AFW Delivering Outcomes for Customers Appendices March 2019 AFW Delivering Outcomes for Customers Appendices 3 Contents Appendix Action ref(s) OC.A1.1 PR19 resilience & environmental bespoke AFW.OC.A1, A2, A3, A36 commitments working group minutes (Nov 17) OC.A1.2 CCG update on bespoke commitments (13 Dec AFW.OC.A1, A2, A3 17) OC.A1.3 PR19 SteerCo: Bespoke Commitments AFW.OC.A1, A2, A3 Resilience Paper (Feb 18) OC.A1.4 Atkins Technical Assurance Report March 2019 AFW.OC.A1, A2, A5, A6, A7, A8, A9, A10, A11, A12, A13, A14, A15, A16, A17, A18, A19, A20, A21, A23, A24, A25, A26, A27, A28, A29, A30, A31, A36, A37, A38, A39, A40, A41, A42, A43, A45, A46, A47, A48 OC.A1.5 Verve customer research report March 2019 AFW.OC.A1, A12, A43 OC.A1.6 Cyber Security and Resilience PC Definition AFW.OC.A1 OC.A2.1 Ofwat, “Delivering Water 2020: consultation on AFW.OC.A2 PR19 methodology, Appendix 3: Outcomes technical definitions”, 11 July 2017 OC.A3.1 Supplementary report to Ofwat from the Affinity AFW.OC.A3, A33, A35 Water Customer Challenge Group (29 March 2019) OC.A4.1 Ofwat, “Technical Appendix 1: delivering AFW.OC.A4, A10, A13, A14, A15, outcomes for customers” Jan 2019, page 28 A20, A23, A25 OC.A11.1 rdWRMP Atkins report AFW.OC.A11, A19 OC.A11.2 NERA Economic Consulting - Assessing AFW.OC.A11 Ofwat’s Funding and Incentive Targets for Leakage Reduction OC.A12.1 Leakage customer engagement evidence AFW.OC.A12 OC.A19.1 Drought resilience matrix AFW.OC.A19 OC.A32.1 SMS feedback analysis (PC2) AFW.OC.A32, A34 OC.A32.2 Financially vulnerable by channel (PC1) AFW.OC.A32, A34 OC.A32.3 SMS Example process flow chart for AFW.OC.A32, A34 satisfaction and ease OC.A32.4 MRS research guidelines AFW.OC.A32, A34 AFW Delivering Outcomes for Customers Appendices AFW Delivering Outcomes for Customers Appendices 4 OC.A32.5 Application of MRS research guidelines to our AFW.OC.A32, A34 PCs OC.A32.6 Framework for BSI 18477 AFW.OC.A32, A34 OC.A36.1 Final dWRMP Report_V3_080618 AFW.OC.A36 OC.A41.1 Desktop Review of Approach to Use EA CBA AFW.OC.A41, A42 Analysis (Eftec) OC.A41.2 PC ODI Incentive Testing – Final Report AFW.OC.A41, A42, A45 (Verve) OC.A44.1 Letter dated 23 April 2018 to Jon Ashley, AFW.OC.A44 setting out Affinity Water’s AIM plans post April 2018, including the reasoning behind the groupings OC.A44.2 Emailed recognition of letter dated 23 April AFW.OC.A44 2018 from Jon Ashley OC.A44.3 OFWAT query on the AIM- email from Jon AFW.OC.A44 Ashley OC.A44.4 Follow up with of phone conversation from after AFW.OC.A44 AIM email from Jon Ashley, in which the groupings were discussed and subsequent note OC.A44.5 Slides from OFWAT and water companies at AFW.OC.A44 workshop to discuss the future of AIM, on 17 April 2018 OC.A44.6 Minutes from AIM workshop on 17 April 2018 AFW.OC.A44 OC.A44.7 Annual AIM performance for the period 2017- AFW.OC.A44 2018 AFW Delivering Outcomes for Customers Appendices AFW Delivering Outcomes for Customers Appendices 5 Appendix OC.A1.1 Action refs AFW.OC.A1; AFW.OC.A2; AFW.OC.A3, AFW.OC.A6 PR19 resilience & environmental bespoke commitments working group minutes (Nov 17) AFW Delivering Outcomes for Customers Appendices AFW Delivering Outcomes for Customers Appendices 6 AFW Delivering Outcomes for Customers Appendices 7 PR19 Resilience and Environment Bespoke Commitments - working group Date 20th Nov 2017 Time 10.30 – 13.00 Venue G7, Hatfield ∑ To review the PR14 performance commitments and challenge whether considered as bespoke commitments or in the areas of resilience and Purpose of environment meeting ∑ To discuss options for “new” bespoke commitments for resilience and the environment. Affinity Water ∑ Sarah Clark CCG members: ∑ Anne Scutt Webber ∑ Jon Sellars Attendees ∑ Arnaud David ∑ David Cheek ∑ Becky Pointer ∑ Caroline Warner (by phone) ∑ Mike Pocock ( ) ∑ ∑ James Jenkins, Richard Haynes, John Rumble, Scott Oram, Chris Offer Apologies ∑ Circulation As above Date of next Tbc meeting Minutes Responsible for ID Agenda item / subject / note / action Action 1. Welcome and introductions DC and CW were welcomed to the group and introductions were made around the table. MP opened the meeting, re-iterating the Company’s strategy to keep a simple suite of performance commitments. ASW asked if there were any queries on the progress/actions from the last meeting, in particular from those who were unable to attend. DC was happy, CW would like to have had more time to read the minutes but was happy to carry on and ask for any clarification along the way. ASW confirmed that the outcome of the previous meeting had been fed back to the Director of Asset Strategy (Mike Pocock) and the Director of Regulation and Corporate Affairs (Chris Offer) and both were in full support of the approach being taken and the development of a commitment around pilot projects. Ofwat expect PR14 commitments to be carried forward. AWL would like to explore which may be duplicated by Ofwat’s PR19 common commitments and which could fit with Ofwat’s expectations of bespoke commitments. AWL presented this in the paper and would like members’ views on those which should be continued into PR19. CW felt that there were some measures(security of supply) that AWL were currently AFW Delivering Outcomes for Customers Appendices AFW Delivering Outcomes for Customers Appendices 8 Responsible for ID Agenda item / subject / note / action Action failing and therefore Ofwat would expect these to be continued as they would want to see evidence that things have been put in place to improve. 2. Metrics AWL took an action to review the current metrics reported in the categories of resilience and the environment. It was clear that there are many measures currently reported and many more not listed in the tables presented at the meeting. It was agreed that the breadth of the term resilience made this a complex area to review. DC mentioned the 4 R’s model. A discussion was held around how such a wide scope could potentially lead to a composite score which was something that Ofwat did not want. 3. Review of PR14 Performance Commitments SC took the group through section 3 – 14 of the paper. The PR14 commitments relating to resilience and the environment were identified. These were then mapped to Ofwat’s common commitments for PR19. Resilience The two commitments which do not map exactly to the PR19 common commitments were discussed in detail. Supply interruptions > 12 hrs The PR14 performance commitment was based on customer feedback, that shorter interruptions were easier to cope with but when they became longer then this caused much more disruption. AWL have failed to meet the target under this performance commitment in AMP6 to date, therefore there was consensus that this should be maintained to drive improvement and would run alongside the common commitment of minutes/property. This will also be tested again with customers. CW noted that AWL had presented a plan for improvement to CCW with 45 action points, however it was felt that the report lacked content, MP assured that this is being addressed. Water Available for Use Ofwat’s common commitment in this area is unplanned outage. The calculation to determine the water available for use is influenced by the outage and sustainability reductions. It was therefore agreed that if both measures are reported as PCs the calculation was not going to add any more value and therefore could be dropped. Discussions were held around some of Ofwat’s common commitments: ∑ Leakage - Ofwat are driving for 15% reduction in PR19, however analysis shows that 11% achieves the economic level, therefore the cost to increase to 15% will be tested with customers. CW mentioned that Ofwat is expecting the Companies to demonstrate value beyond 2025. ∑ Average Water Use – this is the same measure as PR14, however there is some uncertainty as to whether Ofwat will continue to use the normalised figure. CW asked why the Company thought that AWL had the highest PCC in the UK. It was felt to be generally due to some areas of affluence, customer research from Phase 0 supports this, where customers find water cheap and feel that they could not use less. AWL is involved with the Artesia project run by Anglian Water which looks at understanding the variability in consumption and the social demographics. MP to circulate report. MP ∑ MP advocated that the issue was a societal problem and that the government and other bodies should support a national campaign to raise awareness and encourage reduced consumption. AD confirmed that in other European countries, a reduction AFW Delivering Outcomes for Customers Appendices AFW Delivering Outcomes for Customers Appendices 9 Responsible for ID Agenda item / subject / note / action Action in PCC had followed a national campaign. CW raised the issue of IT outages as a measure of resilience of the IT network, in particular when the outage impacts customer services. AD confirmed that this is something that is tracked, MP agreed that this is something that will be considered. Environment Abstraction Incentive Mechanism (AIM) is a bespoke commitment proposed by Ofwat. AWL report against AIM in AMP6, with 2/3 sources currently compliant. Sustainable Abstraction Reductions is a programme which has been completed ahead of schedule in AMP6and continues into PR19. JS asked if targets would be stretched for AMP7, this will be offered as part of the acceptability testing.