water resource management plan annual report 2019-20 iwnl water resource management plan, annual...

1 | P a g e

Water Resource

Management Plan

Annual Report 2019-20

Independent Water Networks Ltd.

June 2020

IWNL Water Resource Management Plan, Annual Report 2019-20

1 | P a g e

Table of Contents

1 Executive Summary; Supply-Demand Balance .......................... 3

2 Introduction ............................................................................. 5

2.1 Independent Water Network Limited (IWNL) ................................................................. 5

2.2 IWNL Water Resource Zones.......................................................................................... 5

2.3 New Sites ...................................................................................................................... 7

3 Supply ...................................................................................... 9

3.1 Bulk Supply Agreements ................................................................................................ 9

3.2 Weather Events. .......................................................................................................... 11

3.3 Supply Forecast ........................................................................................................... 11

3.4 Levels of Service .......................................................................................................... 11

4 Demand .................................................................................. 12

4.1 Consumption .............................................................................................................. 12

4.2 Weather Events ........................................................................................................... 13

4.3 Per Capita Consumption (PCC) ..................................................................................... 13

4.4 Demand Forecast ........................................................................................................ 16

4.5 Leakage ...................................................................................................................... 16

5 Headroom ............................................................................... 21

5.1 Target Headroom ........................................................................................................ 21

6 Customers .............................................................................. 22

6.1 Properties ................................................................................................................... 22

6.2 Occupancy Rates and Population ................................................................................. 23

6.3 Metering ..................................................................................................................... 24

7 Forward Look ......................................................................... 25

8 Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations ..................................... 26

Appendix ..................................................................................... 27

Appendix 1 ............................................................................................................................. 27


2 | P a g e

List of Tables Table 1: Supply-demand balance (ML/d) by WRZ 2019-20..................................................................... 3

Table 2: New IWNL WRZ 2019-20. .......................................................................................................... 8

Table 3: Agreed Limits to the bulk supply by WRZ and volume imported. ............................................. 9

Table 4: Measured household and non-household consumption (ML/d) by WRZ 2019-2020. ............. 12

Table 5: Average per capita consumption (l/pp/d) by WRZ 2019-20. .................................................. 14

Table 6: Average and difference between WRZ PCC (l/pp/d) using WRAR 2018-19 and 2019-20. ...... 15

Table 7: Rainwater harvesting tanks at Kings Cross, yearly comparison of meter readings. ............... 15

Table 8 : Total leakage and target leakage by WRZ 2019-20. .............................................................. 17

Table 9: Leakage by WRZ 2019-20. ....................................................................................................... 18

Table 10: Target headroom (ML/d) by WRZ using data from 2019 WRMP and WRAR 2019-20. ........ 21

Table 11: Measured household properties by WRZ 2019-20. ............................................................... 22

Table 12: Measured household population by WRZ 2019-20. .............................................................. 23

Table 13 IWNL’s level of service for Anglian Water area. ..................................................................... 27

Table 14: IWNL’s level of service for Thames Water area. ................................................................... 27

Table 15: IWNL’s level of service for Severn Trent Water area. ............................................................ 28

Table 16: IWNL’s level of service Southern Water area. ....................................................................... 28

Table 17: IWNL’s level of service for Affinity Water area. .................................................................... 28

Table 18: IWNL’s level of service for South East Water area. ............................................................... 29

Table 19: IWNL's level of service for Bristol Water area. ...................................................................... 29

Table 20: IWNL's level of service for Northumbrian area. .................................................................... 29

Table 21: IWNL’s level of service for Yorkshire Water area. ................................................................. 30

Table 22: IWNL’s level of service for Essex and Suffolk area. ............................................................... 30

List of Figures Figure 1: A map of the UK illustrating the locations of IWNL’s WRZ. ..................................................... 6

Figure 2: A map of IWNL’s WRZs in the Northern region. ....................................................................... 6

Figure 3: A map of IWNL’s WRZ for Southern regions. ........................................................................... 7

Figure 4: A map of IWNL’s WRZ in the Central and South West region. ................................................. 7

Figure 5: A graph showing the bulk supply agreement and volume imported by WRZ, comparing data

from WRAR 2018-19 and 2019-20. ............................................................................................... 10

Figure 6: A graph illustrating the measured and non-measured household consumption by WRZ, using

data from WRAR 2018-19 and 2019-20. ....................................................................................... 13

Figure 7: Graph illustrating the average per capita consumption (l/pp/d) by WRZ, using data from

WRAR 2017-18, 2018-19 and 2019-20.......................................................................................... 16

Figure 8: A graph of the distribution losses and total leakage by WZR using data from WRAR 2018-19

and 2019-20. ................................................................................................................................. 19

Figure 9: A graph of the leakage (l/prop/day) by WRZ using figures from WRAR 2018-19 and 2019-20.

...................................................................................................................................................... 20

Figure 10: A graph displaying the percentage of measured households by WRZ using data from WRAR

208-19 and 2019-20. ..................................................................................................................... 23


3 | P a g e

1 Executive Summary; Supply-Demand Balance

Independent Water Networks’ Water Resource Annual Review (WRAR) 2019 uses data obtained from

bulk supply and customer meters to calculate the supply and demand in our Water Resource Zones

(WRZ). IWNL’s WRAR19-20 defines the year as a normal year. Table 1 shows the supply-demand

balance for each WRZ in 2019-20 compared to the supply-demand balance in our 2019 Water

Resource Management Plan (WRMP) submission.

For all zones, the supply-demand balance is in surplus.

Table 1: Supply-demand balance (ML/d) by WRZ 2019-20.

IWNL Water Resource Zone Incumbent Water Resource

Zone

Supply-Demand Balance 2019/20

Estimate

(ML/d)

Actual

(ML/d)

Change

(ML/d)

Oakham Severn Trent Water, Rutland

WRZ 0.08 0.19 0.11

Priors Hall Anglian Water,

Ruthamford North WRZ

2.42 2.42 0.00

Long Croft Road (Little Stanion) 0.24 0.19 -0.05

Great Billing 0.00 0.01 0.01

Brooklands + Broughton

Grounds Lane

Anglian Water,

Ruthamford Central WRZ 0.84 0.92 0.08

Berryfields

Thames Water, Slough,

Wycombe and Aylesbury

WRZ

0.66 0.73 0.07

The Bridge

Thames Water, London WRZ

0.04 0.04 0.00

Kings Cross 1.57 2.14 0.57

GMV 0.44 0.48 0.04

Ebbsfleet, Castlehill 0.42 0.35 -0.07

NES Crawley Southern Water, Sussex

North WRZ 0.49 0.15 -0.34

Martello Lakes Affinity Water, Dour WRZ 0.48 0.48 0.00

Bishop’s Stortford Affinity Water, Stort WRZ 0.96 0.97 0.01

Chilmington Green South East Water, Ashford

WRZ 2.52 2.74 0.22

Bidwell West Affinity Water, Lee WRZ NAV

Licence

not

awarded

in 2019

WRMP

0.09

Parklands Bristol Water, WRZ 0.70

Throckley Northumbrian Water,

Kielder WRZ

0.30

Lambton Park 0.15

Cockering Road South East Water, WRZ8 0.44

Blythe Valley Severn Trent Water,

Strategic Grid

0.28

Europa Way 0.27


4 | P a g e

IWNL Water Resource Zone Incumbent Water Resource

Zone

Supply-Demand Balance 2019/20

Estimate

(ML/d)

Actual

(ML/d)

Change

(ML/d)

Brough Yorkshire Water, Grid

Surface Water Zone NAV

Licence

not

awarded

in 2019

WRMP

0.20

Pitty Close Farm 0.23

North Whiteley

Southern Water,

Southampton East,

Hampshire WRZ

0.57

Limebrook Way Essex and Suffolk Water,

Essex, WRZ

0.33

Clipstone Park Anglian Water, Ruthamford

South WRZ

2.53

TOTAL 18.13


5 | P a g e

2 Introduction

2.1 Independent Water Network Limited (IWNL)

Independent Water Networks (IWNL) is a subsidiary company within the BUUK Infrastructure group

of companies. We refer to these companies in the document as the “Group”.

The Group is involved in project acquisition, management, design, construction, ownership, operation,

and maintenance of utility networks and associated site infrastructure, serving new developments

throughout the UK mainland.

The Group focuses primarily on the new build market and is the leading independent utility and

infrastructure provider in the UK.

The Group has broadly divided its activities between the regulated ownership of utility network assets

and the unregulated provision of utility infrastructure and asset management services. The Group

owns assets at over 7,000 sites across England, Scotland and Wales which include gas, electric, water,

wastewater, district heating and fibre networks. IWNL only forms a small part of the Group, with 25

sites currently live. The WRZ of the live sites are highlighted in Figure 1 below.

2.2 IWNL Water Resource Zones

A Water Resource Zone (WRZ) is defined as the largest area in which all water resources can be shared

and has the same supply risk and levels of service for the customers within it. Due to the nature of

IWNL, we have 25 WRZ which are shown in the figure below relative to the incumbent resource they

sit in.


6 | P a g e

Figure 1: A map of the UK illustrating the locations of IWNL’s WRZ.

Figure 2: A map of IWNL’s WRZs in the Northern region.


7 | P a g e

Figure 3: A map of IWNL’s WRZ for Southern regions.

Figure 4: A map of IWNL’s WRZ in the Central and South West region.

2.3 New Sites

In 2019-20, 12 new IWNL WRZ went live. Details of the sites are shown in Table 2. There are currently

no customers residing in the following new sites: Parklands, Cockering Road, Pitty Close Farm, North

Whiteley, and Lambton Park.

No changes have been made to our WRZ boundaries.


8 | P a g e

Table 2: New IWNL WRZ 2019-20.

IWNL

ref.

no.

Site Location

Incumbent

and

Incumbent

WRZ

Service(s) Date

granted

Date

commenced

Contract

Length

73193 Bidwell

West

Houghton

Regis

Affinity Water,

Lee WRZ

Water and

Waste 19/01/2018 06/06/2019 Indefinite

67828 Parklands Weston-

Super-Mare

Bristol Water,

WRZ Water 25/07/2018 06/02/2020 Indefinite

73134 Throckley Newcastle Northumbrian

Water, Kielder

WRZ

Water 13/07/2018 26/06/2019 Indefinite

73371 Lambton

Park Durham Water 27/11/2019 25/10/2019 Indefinite

73230 Cockering

Road Canterbury

South East

Water, WRZ8 Water 17/09/2018 27/06/2019

20 years and

can extend

73196 Blythe

Valley Solihull Severn Trent

Water,

Strategic Grid

Water and

Waste 12/07/2018 05/07/2019

23 years and

can extend

73208 Europa

Way Warwick Water 26/07/2018 04/07/2018

23 years and

can extend

73207 Brough North

Humberside

Yorkshire

Water, Grid

Surface Water

Zone

Water 08/10/2018 27/03/2019 23 years and

can extend

73348 Pitty Close

Farm Bradford Water 15/08/2019 14/11/2019

23 years and

can extend

73318 North

Whiteley Southampton

Southern

Water,

Southampton

East,

Hampshire

WRZ

Water 07/11/2019 06/12/2019 Indefinite

73228 Limebrook

Way Maldon

Essex and

Suffolk Water,

Essex WRZ

Water and

Waste 29/03/2019 07/09/2019

4 years and

can extend

73254 Clipstone

Park

Leighton

Buzzard

Anglian Water,

Ruthamford

South WRZ

Water 24/04/2019 27/06/2019 43 years and

can extend


9 | P a g e

3 Supply

3.1 Bulk Supply Agreements

IWNL does not own or operate water supply sources of its own. All supplies are bulk transfers from

the incumbent water companies. There are no exports out of IWNL supply areas.

The quantity of water to be made available in each WRZ has been negotiated with the incumbent

water company such that no supply-demand deficit is envisaged within the 25-year planning horizon.

Quantities are based on estimates of the total water requirement (baseline demand and operating

losses) in each inset area at projected final development, i.e. after all the currently proposed

development is complete. Quantities are defined in terms of an annual maximum volume in m3/year,

a maximum daily volume in m3/day and a maximum instantaneous flow in l/s. Values are set out in

separate bulk supply agreements between IWNL and incumbent water companies. The agreed and

actual import values are shown in Table 3.

Great Billing Bulk Supply Agreement was changed to increase the maximum daily volume from 0.05

to 0.08 (ML/d). This was due to a narrow supply demand balance.

Table 3: Agreed Limits to the bulk supply by WRZ and volume imported.

Site

Maximum

daily volume

(ML/d)

2019-20

Estimate

Volume

Imported

(ML/d)

Actual

Volume

Imported

(ML/d)

Difference

(ML/d)

Oakham 0.44 0.33 0.23 -0.10

Priors Hall 2.98 0.50 0.53 0.03

Long Croft Road (Little Stanion) 0.51 0.33 0.29 -0.04

Great Billing 0.08 0.05 0.07 0.02

Brooklands + Broughton Grounds

Lane 1.52 0.64 0.56 -0.08

Berryfields 1.80 1.05 0.98 -0.07

The Bridge 0.37 0.31 0.31 0.00

Kings Cross 3.56 1.78 1.27 -0.51

GMV 0.68 0.22 0.18 -0.04

Ebbsfleet, Castlehill 0.64 0.19 0.27 0.08

NES Crawley 0.37 0.19 0.21 0.02

Martello Lakes 0.53 0.05 0.04 -0.01

Bishop’s Stortford 1.11 0.14 0.13 -0.01

Chilmington Green 2.77 0.20 0.01 -0.19

Bidwell West 0.09 NAV Licence

not awarded

in 2019

WRMP

0.01 NAV Licence

not

awarded in

2019 WRMP

Parklands 0.70 0.00

Throckley 0.30 0.00

Lambton Park 0.15 0.00


10 | P a g e

Site

Maximum

daily volume

(ML/d)

2019-20

Estimate

Volume

Imported

(ML/d)

Actual

Volume

Imported

(ML/d)

Difference

(ML/d)

Cockering Road 0.45

NAV Licence

not awarded

in 2019

WRMP

0.01

NAV Licence

not

awarded in

2019 WRMP

Blythe Valley 0.28 0.00

Europa Way 0.28 0.00

Brough 0.2 0.00

Pitty Close Farm 0.23 0.00

North Whiteley 0.57 0.00

Limebrook Way 0.33 0.01

Clipstone Park 2.57 0.04

Total 23.51 4.92

Figure 5 illustrates the bulk supply agreement for each WRZ and the volume imported using 2018-19

and 2019-20 data. WRZ with an import value of 0 for 2019-20 have been omitted. The imported

volume will increase proportionally each year until the WRZ reaches 100% developed.

The Bridge and Great Billing are 100% developed; The Bridge has seen a decrease in volume imported

compared to 2018-19 and Great Billing is discussed further in Section 4.3.

Figure 5: A graph showing the bulk supply agreement and volume imported by WRZ, comparing data from WRAR 2018-19

and 2019-20.


11 | P a g e

3.2 Weather Events.

No impact on IWNL’s imports was observed due to weather events in 2019-20 (see 4.2 for demand

weather events commentary).

3.3 Supply Forecast

There are no changes to our supply forecast.

3.4 Levels of Service

A water company’s target level of service is the standard of service (effectively the reliability of supply)

that a customer can expect to receive. It is a form of contract between a water company and its

customers. IWNL’s level of service are aligned to those of the incumbent water companies.

The quantity of water to be supplied under the bulk supply agreements allow for unconstraint demand

in each WRZ to be supplied both now and in the future. However, the agreements also allow for

reductions in the bulk supply to be applied during drought.

IWNL’s level of service are therefore effectively aligned to those of the incumbent water companies

and the annual risk is unchanged throughout the planning period. We liaise with the incumbent

companies and monitor risks associated with our levels of service. See Appendix 1 for the incumbents’

and IWNL’s level of service.


12 | P a g e

4 Demand

4.1 Consumption

Consumption data has been obtained from customer meters; all IWNL’s properties are metered. Table

4 shows the household and non-household consumption by WRZ during 2019-20, compared to the

demand figures used in our 2019 WRMP.

Table 4: Measured household and non-household consumption (ML/d) by WRZ 2019-2020.

Site

Household Consumption 2019/20 Non- Household Consumption 2019/20

Estimate Actual Difference Estimate Actual Difference

Oakham 0.31 0.21 -0.1 0.01 0.00 -0.01

Priors Hall 0.49 0.37 -0.12 0.05 0.06 0.01

Long Croft Road 0.31 0.26 -0.05 0.01 0.00 -0.01

Great Billing 0.05 0.06 0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00


Grounds Lane 0.59 0.48 -0.11 0.02 0.03 0.01

Berryfields 0.98 0.90 -0.08 0.02 0.08 0.06

The Bridge 0.30 0.29 -0.01 0.00 0.00 0.00

Kings Cross 0.35 0.20 -0.15 1.35 1.06 -0.29

GMV 0.21 0.16 -0.05 0.00 0.01 0.01

Ebbsfleet, Castlehill 0.18 0.20 0.02 0.00 0.03 0.03

NES Crawley 0.18 0.20 0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00

Martello Lakes 0.05 0.03 -0.02 0.00 0.00 0.00

Bishop’s Stortford 0.11 0.08 -0.03 0.02 0.01 -0.01

Chilmington Green 0.16 0.01 -0.15 0.04 0.00 -0.04

Bidwell West

NAV

Licence

not

awarded

in 2019

WRMP

0.01

NAV

Licence

not

awarded

in 2019

WRMP

0.00

Parklands 0.00 0.00

Throckley 0.00 0.00


Cockering Road 0.00 0.00



Brough 0.00 0.00





TOTAL 3.51 1.28

Figure 6 demonstrates the measured and non-household consumption by WRZ using 2018-19 and

2019-20 data. WRZ which had a value of 0 for both household and non-household consumption in


13 | P a g e

2019-20 data have been omitted. It is expected that the consumption volume will increase until the

WRZ development reaches 100%.

4.2 Weather Events

There was a heat wave in July 2019 where water usage did not increase. Low rainfall later in the year

had a minimal effect for our insets in Affinity Water (Martello Lakes, Bidwell West, and Bishop’s

Stortford). IWNL actively communicated with Affinity Water during this timeframe.

We continue to work closely with our Incumbent suppliers to monitor any impact on IWNL networks.

4.3 Per Capita Consumption (PCC)

Domestic demand is estimated as:

𝐷𝑜𝑚𝑒𝑠𝑡𝑖𝑐 𝐷𝑒𝑚𝑎𝑛𝑑 = 𝑁𝑜. 𝑜𝑓 𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑡𝑖𝑒𝑠 × 𝑂𝑐𝑐𝑢𝑝𝑎𝑛𝑐𝑦 × 𝑃𝑒𝑟 𝐶𝑎𝑝𝑖𝑡𝑎 𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑠𝑢𝑚𝑝𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 (𝑙/𝑝𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑜𝑛/

𝑑)

Table 5 shows the average per capita consumption (litres/per person/day) by WRZ for the 2019-20, it

is compared to the PCC figures used in our 2019 WRMP.

PCC calculations are based on measured data and have not changed after implementing the guidelines

published by OFWAT in March 2018.

Figure 6: A graph illustrating the measured and non-measured household consumption by WRZ, using data from WRAR 2018-19

and 2019-20.


14 | P a g e

Table 5: Average per capita consumption (l/pp/d) by WRZ 2019-20.

Site

2019-2020

Estimate

(l/pp/d)

Actual

(l/pp/d)

Difference

(l/pp/d)

Oakham 143.4 120.0 -23.4

Priors Hall 139.4 113.0 -26.4

Long Croft Road 140.4 130.0 -10.4



Grounds Lane 140.8 103.0 -37.8

Berryfields 140.4 123.0 -17.4

The Bridge 144.9 139.0 -5.9

Kings Cross 146.9 108.0 -38.9

GMV 140.5 127.0 -13.5


NES Crawley 140.4 94.0 -54.4

Martello Lakes 142.4 86.0 -48.4

Bishop’s Stortford 118.1 62.0 -56.1

Chilmington Green 119.0 40.0 -79.0

Bidwell West

NAV

Licence

not

awarded

in 2019

WRMP

25.0

Parklands 0.0

Throckley 27.0

Lambton Park 0.0

Cockering Road 0.0

Blythe Valley 33.0

Europa Way 28.0

Brough 28.0

Pitty Close Farm 0.0

North Whiteley 0.0

Limebrook Way 30.0

Clipstone Park 51.0

AVERAGE 1081

Average PCC was lower than WRPM19 estimation on all sites, bar Great Billing, as well as being below

the average for England and Wales of 143 (l/pp/d) in the period of Apr 2018-Mar 2019 (apart from

Great Billing)2.

IWNL currently advise all customers of their own water consumption on their water bills and distribute

a waterwise message to our customers in a summer and winter newsletter. Additionally, we are

1 The average total uses the following formula: (Measured household consumption*1,000,000)/(Measured

household populations*1000)

2 https://discoverwater.co.uk/amount-we-use

https://discoverwater.co.uk/amount-we-use


15 | P a g e

contacting customers who reported internal leaks to see if they have been resolved and have plans to

target Great Billing with waterwise messages. These measures will contribute to a reduction of

consumption and we will continue to monitor the PCC, for this and all our WRZ.

Ebbsfleet, has a low PCC; this is attributed to both a reduced consumption as well as development

size.

Our new sites, such as Bidwell and Throckley, have a low PCC; this is an artefact of the calculation on

sites where occupancy has increased throughout the year. The calculated values are expected to rise

until they are fully occupied.

In our WRAR 2018-19, the PCC was higher than our estimation for four sites (Oakham, Berryfield, The

Bridge and Kings Cross); these four sites are now lower than our estimation for WRAR 2019-20. The

increased estimation is due to the predicted expansion of the developments. Please see Table 6 for

comparison.

Table 6: Average and difference between WRZ PCC (l/pp/d) using WRAR 2018-19 and 2019-20.

Site

WRAR 2018-19 WRAR 2019-20 Difference

between Actual

Totals Estimate PCC Actual PCC

Estimate

PCC Actual PCC

Oakham 106.3 118.0 143.4 120.0 2.0

Berryfields 125.0 132.0 140.4 123.0 -9.0

The Bridge 124.9 125.0 144.9 139.0 -14.0

Kings Cross 125.1 130.0 146.9 108.0 -22.0

Rainwater harvesting tanks are installed at Kings Cross; two have meters which log the volume of clean

water used to top up the tanks. Table 7 contains the readings from these two tanks. 2019-20 shows a

decrease of clean water used. This could suggest that the increased rain fall in 2019-20 compared to

previous years has reduced the volume of clean water required, aiding the reduction in PCC for this

WRZ.

Table 7: Rainwater harvesting tanks at Kings Cross, yearly comparison of meter readings.

Rainwater Harvesting

Tank

March 2018-19

(l/s)

March 2019-20

(l/s)

Difference

(l/s)

T1 358 94 264

P1 239

Graph 7 displays the average yearly comparison of PCC by WRZ; sites which have a value of 0 were

removed. The yearly increase of PCC at most the sites is due to the expanding occupation as the

development is built; once these sites are 100% developed, it is expected that the PCC will become

stable. Next year, similar increases will be shown for the 2019-20 new zones e.g Bishop’s Stortford,

Chilmington Green, and Bidwell West. Rates of occupation can be viewed in Section 5.


16 | P a g e

IWNL promote water efficiency to our customers and are aiming to reduce PCC from the industry

average to the new Government standard of 125 l/prop/d for new homes. IWNL are considering

environmental solutions and water recycling strategies to meet the specific water demand

requirements for each inset licence appointment.

4.4 Demand Forecast

There are no changes to our demand forecast. Table 11 includes a population forecast which is based

on current occupation rates and the number of properties within a WRZ, this was not included in the

2019 WRMP; this table does not change the forecast demand levels.

4.5 Leakage

Some degree of leakage from the distribution network is unavoidable. It may occur from storage

facilities, transmission mains and distribution mains (often called ‘distribution’ or ‘company-side’

losses) or from service connections up to the customers’ meter (sometimes called USPL or

‘Underground Supply Pipe Leakage’). Leakage is normally the largest component of losses from a

water supply system, but it is not the only component. Illegal connections may constitute real losses

from the system while meter inaccuracies may give rise to ‘apparent’ losses. Together with leakage,

these ‘real’ and ‘apparent’ losses make up the ‘unaccounted-for water’ component (UFW).

In our inset application IWNL has agreed target rates for UFW of 5% of distribution input. Most of this

will be leakage and the terms ‘leakage’ and ‘unaccounted-for water’ are taken as synonymous in the

context of our supply-demand balance. In 2019-20, more detailed information was obtained from

meter reads and this is being used to identify high usage and target leak investigations.

Table 8 depicts the estimation of total leakage by WRZ based on registered incidents during 2019-20

and distribution loses and compares them to our WRMP19 UFW target of 5% of distribution input.

020406080

100120140160

l/p

p/d

ayAverage per Capita Consumption (l/pp/d) by Water Resource

Zone: Comparison by Year

2017-18 2018-19 2019-20

Figure 7: Graph illustrating the average per capita consumption (l/pp/d) by WRZ, using data from WRAR 2017-18, 2018-19 and

2019-20.


17 | P a g e

Table 8 : Total leakage and target leakage by WRZ 2019-20.

Site

2019-2020

Leakage

(ML/d)

Target UFW

(ML/d)

Difference

(ML/d)

Oakham 0.023 0.012 0.011

Priors Hall 0.101 0.026 0.075

Long Croft Road 0.031 0.015 0.016

Great Billing 0.012 0.003 0.009


Grounds Lane 0.047 0.028 0.019

Berryfields 0.070 0.049 0.021

The Bridge 0.020 0.004 0.016

Kings Cross 0.010 0.063 -0.053

GMV 0.003 0.009 -0.006


NES Crawley 0.044 0.010 0.034

Martello Lakes 0.005 0.002 0.003

Bishop’s Stortford 0.045 0.007 0.038

Chilmington Green 0.006 0.001 0.005

Bidwell West 0.000 0.000 0.000

Parklands 0.000 0.000 0.000

Throckley 0.000 0.000 0.000

Lambton Park 0.000 0.000 0.000

Cockering Road 0.002 0.000 0.002

Blythe Valley 0.000 0.000 0.000

Europa Way 0.000 0.000 0.000

Brough 0.000 0.000 0.000

Pitty Close Farm 0.000 0.000 0.000

North Whiteley 0.000 0.000 0.000

Limebrook Way 0.000 0.000 0.000

Clipstone Park 0.002 0.002 0.000

TOTAL 0.427 0.244 0.183

This table shows that there are WRZ above our UFW target. What steps we are taking to improve this

is discussed below.

Table 9 sets out the estimation of measured USPL based on registered leak incidents during 2019-20.

Table 9 also illustrates the distribution losses by WRZ based on the difference between bulk supply

and customer meters between 2019-20, compared to the figures used in our 2019 WRMP.


18 | P a g e

Table 9: Leakage by WRZ 2019-20.

Site

Measured

Household

and Non-

Household

USPL

(ML/d)

2019-20

Distribution Losses (ML/d)

2019-20

Total Leakage (ML/d)

2019-20

Leakage

(l/prop/

day)

2019-20

Actual Estimate Actual Difference Estimate Actual Difference Actual

Oakham 0.00 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 30.75

Priors Hall 0.02 0.02 0.08 0.06 0.02 0.10 0.08 71.43

Long Croft Road 0.02 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.01 0.03 0.02 36.46

Great Billing 0.02 0.01 0.00 -0.01 0.01 0.01 0.00 71.06

Brooklands +

Broughton

Grounds Lane

0.04 0.03 0.01 -0.02 0.03 0.05 0.02 22.75

Berryfields 0.08 0.04 0.00 -0.04 0.05 0.07 0.02 23.58

The Bridge 0.02 0.01 0.00 -0.01 0.01 0.02 0.01 0.00

Kings Cross 0.00 0.07 0.00 -0.07 0.08 0.01 -0.08 8.14

GMV 0.02 0.01 0.00 -0.01 0.01 0.00 -0.01 4.71

Ebbsfleet,

Castlehill 0.00 0.01 0.03 0.02 0.01 0.04 0.03 42.00

NES Crawley 0.00 0.01 0.00 -0.01 0.01 0.00 -0.01 5.27

Martello Lakes 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 33.84

Bishop’s

Stortford 0.02 0.00 0.03 0.03 0.01 0.05 -0.01 68.11

Chilmington

Green 0.00 0.00 0.01 0.01 0.00 0.01 0.00 59.13

Bidwell West 0.00

NAV

Licence

not

awarded

in 2019

WRMP

0.00

NAV

Licence

not

awarded

in 2019

WRMP

0.00

1.31

Parklands 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Throckley 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Lambton Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Cockering Road 0.00 0.00 0.00 111.04

Blythe Valley 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Europa Way 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.39

Brough 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Pitty Close Farm 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

North Whiteley 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Limebrook Way 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.78

Clipstone Park 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.58

AVERAGE 0.009 0.007 0.01 22.94


19 | P a g e

IWNL do not have PR19 performance commitments with OFWAT, so regulatory leakage figures are

only reported as part of this annual review.

All sites have a leakage lower than the industry average value reported by Discover Water for 2018-

19 of 120.94 (l/prop/day)3. However, there are sites which have a higher volume than estimated. For

Cockering Road, the figure has been attributed to a faulty meter; we have requested South East water

to investigate this as they own the meter.

A large leak was discovered and repaired in Brooklands + Broughton Grounds Lane towards the end

of 2019; in the process of investigating, several smaller leaks were discovered by use of Gutermann

equipment which were fixed.

We are currently in the process of installing data loggers on all our bulk meters. This will allow us to

real time monitor the water usage and trends on site, as well as enable us to respond quicker to

unaccounted losses. We will be monitoring the nightline flow on each of our sites to calculate a

distribution loss figure. Depending on the results from this analysis, we will deploy Gutermann

Leakage equipment to identify areas of concern.

Figure 8 covers the data for the distribution losses and total leakage by WRZ using figures from WRAR

2018-19 and 2019-20. WRZ which had a value of 0 for both distribution losses and total leakage were

omitted. Distribution losses are influenced by construction activities.

Figure 8: A graph of the distribution losses and total leakage by WZR using data from WRAR 2018-19 and 2019-20.

Figure 9 illustrates the changes in leakage (l/prop/day) from 2018-19 and 2019-20. This graph omits

WRZ which had a value of 0 for leakage in 2019-20. Total leakage includes distribution losses which is

influenced by construction activities.

3 https://discoverwater.co.uk/leaking-pipes

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

Ml/

day

Distrubution Losses and Total Leakage by Water Resource Zone: Comparison by Year

Distribution Losses 2018-19 Distribution Losses 2019-20

Total Leakage 2018-19 Total Leakage 2019-20

https://discoverwater.co.uk/leaking-pipes


20 | P a g e

IWNL continue to look at improving our analysis and monitoring of leakage.

Figure 9: A graph of the leakage (l/prop/day) by WRZ using figures from WRAR 2018-19 and 2019-20.

020406080

100120

l/p

rop

/day

Leakage (l/prop/day) by Water Resource Zone: Comparison by Year

2018-19 Actual Leakage 2019-20 Actual Leakage


21 | P a g e

5 Headroom

5.1 Target Headroom

There are no changes to our forecast target headroom. Table 10 shows the target headroom by WRZ.

Table 10: Target headroom (ML/d) by WRZ using data from 2019 WRMP and WRAR 2019-20.

Site

Target Headroom

2018-19

(ML/d)

2019-20

(ML/d)

Difference

(ML/d)

Oakham 0.02 0.02 0.00

Priors Hall 0.03 0.03 0.00

Long Croft Road 0.02 0.02 0.00



Grounds Lane 0.04 0.04 0.00

Berryfields 0.06 0.07 0.01

The Bridge 0.02 0.02 0.00

Kings Cross 0.12 0.12 0.00

GMV 0.01 0.01 0.00

Ebbsfleet, Castlehill 0.01 0.01 0.00

NES Crawley 0.01 0.01 0.00

Martello Lakes 0.00 0.00 0.00

Bishop’s Stortford 0.00 0.01 0.01

Chilmington Green 0.01 0.02 0.01

Bidwell West

NAV

Licence

not

awarded

in 2019

WRMP

0.00 0.00

Parklands 0.00 0.00

Throckley 0.00 0.00


Cockering Road 0.00 0.00



Brough 0.00 0.00





TOTAL 0.38

The data used to forecast target headroom for the 2019 WRMP has been applied to the new WRZ for

WRAR 2019-20.


22 | P a g e

6 Customers

6.1 Properties

Table 11 details the completed household and non-household plots alongside the number of

connections there will be at full development in each inset area.

Table 11: Measured household properties by WRZ 2019-20.

Site

Household and Non-Household Connections

2019-20 Final Current

Development (%)

Oakham 746 1100 67.8%

Priors Hall 1408 5152 27.3%

Long Croft Road 853 988 86.3%

Great Billing 166 166 100.0%


Grounds Lane 2080 2611 79.7%

Berryfields 2968 3642 81.5%

The Bridge 946 946 100.0%

Kings Cross 1228 2667 46.0%

GMV 686 1752 50.7%

Ebbsfleet, Castlehill 1054 1352 60.2%

NES Crawley 902 1836 49.1%

Martello Lakes 183 1050 17.4%

Bishop’s Stortford 666 2450 27.2%

Chilmington Green 109 5750 1.9%

Bidwell West 144 1904 7.6%

Parklands 4 1600 0.3%

Throckley 114 580 19.7%

Lambton Park 7 400 1.8%

Cockering Road 17 750 2.3%

Blythe Valley 143 750 19.1%

Europa Way 87 735 11.8%

Brough 59 750 7.9%

Pitty Close Farm 56 250 22.4%

North Whiteley 28 1562 1.8%

Limebrook Way 110 1000 11.0%

Clipstone Park 375 1210 31.0%

Figure 10 highlights the growth of IWNL’s development using data from 2018-19 and 2019-20. Two

sites are fully developed- Great Billing and The Bridge. It is assumed that each development will take

10 years to be fully built; however not all sites grow equally, and it varies between locations. The

Water Resource Annual Review reflects the current percentage of growth to date.


23 | P a g e

6.2 Occupancy Rates and Population

Table 12 shows the measured household population by heads per property (h/pr) in each WRZ.

Population is estimated as the product of the number of properties times their occupancy. Occupancy

has been evaluated from information held on IWNL’s billing system rather than taking a uniform

occupancy across all zones (as has previously occurred).

Table 12: Measured household population by WRZ 2019-20.

Site Occupancy

Rate (h/pr)

Current

Population

Forecast Population

at 100%

development

Oakham 2.36 1737 2596

Priors Hall 2.43 3243 12519

Long Croft Road 2.36 1991 2332

Great Billing 2.37 384 393


Grounds Lane 2.52 4692 6580

Berryfields 2.53 7316 9214

The Bridge 2.32 2066 2195

Kings Cross 1.88 1890 5014

GMV 1.98 1280 3469

Ebbsfleet, Castlehill 2.40 2297 3245

NES Crawley 2.55 2144 4682

Figure 10: A graph displaying the percentage of measured households by WRZ using data from WRAR 208-19 and 2019-20.


24 | P a g e

Site Occupancy

Rate (h/pr)

Current

Population

Forecast Population

at 100%

development

Martello Lakes 2.39 401 2510

Bishop’s Stortford 2.57 1224 6297

Chilmington Green 2.35 162 13513

Bidwell West 2.53 208 4817

Parklands 0.00* 0 3792

Throckley 0.00* 0 1375

Lambton Park 0.00* 0 948

Cockering Road 2.37* 40 1778

Blythe Valley 3.00 176 2250

Europa Way 2.25 117 1654

Brough 2.92 108 2190

Pitty Close Farm 2.37* 66 593

North Whiteley 0.00* 33 3702

Limebrook Way 0.00* 0 2370

Clipstone Park 0.00* 1737 2868

*No data for occupancy rate, therefore data from the Office of National Statistics 2019 average household

occupancy figure used.

The forecast population is based on the current occupancy rate and the number of properties in a

WRZ once fully developed. This does not consider other factors such as changes to occupancy rate.

6.3 Metering

In line with Government policy, all new properties are metered using the latest AMR metering

technology for domestic and commercial supplies. As a result, the total Household and Non-household

Metering penetration is 100%.


25 | P a g e

7 Forward Look

This is the first year that our 2019 WRMP has been in effect. We have met our target for PCC (bar

Great Billing with plans in place to help reduce the consumption in this WRZ). We have maintained a

good supply-demand balance for our customers in our WRZ.

By the next annual review, we will have further data from the Water harvesting tanks installed at Kings

Cross; although this is limited to one WRZ, it offers insight into water recycling and the effect this has

on PCC.

We are in the process of installing data loggers on 100% of our sites; it is hoped that the next annual

review will use the data collected from these meters. The data will enable us to monitor water usage

and leakage in greater detail, assist with targeted water-efficiency messages to our customers in

specific zones.

We are also currently looking at more intelligent metering solutions and the concept of “Smart

Meters”, this in conjunction with our data logger programme, will allow us to further refine our future

analysis and aid us in our journey towards a “Smart Network”. This will ultimately reduce PCC across

our networks.

These activities will aid the progress of our 2019 Water Resource Management Plan.


26 | P a g e

8 Glossary of Terms and Abbreviations

AMR - Automatic Meter Reading

The technology of automatically collecting consumption and diagnostic data from water or energy

meters and transferring it to a central database for billing, troubleshooting and analysis.

h/pr - Heads per property

A unit used to quantify occupancy rates.

IWNL - Independent Water Network Limited

Owned by parent company Brookfield Utilities UK.

l/h/d - Litres per head per day

A unit used to quantify per capita consumption of water; usually domestic consumption. The same as

l/pp/d.

l/pp/d - Litres per person per day

A unit used to quantify per capita consumption of water; usually domestic consumption. The same as

l/h/d (see above).

l/prop/d - Litres per property per day

A unit of demand or consumption which is often used to describe rates of leakage from the distribution

network; not to be confused with l/pp/d.

l/s - Litres per second

A rate of flow.

ML/d - Megalitres per day

A rate of flow

PCC - per capita consumption

The rate of water consumption expressed as an average per head of population.

USPL - Underground Supply Pipe Leakage

Leakage occurring from the supply pipe that connects a customer’s property to the water company’s

main.

WRPM – Water Resource Management Plan

Every five years, this statutory report is submitted which details the water company’s water resource

plans for the next 25 years.

WRZ - Water Resource Zone

A discrete area in which resources can be shared so that all customers experience the same risk of

supply failure from a resource.


27 | P a g e

Appendix

Appendix 1

The tables below contain the levels of service for the different incumbents IWNL has WRZ in. Bristol

Water, Northumbrian Water, Yorkshire Water and Essex and Suffolk Water are in addition to the 2019

WRAR as the NAV was granted in 2019-20.

Thames Water, Affinity Water, and South East Water have changed their levels of service since IWNL’s

2019 WRMP, this has been amended below to reflect the incumbent.

Table 13 IWNL’s level of service for Anglian Water area.

Level Action Frequency of implementation (drought

severity)

1 Temporary use ban (includes hosepipe ban) Not more than once in 10 years

2 Non-essential use ban Not more than once in 40 years

3 Rota-cuts and standpipes Not more than once in 100 years

Note: If extreme measures (such as standpipes and rota cuts) are required, their implementation would

require an Emergency Drought Order

Table 14: IWNL’s level of service for Thames Water area.


severity)

1 Intensive water saving media campaign

1 in 5 year on average (20% annual

average risk)

2 Sprinkler/unattended hosepipe ban, enhanced

media campaign


average risk)

3

Temporary Use Ban (formerly hosepipe ban),

Drought Direction 2011 (formerly non-essential use

bans) requiring the granting of an Ordinary Drought

Order. N.B. Drought Permits are also part of Level 3

measures, but do not impinge directly on customers

and so are not strictly relevant to customer service

levels.


average risk)

4

Extreme restrictions such as standpipes and rota-

cuts in supply. If such measures were necessary,

their implementation would require the granting of

an Emergency Drought Order


average risk)


28 | P a g e

Table 15: IWNL’s level of service for Severn Trent Water area.


severity)

1 Temporary use bans (TUBs) and non-essential use

bans (NEUBs). Not more than 3 times every 100 years

2 Imposition of the use of rota-cuts/ standpipes Never – considered unacceptable as a

response to drought

Table 16: IWNL’s level of service Southern Water area.


severity)

1 Advertising to influence water use Once in 5 years

2 Temporary Use Ban on different categories of

water use Once in 10 years

3 Apply for Drought Order to restrict water use

(non- essential use ban) Once in 20 years

4 Apply for Drought Order to restrict Once in 500 years

Table 17: IWNL’s level of service for Affinity Water area.


severity)

1 Domestic Temporary Use Restrictions Once in 10 years

2 Ordinary Drought Orders for non-essential use 1 in 40 years

3 Domestic Permits/ Drought Order for temporary

abstraction

1 in >40 years

This will change to 1 >200 years post

March 2024

4

Domestic Temporary Use Restrictions, Drought

Orders for non-essential use and drought

permits/drought orders for additional abstraction

and may require emergency drought orders for

restriction on essential use

Once in 200 years

Note: Emergency Drought Orders deemed unacceptable response but could be used for short

periods of time in localised areas as a result of a civil emergency.


29 | P a g e

Table 18: IWNL’s level of service for South East Water area.


severity)

1 Temporary water use restrictions No more than one year in 10

2 Non-essential water use restrictions No more than one year in 40

3 Severe restrictions (Emergency Drought Order) No more than one year in 40

Table 19: IWNL's level of service for Bristol Water area.


severity)

1 Temporary use ban (TUBs) 1 in 15 years on average

2 Drought Order- Non-essential water use ban 1 in 33 years on average

3 Emergency Drought Order- Partial Supply or rota-

cuts 1 in 200 years

Table 20: IWNL's level of service for Northumbrian area.


severity)

1 Appeal for restraint 1 in 20 years (5% probability in any one

year)

2 Temporary use ban (TUBs) 1 in 150 years (0.66% probability in any

one year)

3 Restrictions on Non-essential use 1 in 200 years (0.5% probability in any

one year)

4 Rota-cuts 1 in 250 years (0.4% probability in any

one year)


30 | P a g e

Table 21: IWNL’s level of service for Yorkshire Water area.


severity)

1 Temporary use ban (TUBs) 1 in 25 years on average (4%

probability in any one year)

2 Drought Order- Non-essential water use ban 1 in 80 years on average (1.3%

probability in any one year)

3 Emergency Drought Order- Partial Supply or rota-

cuts

1 in 500 years (0.2% probability in any

one year)

Table 22: IWNL’s level of service for Essex and Suffolk area.


severity)

1 Appeal for restraint 1 in 10 years (10% probability in any

one year)

2 Temporary use ban (TUBs) 1 in 20 years (5% probability in any one

year)

3 Restrictions on Non-essential use 1 in 50 years (2% probability in any one

year)

4 Rota-cuts 1 in 250 years (0.4% probability in any

one year)

water resource management plan annual report 2019-20 iwnl water resource management plan, annual...

Documents