Utility Week

18 | 29TH NOVEMBER - 5TH DECEMBER 2019 | UTILITY WEEK Policy & Regulation Analysis to say it's too much. Normally one or two say it's too much, but this is unprecedented. Con- versations and speculation seem to suggest a number of referrals to the CMA. The process is expensive and time-consuming so most people wouldn't skip through the door for that. If a big number of companies all go to the CMA that wouldn't be indicative of a suc- cessful process, so let's hope it doesn't come to that," one chief executive says. Tough job, but someone's got to do it Miller-Bakewell says the higher number of companies said to be considering an appeal to the CMA shows that Ofwat is doing something right. He says: "I've always argued that the true demon- stration that Ofwat has really pushed things to the limit in terms of what is acceptable is for there to be multiple appeals. That's the test of this review. "Will all those that are threatening appeals actually do so? That would demonstrate that Ofwat has 'squeezed the pips' and con‡ rm that we've got to the bottom of the cycle in terms of tightening the methodology." When Ofwat was ‡ rst set up, its job was economic regulation, but today it does so much more. Take, for example, leak- age. Leakage only really became an issue in the latter part of the 1990s, so setting leakage targets and determining what funds should be allocated to try and meet them only came along in the post-privatisation world. The evolution of the regulator reŽ ects in part the impact of lobby groups, who have exerted more pressure as political expecta- tions have changed over time – something that applies to other regulated industries too. Miller-Bakewell explains that these changes have been incremental rather than dramatic. "It has been an evolutionary pro- cess with the direction of travel of raising expectations in all areas for what compa- nies can sensibly be expected to deliver," he says. "You can identify di" erent approaches associated with di" erent leaders at Ofwat. We have moved from the civil servant-type approach to a business-type of approach." Since the second review in 1999, when companies recognised the political context they were in, there has been a degree of adversarial debate between the companies and regulators. As one commentator concludes: "It's part of the regulatory process and it's not unique to water. If it was all lovey-dovey you would be deeply suspicious." Ruth Williams, water correspondent, Utility Week continued from previous page "We get strong leadership from regulators, but the sector also needs fl exibility and room to manoeuvre." BOB TAYLOR, CEO, PORTSMOUTH WATER A s a water utility you have a vast network of assets, people and cus- tomers to take care of. You may have miles of pipelines, mil- lions of customers, thousands of individual water meters, hundreds of pumps and dozens of reservoirs. If there is an accident or a leak it can take engineers hours – even days – to ‡ nd the problem and deal with it. In the meantime, water is lost, customers don't get served and people's lives could be at risk. If a toxic substance was accidentally or deliber- ately added to a reservoir on a major city's network, for example, millions of custom- ers could be made ill. Emergency procedures would include stopping pumping stations and shutting down pipelines. Customers would have to be warned, with notices to boil water or follow emergency procedures if they are ill. Police and hospitals would have to be alerted, insurance companies noti‡ ed. The list of to-dos goes on. If you do not deal with the problem quickly, e— ciently and compassionately your reputa- tion goes down the drain. There are steps you can take, and they involve better use of your customer data. Knowing where your custom- ers live on the grid, how to best contact them, whether they are at home at the time – all these things could help save lives and your reputa- tion. Gathering and analysing this data, while also being compliant with privacy laws, complicates the process. Having a predetermined process workŽ ow for emergen- cies is also necessary, but this must have the Ž exibility to change given di" erent circum- stances. Here is where a digital twin could help; a computer- ised companion that mirrors the state of your physical assets, giving you an oppor- tunity to test and respond to any possible event and then prepare more e" ectively. An application combining customer data with docu- mented operating procedures would e" ectively guide an engineer through each step of the process they need to follow to ensure safety and compli- ance. This solution is So› ware AG's ARIS platform. Using ARIS, you could also enforce "read and understood" messages to audit engineers to ensure they have completed their tasks in the right order. It would also allow you easy access to any information that should always be available – such as site plans, equipment lists, emergency contacts, method statements, access protocols, etc. The application would provide value to your ‡ eld engineers attending hundreds of sites to perform routine maintenance or servicing or to provide emergency repairs/ replacements for all the dispa- rate and di" erent assets across the network. Sounds good, right? It is. Don't let your customer data – and your reputation – go down the drain. To start a conversation around how you can bet- ter harness the assets, data, people and processes in your company, please contact: Rik¢Gunderson, UK Utility Director. Email: Rik.Gunder- son@so› wareag.com EXPERT VIEW RIK GUNDERSON, UK UTILITY DIRECTOR, SOFTWARE AG Don't fl ush away your customer data!

• Cover