WATER TARIFF VALUE CHAIN Setting of Raw Water, Bulk Water and Retail Water Tariffs

1. WATER TARIFF VALUE CHAIN Setting of Raw Water, Bulk Water and Retail Water Tariffs Presentation to the Parliamentary Portfolio Committee Mahomed Vawda

2. Objective:- To provide the committee with a clearer understanding of how water is priced through its value chain from raw water, through to bulk water and finally retail water tariffs. PRESENTATION OBJECTIVES

3. Raw Water TariffCharged by DWAF

4. RAW WATER TARIFFS • Legislative mandate: Section 56 – 60 of the National Water Act, requires DWAF to establish a pricing strategy for raw water charges. • Raw water Pricing Strategy was first established in November 1999. • Revised Strategy was approved (Gazetted) for implementation effective from April 2007.

5. OBJECTIVES OF THE PRICING STRATEGY Raw Water Pricing Strategy Ecological Sustainability Economic Efficiency Social Equity Financial Sustainability

6. WATER REQUIREMENTS NOT SUBJECT TO PRICING • Permissible use in terms of Schedule 1 of the NWA • The reserve related to basic human needs • The ecological reserve • Water required to meet South Africa’s commitments regarding international waters obligations.

7. CONTENTS OF THE PRICING STRATEGY • Funding water resources management cost by water management institutions. • Funding of the development and use of water works • Established of a waste discharge charge

8. Water Resource Management Charges for Water Resource Management Activities Monitoring & assessing water resource availability and use Planning & implementation of CMSs Water use allocations Water Resources Management Activities in WMAs Institutional development & public partici- pation Management of floods, droughts, water abstraction, Etc. Management of water quality water & resource protection Water conservation & demand management

9. Budgeting for activity costs for Water Resource Management Charges Costs of WRM activities in WMA Registered volumes/waste load in WMA Unit Cost Costs of WRM activities will be divided between abstraction and waste related activities, both based on registered volumes. For inter-basin transfers, the loss of income to the donor CMA will be funded by water use charges raised In the receiver WMA

10. CHARGES FOR STATE FUNDED (SOCIAL) GOVERNMENT WATER SCHEMES Two charges applicable: • The development (capital cost) charge, comprising: • Depreciation component for the purposes of funding refurbishment cost • Return on assets component for the purposes of funding development and betterment of waterworks • O&M cost to sectors is charged pro-rata on estimated annual water use.

11. Methodology for determining charges for state funded (Social) GWS FOR NEW INFRASTRUCTURE & BETTERMENTS FORREFURBISHMENT Depreciation component: • Asset value as determined in 2000 • Depreciate on straight line over useful life as per table • Examples: Dams – 10% over 45y Steel Pipes - 75% over 30y • Asset values will annually be indexed by PPI until formal revaluation (+ every 10 years) Return on assets: • 4% on completion cost – new infrastructure, or • 4% on depreciated replacement cost (asset value as determined in 2000) • Asset values will annually be inflated by PPI until formal revaluation (+ every 10 years) • Not applicable to existing State irrigation schemes • Operation and maintenance charge: • Direct and indirect costs • Scheme by scheme basis

12. WATER SCHEMES FUNDED OFF BUDGET • DWAF is custodian of some 300 large dams contained in more than 150 Government water schemes throughout South Africa. • The water sector requires investments in excess of R20 billion over a period of 20 years for dam and related projects. • The fiscus cannot alone pay for these large capital outlay and the NWA allows the Minister to direct TCTA to implement and fund commercially viable schemes with non Governmental funding. • This allows TCTA to raise loans to finance the development of new infrastructure on the understanding that the loans will be serviced through cost recovery from economic water users in terms of billable water use charges. • The primary charge is the Capital Unit Charge (CUC)

13. CAPITAL UNIT CHARGE (CUC) • Tariff will be set to ensure that the debt is fully paid by the end user within a reasonable time period (not longer than the life of the asset), after considering affordability and future augmentation of the scheme. • Debt will not overlap unreasonably to another project causing financial strain. • The CUC may be phased in during the construction period and interest will generally not be capitalized after completion of the construction. • Tariffs are based on water used from the scheme.

14. Waste Discharge Charge System • The waste discharge charge system comprise of two distinct water use charges which may be applied in a specific catchment. These are:- • Charges to cover the quantifiable cost of administratively implemented measures for the mitigation of waste discharge related impacts (mitigation charges). • Charges that provides a disincentive or a deterrent to the discharge of waste (incentive charge).

15. BULK WATER TARIFFS OF WATER BOARDS

16. NORMS FOR BULK POTABLE WATER TARIFFS • Water boards • may set a single tariff for its whole supply area. • may set a separate tariff for each scheme or each water treatment plant – motivated by differentials in the cost of supplying to different customers. • Free basic water is only provided to households at the retail level. • The subsidization or cross subsidization of free basic water is a municipal concern and not within the capability of water boards.

17. NORMS FOR BULK POTABLE WATER TARIFFS • Municipalities are entitled to an equitable share of the national revenue in order to fulfill its function of supplying basic services. • Accordingly stepped tariffs does not form part of the bulk potable water tariff structure. • Tariff increases may be smoothed out over time to take into consideration projected future infrastructure development costs. • Operating surpluses may be earned to finance future capital expansion for refurbishment, repayment of debt and contingencies.

18. INPUT COST OF BULK WATER

19. INPUT COST OF BULK WATER

20. RETAIL WATERTARIFFOFWATER SERVICEAUTHORITIES

21. Primary responsibility for the setting of retail water and sanitation tariffs rests with the Water Services Authority • This is in terms of both the Water Services Act, 108 of 1997 and the Municipal Systems Act, No 32 of 2000 • Where a WSP is appointed to provide a service responsibility for regulating and approving the tariff still rests with the WSA RESPONSIBILITY FOR SETTING OF RETAIL TARIFFS

22. DWAF is the national regulator for water services. • DWAF exercises a regulatory oversight role over WSAs with respect to the setting of retail water tariffs. • DWAF has issued norms and standards in respect of tariffs for Water Services (S10 of WS Act). • DWAF cannot approve “Rand and cents” of tariff, but can approve tariff structure and ensure compliance with promulgated regulations. ROLE OF NATIONAL WS REGULATOR

23. In terms of the WS Act and the Municipal Systems Act, each WSA musthave a tariff policy based on the following key principles: • Tariffs should be applied equitably and fairly • Payment for services should be in proportion to use • Tariffs should be pro-poor in their orientation and affordable to all households (especially vulnerable groups) • Tariffs must reflect all costsreasonably associated with providing the service TARIFF PRINCIPLES (1)

24. Tariffs must facilitate financial sustainability of WSA • Tariffs must encourage economical, effective & efficient use of resources • Tariffs may differentiate between different categories of users, and different levels of services • All forms of subsidies must be transparent and fully disclosed TARIFF PRINCIPLES (2)

25. Minister allowed to prescribe norms & standards of water service tariffs – (WS Act) – promulgated in 2002 commonly referred to as “S10 regulations” • S10 Regulations focuses on: CURRENT S10 REGULATIONS (1)

26. CURRENT S10 REGULATIONS (2)

27. In the absence of financial ring-fencing, many WSAs do not know how much it costs to provide the service. • Tariff sometimes linked to overall increase in revenue requirements for all services (Water services tariffs – sometimes viewed as “cash cow”). • Tariff increases are estimated and not calculated scientifically / objectively. • Inefficient and ineffective use of subsidies also impacts on tariff setting. • Strive to keep tariff increases low – impacts on service quality e.g. maintenance usually neglected. COMMON PROBEMS IN WSA APPROACHES TO TARIFF SETTING

28. Regulation unit embarked on WSAs tariff assessment to broadly determine compliance with Sect 10 regulation particularly the rising block tariff • This will enable the regulator to see how many WSAs have tariff structures that cater for the poor or indigent • 236 municipalities participated in the survey • Only 183 municipalities which represent 78% municipalities have already implemented 3 or rising blocks tariffs . • Gauteng has complete rising block tariff structure, whereas EC (59%) & KZN (69%) falling behind on the implementation of rising block tariff structure TARIFF DATA BASE FOR 2006-07

29. MP&FS are between 76% and 80% of rising block tariff implementation whereas Limp; WC; NW & NC range between 82% and 92% of implementation • However, most of the municipalities are not reporting on the criteria used in setting their block tariffs • There is currently no direct correlation between implementation of rising block tariffs with realization of profit margins • In most cases the defined blocks developed by the municipalities are too wide & defeats the purpose of the rising block tariff structure. • This means that in some cases the blocks become regressive- the more you use the less you pay TARIFF DATA BASE FOR 2006-07

30. Difficult to set tariffs if cost of service provision cannot be accurately ascertained, this makes it difficult for the regulator to approve tariff. • Increasing number of indigent households – require greater and more efficient use of subsidies and targeting mechanisms. • Attempts to keep tariff increases to a minimum results in insufficient revenue for O& M. • Increasing bad debt and poor cost recovery places a burden on the financial viability of WSA. • Inappropriate use of the equitable share. • Revenue generated from water not invested back into the business. CHALLENGES

31. Municipal tariffs cannot be evaluated in isolation of the total sequence of charges (tariff chain) • The end user in effect pays for all up stream charges (WRM levy; raw water abstraction cost; and the bulk water distribution cost) • Municipal tariffs could not be evaluated comprehensively without knowing the volume of water used per tariff block and the success of billing recovered CHALLENGES

32. WSAs should be required to financially ring-fence their business, this process should enable WSA to reveal true cost of service provided. • Continues communication of S10 regulations and subsequent monitoring and analysis of tariff structures to ensure compliance with S10 regulations. • Appropriate use of the equitable share must be encouraged. • Support should be provided to municipalities around credit control and debt collection issues. WAY FORWARD

33. THANK YOU