69974 v6 Cost Recovery and Tariff Practices for UWSS Sector in India Interim Report on Cost Recovery and Tariff Practices for Urban Water Supply and Sanitation in India Hyderabad Case Study Prepared for Water and Sanitation Program – South Asia June 2008 Hyderabad 1 Cost Recovery and Tariff Practices for UWSS Sector in India HYDERABAD Table of Contents 1 Context and Background................................................................................................ 3 2 City Profile ..................................................................................................................... 3 2.1 Physical Environment and Topography ................................................................... 3 2.2 Demography ........................................................................................................... 3 2.3 Socio-Economic Profile ........................................................................................... 4 3 Institutional Framework for Water Supply and Sewerage Services ................................ 4 3.1 Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board (HMWSSB) .............. 4 4 Existing Infrastructure and Services ............................................................................... 5 4.1 Water Supply .......................................................................................................... 5 4.2 Sewerage ............................................................................................................... 6 4.3 Key issues in Service Provision .............................................................................. 6 5 Water Supply and Sewerage Finances .......................................................................... 6 5.1 Cost recovery: Current Performance ....................................................................... 6 5.2 Tariff Structure ........................................................................................................ 9 5.3 Consumer Profile .................................................................................................. 10 6 Analysis ....................................................................................................................... 11 6.1 Cost Recovery ...................................................................................................... 11 6.2 Economic Efficiency .............................................................................................. 12 6.3 Equity and Protection of Vulnerable Sections........................................................ 12 6.4 Affordability ........................................................................................................... 12 6.5 Resource Conservation ........................................................................................ 13 6.6 Acceptability and Practicality ................................................................................. 13 7 Summary ..................................................................................................................... 13 7.1 Recommendations ................................................................................................ 13 Annex 1: Water Audit Report ........................................................................................... 15 Annex Two: Recent Tariff Revisions ................................................................................ 16 Hyderabad 2 Cost Recovery and Tariff Practices for UWSS Sector in India HYDERABAD 1 Context and Background In order to access funds for water supply and sanitation improvements under JNNURM, municipal service providers are required to levy „reasonable user charges‟ so that operation and maintenance costs are recovered within seven years. The Ministry of Urban Development, with assistance from the World Bank Water and Sanitation Program - South Asia, has prepared guidelines on the design and implementation of user charge reforms in line with JNNURM requirements. These guidelines are available as a separate document. The guidelines draw on lessons from a review of current user charges and cost recovery arrangements in 23 cities in India. This report focuses on one of those cities: Hyderabad. 2 City Profile Hyderabad, the „City of Nizams,‟ is known for its rich history, culture and architecture. The IT boom has been primarily responsible for the rapid growth of the city and its surrounding areas converting it into a fast growing agglomeration. The Hyderabad Metropolitan Area (HMA) occupies over 1,800 sq km and has a population of more than 6.5 million, making it the sixth largest metropolis in India. 2.1 Physical environment and topography Hyderabad is perched on the top of the Deccan plateau at the crossroads of the Krishna and Godavari Rivers. The annual rainfall is 74 centimeter (cm). 2.2 Demography Hyderabad is one of the fastest growing metropolitan cities in India with a decadal growth rate of 32 percent. It has grown faster than Mumbai, Kolkata and Chennai in recent years and also has a higher population density. Table 3.1 compares key urban agglomerations in India. Table 3.1: Decadal Growth Rate and Population Density of Urban Agglomeration Major Agglomerations in India Decadal Population Growth Density of Population (in (1991-2001) Municipal Corporations) Delhi 51.9% 24 Bangalore 41.5% 19 Hyderabad 31.8% 21 Mumbai 29.5% 27 Kolkata 19.9% 16 Chennai 18.5% 11 The CDP for Hyderabad acknowledges, “A key feature of population growth in Hyderabad Urban Agglomeration is that most of the growth is occurring in the surrounding areas, that is, away from the city core. The population growth in surrounding municipalities was phenomenal during 1981-91 at 158 percent as against 42 percent in the Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad (MCH) area for the same period. During 1991-2001, the Hyderabad 3 Cost Recovery and Tariff Practices for UWSS Sector in India population growth in surrounding municipalities stood at 72 percent as against 19 percent for MCH.� 2.3 Socio-economic profile Hyderabad has established itself as a center of IT and accounts for 10 percent of national IT exports. Despite accelerated industrial growth, however, it ranks low in terms of gross domestic product (GDP) and the key human development indicators of literacy (60.5 percent), educational dropout rate and child mortality (65 per 1,000). 3 Institutional Framework for Water Supply and Sewerage Services 3.1 Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board The Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board (HMWSSB) -- not MCH -- is responsible for water and sewerage services in the city. HMWSSB serves not only the city but also Secunderabad Cantonment, 10 surrounding municipalities and 10 villages – a total population of just over five million. Sewerage services provided by HMWSSB are limited to Hyderabad city and some peripheral areas. Organisational structure Membership of HMWSSB comprises political leaders and managers of MCH and related ministries. Administration lies in the hands of the Managing Director supported by functional heads (Figure 3.1). There are some 5,200 employees and the ratio of staff per 1,000 connections decreased from 6.67 in 2004 to 5.42 in 2006. Figure 3.1: Organogram of Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board Hyderabad 4 Cost Recovery and Tariff Practices for UWSS Sector in India 4 Existing Infrastructure and Services 4.1 Water supply The city water supply system currently provides 162 mgd (729 mld equivalent) against a demand of 220 mgd (990 mld). A three phase augmentation scheme, the Krishna Drinking Water Supply Project, is now underway to address current and future demands to 2021. It will eventually provide an additional 270 mgd (1,215 mld) of treated water to the city (Table 3.2) . The city draws roughly 90 percent of its water from distant surface water sources, the rest from groundwater. The bulk of the surface water comes from four rivers, while the groundwater is extracted via boreholes. The transmission mains total 286 km in length - a considerable distance that gives rise to high production costs. The distribution network is divided into 20 zones, each with many subzones. There are 118 reservoirs serving the city, but the total storage capacity is inadequate for the available supply and cannot enable continuous delivery. Table 3.2: Water Supply and Sewerage System in Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board Area Total area served by HMWSSB 688.2 sq km Total population served by HMWSSB As of 2001 – MCH: 3.6 million; surrounding municipalities: 1.7 million Estimated current population: 7 million Slum population As of 2001 – MCH: 1.4 million; surrounding municipalities: .69 million Estimated current slum population: .16 million Registered slums: 1049 Density of population 625 persons/hectare Number of wards 150 Sources of Water Type of source Production Capacity Present Osmansagar 5 116000 kld 72000 kld Himayatsagar 68000 kld 9000 kld Manjira 205000 205000 kld Singur 340000 kld 340000 kld Krishna 820000 kld 636000 kld Tubewells/Borewells 67 114000 kld 114000 kld Total 1663000 kld 1376000 kld Total Water Demand 1482000 kld Water Deficit 106000 kld Do you have flow meters at the production Yes source? Total water supply coverage (area coverage) 100% Total sewerage coverage (area coverage) MCH: 70%: surrounding municipalities: 20% Total population coverage for water supply 100 % Daily hours of water supply 1.5-2 hours alternate days Per capita availability of water 135 lpcd Transmission and Distribution Infrastructure Total length of pipelines 2400 km Diameter Range: 100 mm to 2200 mm Standposts 6599 Number of handpumps 6098 Total reservoirs (OHT and underground) 118 (as per CDP) Total storage capacity available 615000 kl Hyderabad 5 Cost Recovery and Tariff Practices for UWSS Sector in India Sewerage Total length of sewer line 2772 km Number of manholes 120000 Number of sewage treatment facility 2 Capacity of treatment plants 133000 kld *Source: As provided by HMWSSB technical department in survey questionnaire 4.2 Sewerage Approximately 70 percent of the city area is served by sewers, and nearly all households with water connections also have sewer connections. A large population on the city periphery, however, has no access to sewerage. Only one of the 10 municipalities served by HMWSSB has sewerage. Two sewage treatment plants provide a total capacity of 133,000 kld against an estimated generation of 589,000 kld (assuming sewage generation to be 80 percent of water supply). The system is therefore capable of treating only 23 percent of the generated sewage. Just 3 percent of the treated wastewater is reused. 4.3 Key issues in service provision Discussion with city officials and a review of available literature revealed the following constraints on service provision: High transmission costs from distant sources; High levels of NRW due to transmission and distribution losses, the use of standposts and illegal connections‟ 50 percent collection efficiency; 25 percent faulty meters; 10 percent unregistered customers; and Incomplete sewerage coverage. 5 Water Supply and Sewerage Finances 5.1 Cost recovery: current performance HMWSSB has operated at a loss for the last five years. Deficits are not financed by the government but are carried forward to the next financial year. Over the period of analysis, the total income has increased at a cumulative rate of 22 percent while total expenditures have increased by 44 percent (Table 3.3).. Income In 2006-07, own source revenue made up one-third of total income and comprised water cess, sewerage cess, other income and interest income. Income from water cess forms just over one-quarter of the total income and 85 percent of total revenue income, and has increased at a cumulative rate 14 percent, and sewerage cess at 9 percent, while other income sources have decreased. Sixty-nine percent of the total income comes from capital sources: state grants, new connection charges and loans. State grants account for three-quarter of the capital income while loans constitute only 6 percent and are declining (Table 3.3). Hyderabad 6 Cost Recovery and Tariff Practices for UWSS Sector in India Table 3.3: Operating Account for Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board (in Rs. million) from State Govt Surplus/Deficit Financial Year Capital Grants Establishment Total Income Other Income Total Surplus Own Source Expenditure Power Costs Total Capital Total Capital Depreciation Expenditure Expenditure Water Cess Connection Borrowings Operative Sewerage Operating Expenses Expenses Operative Revenue Charges Finance Interest Charge Income Deficit Total Cess Total New New 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19(17 20 (6-17) 21(11- (2+3+ (7+8+ (6+10) (12+13 +18) 19) 4+5) 9) +14+1 5+16) 2002-03 1301 231 66 2 1600 416 523 1158 2097 3697 420 511 721 87 157 1896 372 2268 -296 1429 2003-04 1389 249 86 11 1735 1041 431 4852 6324 8059 545 482 746 127 161 2061 4373 6434 -326 1625 2004-05 1562 274 34 48 1918 2200 674 476 3350 5268 286 811 784 216 309 2406 3640 6046 -488 -778 2005-06 1964 346 24 0 2334 3537 543 300 4380 6714 446 1082 1005 398 312 3243 2453 5696 -909 1018 2006-07 2199 329 44 0 2572 4292 869 463 5624 8196 638 1114 1143 383 300 3578 6170 9748 -1006 -1552 2007-08 2051 273 69 29 2422 2763 662 0 3425 5847 688 1133 834 287 378 3320 1860 5180 -897.9 667 (Apr- Dec) Hyderabad 7 Cost Recovery and Tariff Practices for UWSS Sector in India Expenditure Operational expenditure accounts for roughly one-third of total expenditure and is growing. It is made up primarily of power and establishment costs. Power costs are not subsidized by the government and are charged to HMWSSB at industrial rates. Capital expenditure constitutes two-third of the total and is growing substantially. The high cost of sourcing and transmitting water from distant river sources adds to these costs. Billing and collection Bills are raised on a bimonthly basis for domestic users, and on a monthly basis for others. Payments are accepted at e-Seva centers across the city and at designated cash collection counters of HMWSSB, and online payment has been introduced. Spot billing is also done in some locations where half of the area is billed by a private operator, half by HMWSSB staff. Despite these customer-friendly arrangements, collection efficiency was just 54 percent in 2006-07, with arrears as a percentage of total demand standing at 38 percent. Table 3.4: Demand Collection and Balance Statement of Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board of the Year Collections Collections Collections Balance at Total Non- During the the End of Beginning Collection Arrears at Efficiency Domestic Domestic Domestic Domestic Demand Demand Demand Demand Current Current Current Total Total Total Total Total Year Year Year Non the 1 2 3 4 5 (3+4) 6 (1+5) 7 8 9(7+8) 10(6-9) 11 (9/6) 2004-05 1618.82 715.96 1121.04 1837.00 3455.82 584.85 1069.16 1654.01 1801.81 48% 2005-06 1801.81 843.97 1466.89 2310.86 4112.67 710.43 1666.05 2376.48 1736.19 58% 2006-07 1736.20 982.84 1817.27 2800.11 4536.31 857.90 1575.74 2433.64 2102.67 54% 2007-08 2102.67 765.51 1499.58 2265.09 4367.76 681.51 1412.98 2094.49 2273.27 48% (April-Dec) Hyderabad 8 Cost Recovery and Tariff Practices for UWSS Sector in India 5.2 Tariff structure HMWSSB has revised tariffs several times in recent years due to rising operating costs and increased capital expenditure arising from the Krishna Drinking Water Supply Project. The changes have mostly involved restructuring tariff slabs and, in making them, HMWSSB has generally sought to pursue cost recovery while also considering equity issues. For example: 1. A flat rate system for low consumption users was abolished and instead the number of slabs was increased to incentivize low consumption and penalize heavy water users; and 2. Rebates are given to select welfare institutions, higher tariffs are charged from industries using water as a raw material (soft drinks, mineral water, and so forth). These kind of cross subsidies provide ample scope for resource generation while addressing the principle of equity. HMWSSB treats multistoried buildings as a special category. Along with the slab-based rate, a minimum monthly charge is levied to individual flats to maintain equity between individual domestic consumers and flat owners. For industrial and commercial users consuming more than 200 kl per month, water charges have been fixed at a single rate for the entire consumption. Special charges also apply for bulk supply to surrounding municipalities and the Cantonment Board. The current tariff has two parts: a minimum monthly charge plus a volumetric charge (Table 3.5). HMWSSB has been pursuing universal metering, using incentives. Fixed minimum charges are applied to those that do not have meters. Table 3.5: Existing Tariff Structure Type of Charge Consumer Category Rate Water Cess/Tariff 1. DOMESTIC Consumption of Rate in Rs. per i. Individual domestic connections water in kl per month kl ii. Multistoried buildings 0-15 6.00 2. HMWSSB has been pursuing 16-30 8.00 universal metering using incentives. 31-50 15.00 Fixed minimum charges are applied to those that do not have meters. 51-100 20.00 NON DOMESTIC 101-200 25.00 iii. Government institutions iv. Commercial institutions 200 and above 35.00 (entire v. Industries consumption) * With respect of government institutions, educational institutions, welfare hostels, a rebate of 20% is applicable ** In cases where water is used as a raw material, for the manufacture of end products such as mineral water, soft drinks, alcoholic beverages, etc., the rate applicable is Rs. 60 per kl, irrespective of consumption 3. BULK SUPPLY Rs. 6 (up to agreed quantity) Municipalities, Panchayats, local authorities, Rs. 35 (above agreed quantity) cantonment and housing colonies. Where specific agreements are not entered, the agreed quantity is deemed to be 15 kl multiplied by the number of residential apartments in the complex as per MCH/Municipality Minimum Monthly Where individual agreements are entered 60% of the agreed quantity Charge Individual domestic connections Rs. 90 per month Multistoried residential apartment complexes Rs. 90 per month per flat Hyderabad 9 Cost Recovery and Tariff Practices for UWSS Sector in India In all other cases minimum charges are based Connection pipe Rs./month on the size of connection size 15 mm (1/2�) 90.00 20 mm(3/4�) 270.00 25 mm(1�) 600.00 40 mm (1-1/2�) 1500.00 50 mm (2�) and 3200.00 above Tanker Charges All categories 5 kl capacity Rs. 250 9 kl capacity Rs. 360 Disconnection and All categories Rs. 400 Restoration Charges Change of Bore All categories Rs. 1500 Meter Testing All categories Rs. 75 Charges Change of Name All categories Rs. 200 Meter Service All categories 15 mm Rs. 15 Charges/Month 20 mm Rs. 30 25 mm Rs. 50 Above 25 mm Rs 15 per each 5mm Service Charges All categories Rs. 6 per inch diameter per month (meter reading, billing and collection) Sewerage Domestic Rs. 25 Chokeages Nondomestic/apartment complex Rs. 250 Corporate hospitals/star hotels Rs. 750 Septic Tank All categories Rs. 750 cleaning Sewerage Cess Domestic 35% of water supply charges Nondomestic If not connected through piped supply: Rs. 400/year excluding slums 5.3 Consumer profile HMWSSB caters to a diverse range of customers, the key categories being: 1. Domestic i. Individual domestic connections; and ii. Multistoried buildings 2. Nondomestic iii. Government institutions; iv. Commercial institutions; and v. Industries 3. Bulk Supply vi. Municipalities, Panchayats and local authorities; vii. Cantonment Board; and viii. Other housing colonies Hyderabad 10 Cost Recovery and Tariff Practices for UWSS Sector in India The total number of consumers as of November 2007 was 564,222 (Table 3.6), but HMWSSB estimates that there is potential for achieving another 100,000. Table 3.6: Consumer Profile of Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply and Sewerage Board (as of Nov 2007) Consumer Category No. of Consumers 1. Domestic 542650 2. Nondomestic 12747 Commercial 11597 Industries 1150 3. Bulk Supply 8825 MSB 7835 Surrounding Municipalities 27 Gram Panchayats 13 Colonies 135 Others 815 Total 564222 6 Analysis Despite the measures outlined above, HMWSSB is struggling to recover the high cost of supply and constraints including political interference, overstaffing and inefficient revenue collection. 6.1 Cost recovery HMWSSB is incurring operating losses that are growing at a cumulative annual rate of 36 percent. And while total revenue income is increasing, revenue expenditure is increasing at a higher rate. JNNURM requires HMWSSB to recover operational costs, which are exceptionally high due to the use of distant sources. Transferring the high externality cost to consumers is, arguably, neither reasonable nor achievable. It might be a more realistic goal to recover all O&M costs except high transmission costs. The current production cost is Rs. 6.61 per kl, inclusive of interest and depreciation, while charges are based on an increasing block tariff with charges ranging from Rs. 6 to Rs. 25 per kl of water (Table 3.5), plus a minimum monthly charge of Rs. 90 per household. This should, in theory, enable recovery of O&M costs, loan interest and depreciation. Improved operational and financial management would considerably enhance cost recovery. Nonrevenue water HMWSSB conducts monthly water audits in all 12 divisions, focusing on unbilled consumption, unauthorized consumption, customer metering inaccuracies, leakage in transmission and distribution mains, leakage and overflows at storage tanks and leakage on service connections up to the point of customer metering. Despite these measures, NRW stands at approximately 42 percent. Technical losses These currently stand at roughly 15 percent of production and include leakage in transmission and distribution, leakage and overflows at storage tanks and leakage on service connections up to the point of customer metering. This amounts to a loss of potential revenue in the region of Rs. 414 million per year. Hyderabad 11 Cost Recovery and Tariff Practices for UWSS Sector in India Wastage More than 13,000 kld of water is supplied free through standposts in low-income areas. If this water was charged at the minimum slab rate of Rs. 6, the potential revenue would be Rs. 29 million. Illegal connections HMWSSB estimates that 30,000-40,000 connections, mostly in poor areas, are unauthorized, while the Water Audit Report (Annex 3.1) finds unauthorized consumption to be 7 percent of supply. In the absence of accurate information, a rough estimation of the resulting revenue losses is Rs. 210 million at the rate of Rs. 6 per kl. Collection efficiency If HMWSSB was to achieve 90 percent collection efficiency in line with international standards, it would generate an additional Rs.1,649 million in revenue in addition to the Rs. 2,433 million collected in 2006-07. Faulty meters are clearly an impediment to improved collection though accurate information on this problem is unavailable. Coverage Hyderabad had a population of 5.7 million as of 2006, indicating the potential for 1.14 million connections assuming a family size of five members. However, the prevalence of multistoried buildings with bulk connections complicates the picture, making it difficult to estimate the connections as a percentage of total households. If HMWSSB estimate of 100,000 potential new connections is correct, the additional revenue potential would be Rs. 144 million based on the minimum rate of Rs. 6 per kl. Cost recovery from sewerage services The tariff structure for sewerage services, at 35 percent of water supply charges, is a simple and practical basis for cost recovery. This is set to improve as coverage increases under the proposed investments. 6.2 Economic efficiency The increasing block tariff captures the economic cost of providing water at higher levels of consumption. Water-intensive industries, for example, such as soft drinks manufacturers, are charged Rs. 60 per kl irrespective of consumption. This is an economic price bearing in mind the high cost of production, though some might argue that it is also a disincentive for industrial growth. 6.3 Equity and protection of vulnerable sections HMWSSB provides free water for poor residents via some 6,600 standposts and 6,100 handpumps. There is, however, no data to verify that these water points are used primarily by the poor. Within the tariff structure, there are no special provisions for the poor, so that all households with metered connections pay the same rate, amounting to an estimated bill of Rs. 220 per month for 20 kl consumption. This could serve as a disincentive for poor families to take up house connections and may partially explain the estimated 40,000 illegal connections in poor areas. It is debatable whether charges to industrial consumers are fair and reasonable, though they are set at an economic rate. 6.4 Affordability Monthly household spending on 20 kl consumption is Rs. 220, which translates into 7.9 percent of the monthly budget of poor consumers, using the official urban poverty line of Rs. 559 per person. This exceeds the 5 percent advisory limit recommended by WHO, though it Hyderabad 12 Cost Recovery and Tariff Practices for UWSS Sector in India should be borne in mind that HMWSSB also supplies a considerable amount of free water to poor communities. 6.5 Resource conservation The use of an increasing block tariff discourages excessive consumption, while high charges for water-intensive industries take into account both the economic and social costs of water. It can be argued, however, that such high rates may discourage industries from moving to Hyderabad. While the tariff structure promotes resource conservation, this is being undermined by technical losses and wastage. A good initiative by HMWSSB has been the adoption of an incentive scheme for rainwater harvesting, which provides a 10 percent discount on the construction of harvesting pits. Details are available at www.hyderabadwater.gov.in. 6.6 Acceptability and practicality The increasing block tariff structure adopted by HMWSSB is practical and fair, and lends clarity and ease in the calculation of water charges. In addition, HMWSSB has adopted a Citizen‟s Charter and tries to disseminate clear and accurate information on key aspects of the service. It also has an elaborate system for documenting customer complaints, which have recently increased from 14 to 22 percent of total connections. 7 Summary While the water tariff is well designed in terms of its cost recovery potential, HMWSSB has not addressed the needs of poor consumers who take up house connections. Furthermore, cost recovery is critically undermined by high production costs and weaknesses in technical and financial management. 7.1 Recommendations Non-revenue water 1. HMWSSB needs to reduce technical losses by more rigorous application its audit program; 2. Standposts should be replaced with free house connections for the poor (financed under JNNURM); and 3. Incentives and penalties should be introduced to reduce the number of illegal connections. Liaison with MCH, which holds property tax data, would help here. Collection efficiency 4. HMWSSB should adopt a strict defaulter policy with penalties to boost payment; and 5. It should also take up targeted campaigns at the end of each year to recover payments and reduce arrears. Coverage 6. Measures should be adopted to increase the water supply customer base, bearing in mind the growing population and Hyderabad 13 Cost Recovery and Tariff Practices for UWSS Sector in India 7. The proposed introduction of compulsory connections in conjunction with network expansion is to be encouraged as it should enable improved cost recovery from the service. Equity and affordability 8. HMWSSB should introduce a propoor dimension to metered service provision, by providing free house connections for the poor. Subsistence consumption at current tariff rates would be affordable for most poor households, but the minimum charge of Rs. 90 should be waived; and 9. The tariff structure for industrial consumers should be lowered to avoid a disincentive for industrial investment in the agglomeration. Other suggestions 10. An energy audit would help to reduce power costs. Outsourcing pump maintenance may also be helpful; 11. Promotion of HMWSSB‟s rainwater harvesting initiative would help to increase uptake. Hyderabad 14 Cost Recovery and Tariff Practices for UWSS Sector in India Annex 3.1: Water Audit Report Hyderabad Metropolitan Water Supply And Sewerage Board STATEMENT SHOWING THE WATER AUDIT MATRIX OF ALL OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE DIVISIONS (Provisional for December 2007) Authorized Consumption Water Losses Billed Unbilled Authorized Approximate Losses Real Losses Authorized unauthorised Consumption Connections up to point of Leakage and Overflows at Unbilled Consumption for Leakage on transmission Authorized Consumption Utility‟s Storage Tanks and distribution Mains Date Handling Errors Unbilled Unmetered Leakage on Service Unbilled Authorized Customer Metering Customer Metering Nonrevenue Water Billed Unmetered Unbilled Metered Billed Authorized Apparent Losses Revenue Water Billed Metered Water Losses the not raised Consumption Consumption Consumption Consumption Consumption Consumption System Input inaccuracies Real Losses Divisions Sl. No: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 1 Div - I 12 9.68 2.32 7.85 1.83 0.68 1.64 6.74 1.11 0.15 0.05 1.63 0.28 0.25 0.15 1.12 0.03 0.49 7.85 4.15 2 Div - II 25.28 15.03 10.25 13.03 2 4.5 5.75 9.56 3.47 0.42 1 0.58 3 0.5 1 4 0.8 0.95 13.03 12.25 3 Div - III 19 12.77 6.29 9.2 3.57 2.17 4.12 3.37 5.83 0.24 0.8 2.53 1.69 0.1 0.38 2.9 0.25 0.97 9.2 9.8 4 Div - IV 16 10.54 5.6 8.72 1.82 3.02 2.58 1.92 6.8 0.24 0.87 0.71 2.42 0.5 0.1 1.82 0.18 0.58 8.72 7.28 5 Div - V 29.5 21.29 7.83 15.94 5.35 2.03 5.8 10.5 5.44 0.39 0.01 4.95 1.04 0.78 0.21 4.36 0.28 1.16 15.94 13.56 6 Div- VI 29 19.3 9.7 12.3 7 3.6 6.1 8.6 3.7 2 2 4.5 2.5 0.9 0.2 3.7 0.3 2.1 12.3 16.7 7 Div - VII 16 10.18 4.82 8.92 1.26 1.02 3.8 5.22 3.7 0.14 0.03 1.09 0.5 0.45 0.07 0 0.05 1.5 8.92 7.08 8 Div - 19.5 19.5 0 0 0 0 0.5 18.77 0 0 0 0 0.73 0 0 0 0.5 0 18.77 0.73 VIII 9 Div - IX 15.7 6.65 4.82 4.65 2 1.02 3.8 4.43 0.22 0.05 0.86 1.09 0.5 0.47 0.07 2.25 0.05 1.5 4.65 11.05 10 Div - X 15 12.86 2.14 10.12 2.74 0.89 1.25 7.46 2.66 0.11 0.02 2.61 0.22 0.36 0.31 1.1 0.02 0.13 10.12 4.88 11 Div - XI 29.5 29.5 0 0 0 0 8 24.45 MGD 0 0 0 5.05 0 0 0 0 0 24.45 5.05 12 Div - XII 15 6.56 3.85 5.75 0.81 0.94 2.91 2.11 3.64 0.36 0.36 0.42 0.01 0.9 0.03 0.9 0.5 0.1 5.75 9.25 Total 241.48 173.86 57.62 96.48 28.38 19.87 46.25 103.1 36.57 4.1 6 20.11 17.94 5.21 2.52 22.15 2.96 9.48 139.7 101.7 3 8 % 72.00 23.86 39.95 11.75 8.23 19.15 42.71 15.14 1.70 2.48 8.33 7.43 2.16 1.04 9.17 1.23 3.93 57.85 42.15 Hyderabad 15 Cost Recovery and Tariff Practices for UWSS Sector in India Annex 3.2: Recent Tariff Revisions 1997 The number of domestic slabs was increased; For bulk supply, slabs were removed and a standard procedure, based on agreed quantity of supply, was introduced. Consumption above the agreed quantity of supply was charged at a considerably higher rate; For multistoried buildings having commercial use of less that 10 percent of plinth area, slabs were reduced from 0-500 to 0-300 and above 300. A minimum rate payable per month was also introduced; For multistoried buildings having commercial use of more than 10 percent of plinth area, a minimum rate payable per month was introduced. Slabs were introduced in commercial use of more than 10 percent but less than 30 percent; For all nondomestic supplies, a common increasing block tariff was introduced; and Other chargeable services included connection charge (as per ferrule size), tanker charge, temporary connection charge, disconnection and restoration charge, meter testing charge, connection transfer (change of name), service charges (for meter reading, billing, and so forth), cleaning choked sewers, sewerage cess (for consumers who do not avail of water supply but use the sewerage system). 2002 Tariff rates for domestic and nondomestic connections were merged into a single increasing block tariff structure plus basic minimum charges. 2004 A flat rate was fixed for water supply connections to white cardholders (in notified slums) at Rs. 1,200 per month, with provision for a monthly installment of Rs. 100; To achieve parity with tariff structures in other metropolitan cities and reduce the financial burden of Krishna Drinking Water Supply Project, an increase of Rs. 10 per kl was introduced for consumption above 200 kl per month; To address the slow pace of metering, minimum charges were increased from Rs. 90 to Rs. 100 for nonmetered connections; and To reduce NRW, a surcharge of Rs. 50 per month was imposed, after a grace period of three months, for meter installation or repair. The surcharge was to be enhanced by Rs. 50 in each successive month followed by disconnection after six months. For consumption beyond 200 kl per month, the surcharge was Rs. 200 per month with progressive increase of the same amount for the next and subsequent month. 2005 Tariff was revised for consumption below 200 kl per month for large institutional /commercial consumers by introducing different consumer slabs; Tariff was increased for industries using water as a raw material, such as drinks manufacturers, to a flat rate of Rs. 60 per kl; A rebate of 20 percent to government hospitals, educational institutions, welfare hostels, etc.; and For multistoried buildings where agreements are not entered into, the agreed quantity will be 15 kl multiplied by the number of residential apartments in the complex. As per the construction plan approved by MCH/Municipality/actually constructed. 2006 As per the 2002 notification, all multistoried buildings having consumption above 500 kl must enter into an agreement with HMWSSB allowing the application of 60 percent as a minimum charge. Since most multistoried buildings did not have recorded consumptions of 500 kl, they were being exempted from the minimum charge, thereby creating inequity. These buildings are now levied a minimum charge on a par with domestic charges, that is, Rs. 90 per month, to ensure equity and generate additional revenue. Hyderabad 16 Cost Recovery and Tariff Practices for UWSS Sector in India Hyderabad 17