Briefing on

the functioning of HMWS&SB

To

Our Partners from

The City of Venice &The City of Modling

HMWSSB-EvolutionWater Works Department,Govt. of Andhra Pradesh

Municipal Corporation of Hyderabad

SewerageWater Supply

Hyderabad MetropolitanWater Supply and Sewerage

Board

1987 Transferred with staff

Constituted on 1 Nov 1989 under the Hyderabad Metropolitan Water

Supply & Sewerage Act 1989

1 November 1989

HMWSSB

Goals

– Access to Water Supply• To provide access to safe and adequate drinking

water to 100% of the projected population of the Hyderabad Metropolitan Area.

– Access to Sewerage• 100% coverage• 100% sewerage treatment to 30 BOD

Access Modes of WS

100 100

56

21

49

85

0 0

19

39

32

80 0

2550

197

0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%80%90%

100%

N.America Europe L.America Africa Asia Hyderabad

HouseHold Conns Other Access No Access

Global Water supply and Sanitation Coverage Report 2000, WHO

HMWSSB

Hyderabad Population projections (in Millions)

2.774

4.3495.533

8.191

10.153

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

1981 1991 2001 2011 2021

3.16% per Annum

Census

TCE Projections

The Decadal Growth rate as per 2001 census for Hyderabad city is13.8% whereas it is 72% for LB Nagar and 112% for Qutbullapur

Osman Sagar (1920)123 mld

Himayat Sagar (1927)82 mld

Manjira Phase-II (1981)136 mld

Manjira Phase-I (1965)68 mld

Manjira Phase-III (1991) 163 mld

Manjira Phase-IV (1993)163 mld

Water Supply Sources123 mld123 mld204 mld204 mld272 mld272 mld409 mld409 mld572 mld572 mld735 mld – 114 lpcd735 mld – 114 lpcd

Now0 mld

Himayat Sagar 54 mld

604 mld – 87 lpcd604 mld – 87 lpcd

Demand and Supply ImmediateHMWSSB

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

MG

D

PresentCapacity 153 162 162 162 162 162GroundWater 25 25 25 25 25 25Demand 230 240 250 260 275 290

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

HMWSSB

Demand and Supply

050

100150200250300350400450

MG

D

PresentSupply 153 162 162 162 162

GroundWater 25 25 25 25 25

Demand 230 290 328 360 400

2001 2006 2011 2016 2021

Supply Mix HMWSSB

145Total Water Drawn

4833.2%Unaccounted Water(Break-up for 17 MGD yet to be Calculated)

97100%Total

2223%Non-domestic

2930%Domestic - Bulk

4040%Domestic - Individual

77%Free Water (6600)

MGD%

HMWSSB

Unaccounted For Water

Revenue Losses

Physical Losses

145100.0%Water Drawn

4329.7%Total

4833.2%Total

53.5%Total non revenue water in the 3 municipalities taken over

1510.2%

85.5%Distribution Losses

2014.0%Transmission Losses

MCH

MGD%Details

Break-up for 145 MGD only

UFW-Asian Cities HMWSSB

Hyderabad is one of the very few cities which has reliable UFW accounting. UFW figures in many other cases are estimates. In some cases are only estimated physical losses, without real reconciliation of water drawn and billed

Mandalay, Lee, PhnomPenh, Honoi, RarotongaAbove 60%

Dhaka, Jakarta, Khatmandu, Nuku, Biankek, suva, Bandung, Ulaanbatav, Apis

50%-60%

Lahore, Manila, Calcutta, 40%-50%

Karchi, Ulssah, Hochiminh, Seol, Colombo, Kulalumpur, Hongkong, Bangkok, Faislabad, Devao, Vientine, Chittagong, Chaingmai, Thimpu, Chonburi, Honaira, Cebu

30%-40%

Johar Bahru, Delhi, Taipei, Medan, Penang, PortVila20%-30%

Shanghai, Mumbai, Chennai, Mali, Tianjin, Almaty, Tashkent10%-20%Singapore, Beijing5% - 10%

CitiesUFW %

HMWSSB

Allocation of Singoor Water

8.35

6.96

4.61

5.02

1.00

4.06

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

TMC

Evaporation

Balance

TwinCities WS

Nizamsagar

Ghanpur

Siltation Losses

Balance Water60 MGD

Maximum utilisation for irrigation

6.6 TMC in 1997against allocation of

12.41 TMC

!"#$ &'() *$+ ,'- !.(!(&#" ,( /.#) #//*,*($#" 01 2+/ 3.(2 &*$+4. /#25(2!($-$, 6 *

/#,- (3 3*.&, /.#) $

/#,- (3 54..-$, 4!/#,*($

'7/-.#8#/ 2-,.(!("*,#$ ) #,-. &4!!"7 #$/ &-) -.#+- 8(#./

5-$,.#" /-&*+$ 5-""

9: 6 90 6 0111

9: 6 90 6 0111

Phase III

Phase IV

COMPONENT – I MAP

Access to poor –slum improvement project

HMWSSB

• Government approved a project to provide drinking water and sewerage network in slums at a cost of Rs 54 Crores to be implemented in 2 years

• 596 works executed at a cost of Rs 30.75 crores• 228 Slums were provided with Water Supply

and 322 slums with improved sewerage network

Sewerage Network

822 Kms1087 KmsLaterals (300 mm diameter and below)

3

423 Kms572 KmsTrunk Sewers, Main Sewers, Branch Sewers (above 300 mm diameter)

2

1323113 +20Sewage Treatment Plant (MLD)1

Required as per Master

Plan

ExistingFacilitiesS.No

Approximate Cost Rs 4000 Crores

Hussain SagarHussain SagarK&S MainK&S Main

DuplicateK&S MainDuplicateK&S Main

Existing Sewer Mains

Hussain SagarHussain SagarSewer Main completed last

Duplicate A - MainDuplicate A - Main

Picket DrainPicket Drain

Industrial effluents through Kukatpally Drain

Industrial effluents through Kukatpally Drain

Yousufguda DrainYousufguda Drain

Banjara DrainBanjara Drain

Balkapur DrainBalkapur Drain

Sources of Pollution

Hussain SagarHussain Sagar

STP

Hussain SagarHussain SagarDiversion of sewage

and effluents into the Sewer Mains

STP

Hussain SagarHussain SagarDiversion of sewage

and effluents into the Sewer Mains

Aeration Tank Inlet Units

Settling Tank Flow Indicator

Hussain Sagar STP in Action

HMWSSB

The Krishna Water

• Cabinet Approval vide G.O.Ms No 559. M.A Dated 23rd November 2001

• Approved method of funding– GOAPs Contribution - Rs 300 Crores– Term loans/Bonds - Rs 700 Crores

• Project implementation period 2½ years– Now crashed to 1½ years– Expected to be completed by March 2004

" ( 5 # , *( $ !" # $; . *& ' $ # ) # , -. & 4 !!" 7 !. ( ☺-5 ,

' 7 / -. # 8 # / 2 -, . ( !( " *, # $ ) # , -. & 4 !!" 7 = & -) -. # + - 8 ( # . /

"( 5 # , *( $ !" # $ ( 3 !. ( ☺-5 , # . -#

C E N T R A L D E S I G N C E L LD A T E O F F I R S T D R A W ND A T E O F C U R R E N T U P D A T I O N

H Y D E R A B A D M E T R O P O L I T A N W A T E R S U P P L Y A N D S E W E R A G E B O A R D

1 6 - 0 4 - 2 0 0 11 0 - 1 1 - 2 0 0 0

>& " 8 5 # & & ( 4 . 5 -?

Sunikesula

Head 405.5 Mts

Status• Pipeline works

• Tenders received• 25% to 29% less (Saving Rs.110 Crores)• Works to commence shortly

• Water Treatment Plant• Tenders received• -20.16% for part 1 & +11.9% for part 2 (saving 4.6 crores)

• Enroute Reservoirs• Tenders received• +2% for 1 and -8.25% to 12.81% for others (saving 2.12 crores)

• Pumping Equipment• Tenders due

Abatement of Pollution to river Musi

HMWSSB

• Assistance under NRCAP• Detailed Project Report –Rs.344 Crores• 70% assistance from GOI• Balance from beneficiaries• Sewerage cess to be enhanced to meet

O&M cost

SALIENT FEATURES OF CONSERVATION OF

RIVER MUSI PROJECT.

•Interception and Diversion of dry weather flow from the existing 18 storm water drains joining River Musi in the city area on either side.

•Interception and Diversion structures with screens and grid chambers.

•Conveying mains of 33 Kms., to transmit the DWF from the I&D works to the proposed STPs.

•Sewage Treatment Plants at 5 places to treat expected flows by 2005 of 592 Mld.

Amberet - 339 MldJiaguda - 21 Mld

Nagole - 172 MldNallacheruvu - 30 MldNandimusalaiguda - 30 Mld

Total - 592 Mld

Rain Water Harvesting

HMWSSB

Past Performance

25.1335.25

43.6053.79

59.6364.46

80.56

106.24 110.59120.10

125.00 127.30

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

90-91 91-92 92-93 93-94 94-95 95-96 96-97 97-98 98-99 99-00 00-01 01-02

Rs. C

rore

s

Debt ServiceDepreciationChemicalsOpns & MtceStaffPowerRevenue

Financial Projections

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

350

400

450

2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09

Year

Rs.

Cro

res

DebtServiceDepreciationMaintenanceStaffPowerSales

Non-domestic Tariffs in Metros

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Rs.

per

KL

Rs. Per KL 60 40 35 25

Bangalore Chennai Mumbai Hyderabad

Chennai and Mumbai have large captive non-domestic consumptions

Domestic Slab Rates in Metros

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

Rs.

per

Mon

th

Rs per Mth 100 90 90 50 30

AP Mun Corpns

Hyderabad Bangalore Chennai Mumbai

Chennai : Additional 7% water & sew tax on annual rental value

Domestic Tariff - Metros

25.0036.0025.00Above 20025.0030.0010.0050-20025.0012.0010.0030-5025.0012.006.0025-3015.008.006.0015-2510.006.006.0010-152.506.006.000-10

509090MinimumChennaiBangaloreHyderabadSlab (KLPM)

Board Total

0

20,000,000

40,000,000

60,000,000

80,000,000

100,000,000

120,000,000

140,000,000

160,000,000

180,000,000

200,000,000

Apr-99

Jun-9

9Aug-9

9Oct-

99Dec-9

9Feb

-00Apr-

00Ju

n-00Aug

-00Oct-

00Dec-0

0Feb

-01Apr-

01Ju

n-01Aug

-01Oct-

01Dec

-01Feb

-02Apr-0

2Ju

n-02Aug

-02Oct-

02Dec

-02Feb

-03

Collections in the Month(Rs)

Board Total

0

20,000

40,000

60,000

80,000

100,000

120,000

140,000

Apr-99

Jun-99

Aug-99

Oct-99

Dec-99

Feb-00

Apr-00

Jun-00

Aug-00Oct-

00Dec-0

0Feb

-01Apr-

01Ju

n-01Aug

-01Oct-

01Dec-0

1Feb

-02Apr-0

2Ju

n-02Aug-02Oct-

02Dec-0

2Feb

-03

No of People paying(No)

Customer Care InitiativesHMWSSB

• Citizen’s Charter

• MCC 1916

• SWC

• Revenue MIS

• Lok Adalat

• MSTC

•Monitoring Indicators

Complaint wise Redressal EfficiencyFrom 01-02-1999 to 04-03-2003

• 93.2%• 83.3%• 74.6%• 65.9%• 64.3%• 63.1%• 59.2%• 58.9%• 58.2%• 56.1%• 53.4%

• Septic Tank Clearing• Changing of line requested• Cleaning & Maintenance of meters• Meter repairs & Replacements• Change of category of consumption• Sewerage overflows on the road• No water for ‘X’ days• Low water Pressure• Others• Non-receipt of water bill• Water Leakage

Division wise Redressal EfficiencyFrom 01-02-1999 to 04-03-2003

• 38.2%• 28.6%• 53.0%• 62.7%• 41.4%• 59.7%• 54.5%• 35.4%• 38.6%

• Division 1• Division 2• Division 3 • Division 4• Division 5 • Division 6• Division 7 • Division 9• Division 10

Analysis of Top 10 complaintsFrom 01-02-1999 to 04-03-2003

No water for x days17.76%

Replacement of missing manhole

1.08%

Sewerage overflows on the road

36.00%

non-receipt of water bill

0.30%

erratic timing of water supply

0.25%

water leakage4.98%

Chokage customer premises29.99%

Others1.61%

polluted water supply3.37%

low water pressure4.66%

These constitute about 99.29 % of 2,95,447 complaints from 2/99 till 04.03.03

No Water for 'X'days

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

180

200

01/0

2/19

99

01/0

4/19

99

01/0

6/19

99

01/0

8/19

99

01/1

0/19

99

01/1

2/19

99

01/0

2/20

00

01/0

4/20

00

01/0

6/20

00

01/0

8/20

00

01/1

0/20

00

01/1

2/20

00

01/0

2/20

01

01/0

4/20

01

01/0

6/20

01

01/0

8/20

01

01/1

0/20

01

01/1

2/20

01

01/0

2/20

02

01/0

4/20

02

01/0

6/20

02

01/0

8/20

02

01/1

0/20

02

01/1

2/20

02

01/0

2/20

03

Low Water Pressure

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

01/0

2/19

99

01/0

4/19

99

01/0

6/19

99

01/0

8/19

99

01/1

0/19

99

01/1

2/19

99

01/0

2/20

00

01/0

4/20

00

01/0

6/20

00

01/0

8/20

00

01/1

0/20

00

01/1

2/20

00

01/0

2/20

01

01/0

4/20

01

01/0

6/20

01

01/0

8/20

01

01/1

0/20

01

01/1

2/20

01

01/0

2/20

02

01/0

4/20

02

01/0

6/20

02

01/0

8/20

02

01/1

0/20

02

01/1

2/20

02

01/0

2/20

03

Sewerage overflows on the Road

0

50

100

150

200

250

300

01/0

2/19

99

01/0

4/19

99

01/0

6/19

99

01/0

8/19

99

01/1

0/19

99

01/1

2/19

99

01/0

2/20

00

01/0

4/20

00

01/0

6/20

00

01/0

8/20

00

01/1

0/20

00

01/1

2/20

00

01/0

2/20

01

01/0

4/20

01

01/0

6/20

01

01/0

8/20

01

01/1

0/20

01

01/1

2/20

01

01/0

2/20

02

01/0

4/20

02

01/0

6/20

02

01/0

8/20

02

01/1

0/20

02

01/1

2/20

02

01/0

2/20

03

Chokage Customer Premises

0

50

100

150

200

250

01/0

2/19

99

01/0

4/19

99

01/0

6/19

99

01/0

8/19

99

01/1

0/19

99

01/1

2/19

99

01/0

2/20

00

01/0

4/20

00

01/0

6/20

00

01/0

8/20

00

01/1

0/20

00

01/1

2/20

00

01/0

2/20

01

01/0

4/20

01

01/0

6/20

01

01/0

8/20

01

01/1

0/20

01

01/1

2/20

01

01/0

2/20

02

01/0

4/20

02

01/0

6/20

02

01/0

8/20

02

01/1

0/20

02

01/1

2/20

02

01/0

2/20

03

GE cases in Fever Hospital- Trend Reversed

0

500

1000

1500

199519961997199819992000200120022003

1995 328 577 657 595 722 1079 1299 1030 596 636 416 418

1996 396 546 882 878 1269 1407 1159 866 617 471 342 325

1997 312 361 607 571 692 669 758 684 511 448 363 355

1998 391 501 684 982 1366 872 933 1053 834 750 435 322

1999 327 381 495 630 1008 607 493 344 236 235 233 195

2000 236 285 439 432 512 678 867 294 151 123 93 75

2001 66 67 74 67 76 82 111 94 82 119 61 64

2002 49 17 12 4 10 3 1 0 0 0 0 0

2003 0

Jan Feb Mar Apl May Jun July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec

Never Paid Connections

34.15 lakhs5% incentive

6.83 Crores17,401Converted

36.54 Crores43,489Total

AmountNumber

GOAL HMWSSB

Target

March2004

January2003

20.078

Alternative Indicator is:

No. of GE cases per Lakh population per month

Difficult for assessment on a regular basis

DALY(Disability Affected Life Years)Ensure Public

Health by provision of safe drinking water and safe sanitary conditions

Baseline2000-01

IndicatorsGoal

OutcomesCoverage & UFW

Workings

HMWSSB

Target

50066611027. Complaints per LakhConnections

March2004

January2003

16%18%19%6. Physical Losses

134 MGD133MGD117 MGD5. Quantity Supplied

162 MGD162 MGD145 MGD4. Capacity

4.20Lakhs

4.03Lakhs

3.40Lakhs

3. Number of domestic Connections

81%85%75%2. Population covered

Alt. day 2 hours

Alt. day 2 hours

Alt. day2 hours

1. Frequency of supply1. Increase access to piped water supply

Baseline2000-01

IndicatorsOutcomes

Outcomes HMWSSB

Target

100811703. Pollution complaints per lakh conns per month

March2004

January2003

350228NA2. Number of slums covered fully

156.22.51. NSDP connections (from 01-04-1999) in ‘000

3. Increase access to poor

99%99%98%2. % of Safe samples tested

20.0781. Number of GE cases per Lakh Population Per Month

2. Better quality of Drinking Water Supplied

Baseline2000-01

IndicatorsOutcomes

1. 90% coverage of a slum is considered as full coverage2. Accurate details of coverage of slums are being worked out

Outcomes HMWSSB

Target

750130714765. Complaints per lakhconnections per month

60%54%50%4. Population coverage (%)

283 MLD20 MLD20 MLD(b) Upto 30 BOD

March2004

January2003

3.20Lakhs

3.15 Lakhs

2.70Lakhs

3. Number of sewerage connections

283 MLD133 MLD133 MLD2. Quantity Treated

NIL113 MLD113 MLD(a) Primary Treatment

283 MLD133 MLD133 MLD1. Treatment Capacity4. Increase environmental sanitation through sewerage collection, treatment and disposal system

Baseline2000-01

IndicatorsOutcomes

Outcomes HMWSSB

Target

13.613.579.03 Demand (Rs. Crores PM)

March2004

January2003

Rs.8.28Rs.12.50Rs. 8.37. Realisation per KL (*)

Rs.11.51Rs.12.50Rs.11.22 6. Cost per KL of water billed

13.012.277.44. Collections (Rs. CroresPM)

10%16%17%2. Unaccounted for water (Revenue Losses)

3%5%5%1. Nonrevenue (accounted for ) water

5. Financial Self sufficiency & Provision of services at economic cost

Baseline

2000-01IndicatorsOutcome

s

* Appropriate tariff revision needed

HMWSSB

PPP

Public Private Partnership HMWSSB

• Water treatment plant,• Sewerage treatment plants –2 Nos,• Water Tankers• Johannesburg experiment• Bangalore proposals• Kukatpally initiative• Concession proposal• GDANSK model

HMWSSB

Thank you