Portsmouth Water's formal Statement of Response to representations on its Draft Water Resources Management Plan has confirmed that the company  is not anticipating that any major capital expenditure will be required in the short/medium term.

The Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs received a relatively low number of 15 representations in total commenting on the Plan from public bodies which included District, City and County Councils,  Consumer Council for Water, the Environment Agency, English Heritage and Ofwat.

The Statement of Response document sets out where the company has made changes to their draft Water Resources Management Plan to reflect the representations made.

Portsmouth Water has outlined each of the key issues raised by each respondent and has then provided its response to the issue followed by changes it has made to its Draft Plan.

The CCW made the interesting point in its submission that it understands that as Portsmouth Water do not forecast a deficit over the planning period there is no major capital expenditure required in the short/medium term, commenting:

“The company appear therefore to be proposing a “business as usual” approach over the next five years, with resource development proposed in the longer term, in part to contribute to the proposed regional water management strategy. The company has a good track record in securing supplies for its customers and keeping bills low, so this approach appears to be consistent with that ethos.”

Portsmouth Water said that  CCW were correct in their interpretation of the impact of not having a deficit, confirming that the Draft Final WRMP 2014 is based on “business as usual” with no major capital expenditure.

On CCW’s view that given the company’s intention to share the benefits of future resource development with neighbouring water companies it would be good to see that Portsmouth Water’s customers had been consulted on this and other strategic

Decisions,  Portsmouth Water said it already provided bulk supplies to other companies. Customers would not be disadvantaged by the bulk supplies, either in terms of cost, or reliability of supply.

Portsmouth City Council had separately raised the issue of bulk supplies and continuity of supply in droughts – the utility said that bulk supplies were included in the shorter return period events (1 in 20) but would not be guaranteed in rare events covered by Emergency Drought Orders (1 in 300). The larger bulk supplies offered to Southern Water, as part of the Alternative Plan, had not in fact been taken up by Southern Water. However, Portsmouth Water said it recognised the need to engage with customers if further significant bulk supplies were proposed.

 The Company now intends to submit a Draft Final Water Resources Management Plan to the Secretary of State asking for permission to formally publish the plan.

Click here to access the response document in full.

http://www.portsmouthwater.co.uk/WorkArea/showcontent.aspx?id=10488