to help reduce water consumption as well as money saving tips. In addition, we also have water saving kits available on request. We have also installed free water fountains in the centre of Bristol and offered a ‘water bar’ at local festivals and events, to help promote the benefits of water. Despite these initiatives, we have missed our target for this year.

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 144.5 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.

Population at risk of asset failure

keyboard_arrow_right

Also known as:

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

Target:
9,063 people at risk
Actual:
9,063 people at risk
Target met?
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 at risk from the failure of a single source above ground asset, such as a treatment works is unable to operate or a source is contaminated (in supply areas of more than 25,000 consumers).

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

The Southern Resilience Scheme is a £27 million water infrastructure project that provides improved security of supply to over 280,000 customers across our supply area, including Weston-super-Mare, Cheddar, Burnham and Glastonbury and the southern part of Bristol. We have reduced the number of consumers in population centres of over 25,000 people at risk from 288,589 to 9,063, by undertaking this major scheme to construct 30 kilometres of new mains to reinforce and support our southern supply area.

This new network gives us increased flexibility and will allow us to move water from our northern sources into our southern region in the event of a loss of supply, or water back up to Bristol if we lose our northern supply. Put simply, the Scheme means if there is an emergency we can get you back in water much, much quicker.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Further information on the Southern Resilience Scheme can be found here.

Raw water quality

keyboard_arrow_right

Also known as:

Raw water quality of sources

Target:
+/-≤10%
Actual:
-1
Target met?
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 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.

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

We have been working with local landholders and farmers to identify where these raw water quality issues can be addressed and through our partnership programmes with key stakeholders, such as the Mendip Lakes Partnership, we are able to work together on these issues. The partners involved include Natural England, the Environment Agency, Wessex Water, Avon Wildlife Trust, Farming & Wildlife Advisory Group and Catchment Sensitive Farming. We are continuing to hold a range of successful farm engagement and training sessions with landholders in the key catchment areas. We monitor the quality of water in the Mendip reservoirs and this monitoring has indicated that our catchment management programme is having a progressive beneficial effect on water quality, with a gradual reduction in the level of algal blooms experienced in these water sources.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

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

Satisfaction from surveys

keyboard_arrow_right

Also known as:

General satisfaction from surveys

Target:
93%
Actual:
87%
Target met?
No

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

This is the percentage of our customers responding to our annual satisfaction survey who rate our service as excellent, very good or good.

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

Our performance is below the level where we would have expected to be when we started the year as four incidents (Sea Mills burst, Willsbridge burst, Clevedon boil notice and the freeze/thaw related supply interruption incidents at the end of the year) have impacted significantly on this measure. We have worked throughout the year on a number of projects to drive improvement for the 2017/18 results but the impact was not enough to mitigate the effects of incidents.

A selection of the improvements that we introduced during 2017/18 to improve customer satisfaction included a bill redesign, real time feedback, ‘Live Chat’ and the increased use of social media, with over 400,000 customers reached through Facebook during the Clevedon boil notice and a new customer charter across Bristol Water and our network sub-contractors.

Security of Supply Index (SOSI)

keyboard_arrow_right
Target:
100%
Actual:
100%
Target met?
Yes

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

One of our customers’ most important requirements is an unrestricted water supply and we have a duty to maintain the security of our water supplies. Our performance of this is measured by our level of service on the frequency of supply restrictions during periods of water shortages, measured using the ‘security of supply index’ (SOSI). If a score of less than 100 is calculated, this would indicate that there could have been a higher risk of water use restrictions for our customers that year.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

We have reported a SOSI value of 100 for 2017/18 (and every year to date in AMP6), indicating our customers can expect a sufficient supply of water, with no restrictions.

Supply interruptions

keyboard_arrow_right

Also known as:

Unplanned customer minutes lost

Target:
12.8 mins/property/year
Actual:
73.7 mins/property/year
Target met?
No

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

Keeping water flowing is an essential part of our role as a water company. This is measured as 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.

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

Our performance has been adversely affected by a number of exceptional incidents that took place over the last 12 months; in particular the Willsbridge burst in May 2017 caused an interruption to 35,000 customers and added 54.74 minutes to our performance figure. Other significant interruptions occurred at Sea Mills, Withywood (1.38 mins) and Meare (0.89 mins). In addition, this year we encountered water supply issues during the freeze and thaw surrounding the ‘Beast from the East’ severe weather in March.

Additional information

keyboard_arrow_right

Further information on the Willsbridge burst was included in our Mid-Year Performance Report which can be found here.

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

Total carbon emissions

keyboard_arrow_right
Target:
23 kg/CO2e/person
Actual:
28 kg/CO2e/person
Target met?
No

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

This is the total carbon emissions of 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. This equals our annual operational greenhouse gas emissions, based on the Carbon Accounting Workbook and is expressed in kilograms of CO2 (carbon dioxide) equivalent divided by the population supplied.

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

This continues to be a challenging target for the Company to achieve, as the factors that influence this performance commitment are largely outside of our control.

One key measure of our environmental impact is our carbon emissions. We use almost 80 million kilowatt hours of electrical energy to treat and distribute water. This accounts for almost 90% of our total carbon footprint. We can play our part in reducing the carbon emissions associated with energy use by improved pumping efficiency; reducing leakage and helping our customers use water more efficiently. This, together with improved energy efficiency of our buildings and vehicle fleet, and development of renewable energy sources, enables us to manage those aspects of our carbon footprint that we can control.

Turbidity at our treatment works

keyboard_arrow_right
Target:
0 incidents
Actual:
0 incidents
Target met?
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 at our water treatment works.

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

We have a long track record of achieving zero turbidity events and for 2017/18 we have again met our target, which means we have again been successful in ensuring consistently good treated water enters our supply system.

Value for money

keyboard_arrow_right
Target:
71%
Actual:
69%
Target met?
No

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

This is the percentage of our customers who consider that we provide good value for money.

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

Despite having below average customer water bills compared to the rest of the industry, our performance for this year has declined from last year’s reported performance.

The measures we are taking to improve overall affordability across our entire customer base involve:

  • Finding efficiencies by improving our digital offering and leveraging new technologies to reduce our cost to serve
  • Continuing to refine our processes for bad debt reduction
  • Helping customers find ways to reduce their own bills through reducing their consumption

Waste disposal compliance

keyboard_arrow_right
Target:
100%
Actual:
98%
Target met?
No

Definition

keyboard_arrow_right

This measures the percentage compliance as per by the number of Bristol Water samples taken of discharged trade effluent from designated Company sample points that meet the consent requirements in the Environment Agency (EA) permits.

Commentary

keyboard_arrow_right

Although we failed to meet our target for this year, over 98% of the samples we took were fully compliant with the discharge consent conditions. This shows a good level of improvement compared to the performance during 2016/17.

Our Solutions Engineering Team are looking at the reasons for the small number of failures we’ve had this year with a view of implementing remedial measures to drive our compliance figure higher.

close

Loading...

Also Known As:

Generating...

The content is loading.

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