PART II

UTILITIES COMPARISONS
(Figures and Tables)
 Table 2: Names and Locations of Utilities
Area
City State Population Year Name of Utility
Ahmedabad Gujarat 4,491,000 2005–2006 Ahmedabad Municipal Corporation
Amritsar Punjab 804,455 2005–2006 Municipal Corporation, Amritsar
Bangalore Karnataka 5,361,500 2005–2006 Bangalore Water Supply and Sewerage Board
Bhopal Madhya Pradesh 1,437,000 2005–2006 Bhopal Municipal Corporation
Chandigarh UT Chandigarh 1,150,000 2005–2006 Municipal Corporation, Chandigarh
Chennai Tamil Nadu 5,320,000 2005–2006 Chennai Metropolitan Water Supply & Sewerage Board
Coimbatore Tamil Nadu 994,000 2005–2006 Coimbatore City Municipal Corporation
Indore Madhya Pradesh 2,200,000 2005–2006 Indore Municipal Corporation
Jabalpur Madhya Pradesh 1,050,000 2005–2006 Jabalpur Municipal Corporation
Jamshedpur Jharkhand 488,000 2005–2006 Jamshedpur Utilities & Services Company, Limited
Kolkata West Bengal 3,998,000 2005–2006 Kolkata Municipal Corporation
Mathura Uttar Pradesh 238,000 2005–2006 Mathura Municipal Council
Mumbai Maharashtra 13,000,000 2005–2006 Municipal Corporation of Greater Mumbai
Nagpur Maharashtra 2,302,990 2005–2006 Nagpur Municipal Corporation
Nashik Maharashtra 1,350,000 2005–2006 Nashik Municipal Corporation
Rajkot Gujarat 980,000 2005–2006 Rajkot Municipal Corporation
Surat Gujarat 2,954,000 2005–2006 Surat Municipal Corporation
Varanasi Uttar Pradesh 1,489,000 2005–2006 Varanasi Jal Sansthan
Vijayawada Andra Pradesh 675,000 2005–2006 Vijayawada Municipal Corporation
Visakhapatnam Andra Pradesh 920,000 2005–2006 Greater Visakhapatnam Municipal Corporation

Table 3: Size of Utilities

Production Number of Number of People
Utility (m3/day) Utility Connections Utility Staff Utility Served
Mumbai 3,200,000 Ahmedabad 556,734 Mumbai 8,371 Mumbai 13,000,000
Kolkata 971,560 Bangalore 486,850 Chennai 4,578 Bangalore 4,978,330
Bangalore 923,090 Chennai 344,079 Kolkata 3,866 Kolkata 3,948,000
Ahmedabad 623,836 Surat 310,836 Indore 2,979 Ahmedabad 3,716,624
Chennai 623,836 Mumbai 309,226 Bangalore 2,510 Surat 2,954,000
Nagpur 608,220 Nagpur 265,231 Bhopal 2,171 Chennai 2,364,725
Surat 554,685 Kolkata 262,839 Ahmedabad 1,200 Nagpur 2,277,990
Chandigarh 381,280 Rajkot 193,879 Chandigarh 1,196 Indore 1,700,000
Jamshedpur 370,110 Indore 159,104 Nagpur 856 Bhopal 1,418,460
Nashik 310,000 Chandigarh 139,300 Varanasi 676 Nashik 1,250,000
Varanasi 270,000 Amritsar 127,786 Amritsar 617 Varanasi 1,243,000
Bhopal 258,000 Nashik 127,562 Surat 532 Chandigarh 1,150,000
Visakhapatnam 228,451 Varanasi 114,907 Visakhapatnam 466 Rajkot 983,000
Coimbatore 228,400 Coimbatore 113,762 Coimbatore 452 Amritsar 804,455
Indore 183,000 Bhopal 105,012 Vijayawada 445 Coimbatore 799,000
Jabalpur 175,115 Visakhapatnam 85,668 Nashik 440 Jabalpur 790,000
Amritsar 171,005 Vijayawada 78,298 Jamshedpur 298 Visakhapatnam 750,000
Rajkot 143,836 Jabalpur 46,260 Rajkot 211 Vijayawada 600,000
Vijayawada 131,833 Jamshedpur 38,800 Mathura 160 Jamshedpur 458,000
Mathura 38,172 Mathura 24,643 Jabalpur 17 Mathura 238,000

______________________________________________________________________________________________________
Utilities Comparison - Institutions 17
 Figure 1: Type of Water Utility

No. of Utilities
No. of Utilities
10

(15)
Bansalan
Ahmedabad
6 Amritsar Metro Carigara
Bhopal
Chandigarh Guimba
Coimbatore
Indore Muñoz
4 Jabalpur
Kolkata San Francisco
Mumbai
Nagpur Santa Rosa
Nashik
Jagna
2 Rajkot Silay
Darasa Surat
Nueva Vizcaya
Vijayawada Tandag
Tibal-og Bangalore
Viskhapatnam
Mathura Tagbilaran
Jamshedpur Chennai
Calapan Varanasi
Victorias
0
Municipal Council Municipal Corporation Private City Board Autonomous Local
Body

Figure 2: Capital Expenditure Per Connection

Utilities
Bhopal
Varanasi
Amritsar
Indore
Ahmedabad
Mathura
Nagpur
Chandigarh
Bangalore
Rajkot
Jabalpur
Coimbatore
Jamshedpur
Surat
Nashik
Kolkata
Mumbai
Visakhapatnam
Chennai 10,080

0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000

Capital Expenditure (Rs per connection)

18 2007 Benchmarking and Data Book of Water Utilities in India

 Figure 3: Production Volume

Utilities
Mathura
Vijayawada
Rajkot
Amritsar
Jabalpur
Indore
Coimbatore
Visakhapatnam
Bhopal
Varanasi
Nashik
Jamshedpur
Chandigarh
Surat
Nagpur
Chennai
Ahmedabad
Bangalore
Kolkata
Mumbai 3.2

0.000 0.200 0.400 0.600 0.800 1.000

Production (million cubic meters per day)

Figure 4: Storage Capacity

Utilities
Mathura
Amritsar
Surat
Jamshedpur
Vijayawada
Jabalpur
Bangalore
Varanasi
Visakhapatnam
Bhopal
Nashik
Indore
Coimbatore
Nagpur
Rajkot
Chandigarh
Chennai
Kolkata
Ahmedabad
Mumbai

0 200 400 600 800 1,000

Storage Capacity (1,000 cubic meters)

Utilities Comparison - Production 19

 Figure 5: Production Metering

No. of Utilities
14

12
Tibal-og

Jagna
10
Tagbilaran

Argao
8
Ahmedabad
Amritsar Buhi
Darasa Bhopal
6 Chandigarh Guimba
Nueva Vizcaya Indore
Bangalore Jabalpur Muñoz
Padada Kolkata
4 Chennai
Coimbatore MathuraSan Francisco
San Pedro MPC Nashik
Jamshedpur
Mumbai Rajkot Sta. Rosa
San Pedro RACI Varanasi
2 Nagpur
Surat Vijayawada Silay
Calapan Visakhapatnam
Tandag
0 Bansalan Metro Carigara
100% metered No metering
Percentage of Production Metered
Percentage of production metered

Figure 6: Water Coverage

Utilities Utilities
Visakhapatnam
Mathura
Vijayawada
Jamshedpur
Ahmedabad
Jabalpur
Amritsar
Coimbatore
Indore
Surat
Varanasi
Kolkata
Bhopal
Chennai
Nagpur
Nashik
Bangalore
Rajkot
Mumbai
Chandigarh

0 20 40 60 80 100
Percent of Total Population

20 2007 Benchmarking and Data Book of Water Utilities in India

 Figure 7: Water Availability
Utilities

Rajkot
Indore
Visakhapatnam
Bhopal
Mathura
Ahmedabad
Surat
Vijayawada
Coimbatore
Nashik
Mumbai
Jabalpur
Bangalore
Nagpur
Chennai
Jamshedpur
Varanasi
Kolkata
Amritsar
Chandigarh

0.0 4.0 8.0 12.0 16.0 20.0 24.0

Average Number of Hours Per Day

Figure 8: Water Use

Domestic Others UFW
Utilities
Jamshedpur
Nashik
Nagpur
Coimbatore
Bhopal
Amritsar
Visakhapatnam
Chandigarh
Bangalore
Kolkata
Jabalpur
Varanasi
Chennai
Rajkot
Vijayawada
Mumbai
Indore*
Surat*
Ahmedabad*
Mathura*

0 20 40 60 80 100
* Indore, Surat, Ahmedabad & Mathura excludes UFW Percent Other use includes industrial, commercial,and institutional.

Utilities Comparison - Service 21

 Figure 9: Per Capita Consumption

Utilities
Bhopal
Bangalore
Amritsar
Indore
Chennai
Nashik
Nagpur
Rajkot
Coimbatore
Visakhapatnam
Kolkata
Jabalpur
Varanasi
Chandigarh
Vijayawada
Ahmedabad
Mumbai
Jamshedpur 203

0 50 100 150 200

Liters Per Capita Per Day

Figure 10: Household Monthly Consumption

Utilities
Rajkot
Amritsar
Bangalore
Coimbatore
Bhopal
Vijayawada
Indore
Nashik
Visakhapatnam
Ahmedabad
Nagpur
Varanasi
Chandigarh
Chennai
Mathura
Surat
Kolkata
Jabalpur
Jamshedpur
Mumbai 156
10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Cubic Meters Per Month

22 2007 Benchmarking and Data Book of Water Utilities in India

 Figure 11: Household Monthly Bill

Utilities

Kolkata
Mathura
Bhopal
Surat
Ahmedabad
Rajkot
Visakhapatnam
Indore
Vijayawada
Jabalpur
Coimbatore
Jamshedpur
Chennai
Nashik
Varanasi
Amritsar
Bangalore
Mumbai 708.46

0 50 100 150 200 250 300

Rs Per Month

Figure 12: Unaccounted For Water

Utilities

Jamshedpur

Mumbai

Jabalpur

Visakhapatnam

Chennai

Rajkot

Vijayawada

Varanasi

Kolkata

Chandigarh

Coimbatore

Bangalore

Nagpur

Amritsar

Nashik

0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Percentage Unaccounted For Water

Utilities Comparison - Service 23

 Figure 13: Consumer Metering

No. of Utilities
10

Jamshedpur
4 Rajkot
Indore Vijayawada
Kolkata Amritsar
Bhopal Chennai Bangalore
Jabalpur Ahmedabad Nashik
2 Mathura Surat Chandigarh
Varanasi Visakhapatnam Mumbai
Nagpur

Coimbatore
0
<1% 10–1% 99–40% 100%
Percentage of Connections Metered

Figure 14: Staff Per 1,000 Connections

Utilities
Jabalpur
Rajkot
Surat
Ahmedabad
Nagpur
Nashik
Coimbatore
Amritsar
Bangalore
Visakhapatnam
Jamshedpur
Vijayawada
Varanasi
Mathura
Chandigarh
Chennai
Kolkata
Mumbai
Indore
Bhopal

0 5 10 15 20 25
Staff Per 1,000 Connections

24 2007 Benchmarking and Data Book of Water Utilities in India

 Figure 15: Average Tariff

Utilities
Bhopal
Mathura
Kolkata
Ahmedabad
Jabalpur
Surat
Vijayawada
Indore
Varanasi
Coimbatore
Nashik
Jamshedpur
Mumbai
Chandigarh
Rajkot
Nagpur
Visakhapatnam
Amritsar
Chennai
Bangalore

0.00 5.00 10.00 15.00 20.00 25.00

Average Tariff (Rs per cubic meter)

Figure 16: Unit Production Cost

Utilities
Coimbatore
Ahmedabad
Jabalpur
Surat
Nashik
Nagpur
Mathura
Varanasi
Vijayawada
Jamshedpur
Rajkot
Bhopal
Kolkata
Mumbai
Amritsar
Chandigarh
Visakhapatnam
Chennai
Bangalore
Indore

0.00 3.00 6.00 9.00 12.00 15.00

Production Cost (Rs per cubic meter)

Utilities Comparison - Management 25

 Figure 17: Management Salaries

Utilities

Jabalpur
Mathura
Varanasi
Coimbatore
Vijayawada
Nashik
Kolkata
Indore
Surat
Jamshedpur
Nagpur
Rajkot
Ahmedabad
Visakhapatnam
Mumbai
Chennai
Bangalore
Amritsar
Chandigarh

0 10 20 30 40 50
Average Salaries of Top Three Management (Rs1,000 per month)

Figure 18: Connection Fee for House Connection

Utilities
Ahmedabad
Jamshedpur
Surat
Mathura
Chandigarh
Mumbai
Amritsar
Kolkata
Nashik
Bhopal
Nagpur
Bangalore
Rajkot
Chennai
Jabalpur
Visakhapatnam
Varanasi
Indore
Coimbatore
Vijayawada 5,500
0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000
Connection Fee (Rs)

26 2007 Benchmarking and Data Book of Water Utilities in India

 Table 4: Priority Needs of Utility

Utility Priority Needs

Ahmedabad Regular, adequate, safe water All water supplies must be surface Water audit
supply to citizens water

Amritsar Institutional improvement Access survey and management Leak detection and control

Bangalore Reduce unaccounted for water Reuse water for potable uses and Ensure no flow of sewage in storm
industries water drains

Bhopal 24-hour water supply to all Detect leak to control UFW Meeting the future needs of growing
population

Chandigarh Water supply Sewage treatment plant Storm water drainage

Chennai Water conservation Safe disposal of sewage Source identification and

development

Coimbatore Nonrevision of tariffs in nearly Shortage of staff with ban on fresh Limited role of private sector
10 years recruitments

Indore Augmentation of water supply Increase in revenue to make Upgrade existing distribution system
system capacity system sustainable

Jabalpur Leakage control Zoning of water distribution system Collection improvement – realization
of cess

Jamshedpur Increase service coverage 24 x 7 supply with 100% metering Reduction of nonrevenue water

Kolkata Water supply network Management of UFW reduction 24 x 7 water supply with 100%
management metering

Mathura Master plan for distribution Rehabilitation in core of city and Metering and computerization for
system expansion billing and collection

Mumbai Reduce UFW Distribution management from GIS-based network interlinked with
service reservoir to consumer end SCADA

Nagpur Reduce raw water losses Rehabilitation and upgrade existing Upgrade and improvement of existing
infrastructure distribution network

Nashik Full coverage in terms of Reduction in water losses Augmentation of water supply
population and area systems for year 2026 requirement

Rajkot Source augmentation Minimize leaks 100% cost recovery

Surat Reducing pollution of its Exploring alternate sources of Rationalize water tariff for
present source of raw water water sustainability

Varanasi Revenue – billing and Regular supply of potable water to Upgrade, extension, and improved
collection citizens maintenance of existing water supply

Vijayawada Every house to be provided Accountability Decrease in NRW

with a tap

Visakhapatnam Water supply improvement in Refurbish and extend the 100% coverage with 24 x 7 supply
quantity and quality distribution system at uniform
service levels

Utilities Comparison – Management 27

 Figure 19a: Domestic Tariff Structures

Tariff Rate (in Rs per cubic meter)

35.0

30.0 Group 2
Bangalore
Indore
Rajkot
25.0
Vijayawada

20.0

15.0

10.0

5.0

0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Monthly Household Consumption (cubic meters)

Figure 19b: Domestic Tariff Structures

Tariff Rate (in Rs per cubic meter)

30.0

25.0 Chennai
Jamshedpur
Visakhapatnam
Nashik
20.0

15.0

10.0

5.0

0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Monthly Household Consumption (cubic meters)

28 2007 Benchmarking and Data Book of Water Utilities in India

 Figure 19c: Domestic Tariff Structures

Tariff Rate (in Rs per cubic meter)

7.5

Chandigarh
6.0
Ahmedabad
Bhopal
Varanasi

4.5

3.0

1.5

0.0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Monthly Household Consumption (cubic meters)

Figure 19d: Domestic Tariff Structures

Tariff Rate (in Rs per cubic meter)

5.0

Coimbatore
4.5 Mumbai
Amritsar
Nagpur

4.0

3.5

3.0

2.5
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
Monthly Household Consumption (cubic meters)

Utilities Comparison - Tariffs 29

 Figure 20: Operating Ratio

Utilities
Chennai
Mumbai
Jamshedpur
Nagpur
Visakhapatnam
Bangalore
Coimbatore
Surat
Vijayawada
Nashik
Varanasi
Chandigarh
Amritsar
Ahmedabad
Rajkot
Jabalpur
Bhopal
Mathura
Kolkata
Indore 5.03

0.00 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00

Operating Ratio (O&M costs/revenue)

Figure 21: Accounts Receivable

Utilities
Nashik
Jamshedpur
Chennai
Vijayawada
Kolkata
Jabalpur
Coimbatore
Surat
Visakhapatnam
Bhopal
Varanasi
Indore
Amritsar
Rajkot
Bangalore
Ahmedabad
Nagpur
Mumbai
Mathura

0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5 10.0 12.5

Accounts Receivable (months equivalent)

30 2007 Benchmarking and Data Book of Water Utilities in India

 Figure 22: Revenue Collection Efficiency

Utilities
Rajkot
Varanasi
Ahmedabad
Amritsar
Jabalpur
Coimbatore
Nagpur
Visakhapatnam
Indore
Nashik
Chandigarh
Surat
Kolkata
Jamshedpur
Mathura
Bangalore
Vijayawada
Chennai 152
Bhopal 178
Mumbai 189

0 30 60 90 120 150
Percentage Collection over Billings

Figure 23: Annual Operation and Maintenance Costs

Utilities
Mathura
Jabalpur
Vijayawada
Coimbatore
Rajkot
Varanasi
Nashik
Amritsar
Bhopal
Ahmedabad
Jamshedpur
Surat
Visakhapatnam
Nagpur
Chandigarh
Indore
Kolkata
Chennai
Bangalore
Mumbai

0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000

Annual O&M Costs (million rupees)

Utilities Comparison - Tariffs 31

 Figure 24: O&M Cost Components

Utilities Personnel Power/Fuel Other

Bhopal
Surat
Rajkot
Nagpur
Bangalore
Visakhapatnam
Indore
Jamshedpur
Vijayawada
Chandigarh
Jabalpur
Nashik
Kolkata
Mumbai
Varanasi
Chennai
Coimbatore
Amritsar
Mathura

0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90 100
Percent

Figure 25: Leaks Repaired Annually

Utilities
Jabalpur
Mathura
Amritsar
Mumbai
Jamshedpur
Varanasi
Chennai
Chandigarh
Visakhapatnam
Coimbatore
Indore
Nashik
Nagpur
Surat
Vijayawada
Bhopal
Ahmedabad
Rajkot
Bangalore 25,500
Kolkata 77,197

0 5,000 10,000 15,000 20,000 25,000

Leaks Repaired Annually

32 2007 Benchmarking and Data Book of Water Utilities in India

 Figure 26: Meters Replaced Annually

Utilities

Varanasi

Rajkot

Mathura

Kolkata

Jabalpur

Bhopal

Ahmedabad

Jamshedpur

Indore

Surat

Visakhapatnam

Amritsar

Nagpur

Coimbatore

Chandigarh

Bangalore 37,145

0 2,000 4,000 6,000 8,000 10,000

Meters Replaced Annually

Figure 27: Water Quality Sampling

Utilities
Visakhapatnam
Vijayawada
Varanasi
Surat
Rajkot
Nashik
Nagpur
Mumbai
Mathura
Kolkata
Jamshedpur
Jabalpur
Indore
Coimbatore
Chennai
Chandigarh
Bhopal 108/0.8
Bangalore
218/24
Amritsar
730/0.1

0 20 40 60 80 100
Number of Samples Passed/Failed (1,000 samples)

Utilities Comparison - Operation and Maintenance 33

 Figure 28: Complaints Received Annually

Utilities

Nashik

Indore

Jabalpur

Amritsar

Bhopal

Chandigarh

Coimbatore

Rajkot

Surat

Varanasi

Visakhapatnam

Vijayawada

Jamshedpur

Nagpur

Bangalore

Ahmedabad

Mumbai 100.0
Chennai
156.9

0 10 20 30 40 50
Complaints Received Annually (1,000 complaints)

Figure 29: New Connections Annually

Utilities
Mathura
Jabalpur
Kolkata
Varanasi
Ahmedabad
Bhopal
Visakhapatnam
Indore
Jamshedpur
Chandigarh
Coimbatore
Vijayawada
Amritsar
Nagpur
Rajkot
Chennai
Mumbai
Surat
Nashik
28.6
Bangalore

0.0 3.0 6.0 9.0 12.0 15.0

New Connections Per Year (1,000 connections)

34 2007 Benchmarking and Data Book of Water Utilities in India