RE: W-C. April 15,2019. Jewel Ann Foster PO Box 240 Cedar Grove, WV 25039

Transcription

1 201 Brooks Street, P.O. Box 812 Charleston, West Virginia Phone: (304) Fax: (304) April 15,2019 Jewel Ann Foster PO Box 240 Cedar Grove, WV Jewel Ann Foster c/o Timothy W. Alderman 110 McArthur Ave. Chesapeake, WV The Honorable James Hudnall Mayor, Town of Cedar Grove PO Box 536 Cedar Grove, WV RE: W-C Jewel Ann Foster V. Cedar Grove Municipal Water Department Dear Ms. Foster and Mayor Hudnall: Pursuant to Rule 4.3.c of the Commission s Rules of Practice and Procedure, we are enclosing a copy of the Staff memorandum in this matter. Any responses must be submitted to the Executive Secretary s Office in writing within 10 days of this date, unless directed otherwise. All other parties of record will receive this filing via electronic docket notification. Your failure to respond in writing to the utility s answer, Staffs recommendations, or other documents may result in a decision in your case based on your original filing and the other documents in the case file, without further hearing or notice. If you have not done so, you are encouraged to file the Electronic Mail Agreement, previously mailed to you, which allows the Commission to serve all orders issued in this matter via electronic docket notification. When you provide an address, you will automatically receive docket notifications as documents are filed in this proceeding. The notifications allow recipients to view a document within an hour from the time the filing is processed. If you have not provided your address, please send an to caseinfo@,psc.state.wv.us and state the case number in the subject field.

2 Case No W-C April 15, 2019 Page Two Please note - the Public Service Commission does not accept electronic filings. Sincerely, IF/tg Enc. Memo cc: Robert Passmore, Esq. (Via electronic docket notification only) West Virginia-American Water Company Ingrid drrell, Director Executive Secretary Division

3 TO: INGRID F ELL Executive Secretary DATE: April 15,2019 FROM: JOHN AUVILLE Staff Attorney 3 ' 4 &=%d RE: CASE NO W-C JEWEL ANN FOSTER V. CEDAR GROVE MUNICIPAL WATER DEPARTMENT Cedar Grove has no justification as to why it has not complied with the previous Commission order in this matter. Cedar Grove should be ordered to immediately comply with the previous Commission order in this matter and submit a detailed plan to resolve this matter within 60 days. On January 14, 2019, Jewel Ann Foster (Complainant) filed a letter requesting that this formal complaint against Cedar Grove Municipal Water Department (Cedar Grove) be reopened. The Complainant states she continues to have poor water pressure to her residence in Rube Hollow Road. Cedar Grove finally filed a response in this matter on March 20, Cedar Grove states the Complainant lives in an area of low pressure. There was once a pump in the area operated by Mi. Massey that kept pressure up in the line. The Complainant helped pay for this pump. Once Mr. Massey moved out of the area, the pump ceased to be operated. Cedar Grove believes the Complainant should be responsible for providing a pump to increase pressure. Cedar Grove has also attempted to have West Virginia American Water Company (~AWC) serve this area, but WVAWC deemed it economically unfeasible. On March 29, 2019, WAWC filed a response to the answer of Cedar Grove. WVAWC has never said it is economically unfeasible to serve these customers. As a result of the 2015 complaint case, ~ A W developed C a Water Rule 5.5 main extension estimate. Cedar Grove's portion of that estimate was $28,695, which was never paid. WAWC continues to remain willing to provide service to these customers provided the cost estimates are updated and Cedar Grove pays its share of the costs. The Engineering Division submitted its final recommendations through the attached memorandu~ from Lisa Bailey, Technical Analyst. A recommended decision

4 Case No W-C April 15,2019 Page 2 was issued on July 1, 2016, requiring Cedar Grove to submit a plan within 60 days to resolve the inadequate pressure to the customers in the Rube s Hollow Road area. To date, Cedar Grove has not complied with the Commission s order. The Complainant s water pressure continues to be below the minimum required by Water Rule 5.8.d. Ms. Bailey submitted data request questions to Cedar Grove which were never answered. Ms. Bailey conducted a field investigation and spoke with the Mayor of Cedar Grove, the Water Department Manager and the Office Manager. Ms. Bailey felt that Cedar Grove understands it is their responsibility to provide adequate service to this area. Cedar Grove told her there is a project in the works to provide significant repairs to its system. Ms. Bailey notes this same project was discussed back in 2016, but it has not progressed because Cedar Grove is not up to date on its utility audits. Ms. Bailey continues that she went into the field and talked to several residents in the area. She also spot checked pressures in the area. It is obvious that nothing has been done and service remains inadequate. While the project may resolve these problems, it is several years away and Cedar Grove has already been ordered to fix this problem. She believes Cedar Grove should be ordered to take whatever actions are necessary to resolve this problem. She further recommends Cedar Grove be ordered to file a detailed plan within 60 days as to how it will resolve the problem. Legal Staff has reviewed the above mentioned memorandum and agrees with the contents therein. At the outset, Legal Staff is concerned that Cedar Grove has ignored a Commission order for the last three (3) years and has not resolved this problem. It is further alarming that when Cedar Grove finally filed an answer in this matter that it tried to absolve itself of responsibility in this matter. It is also concerning Cedar Grove did not answer the interrogatories, despite being ordered to do so. Those facts coupled with the fact Cedar Grove cannot get a necessary project to upgrade its system completed because it is behind on a simple matter of utility audits makes Legal Staff question Cedar Grove s competency to properly run its system. Cedar Grove has no justification as to why it has not complied with the previous Commission order in this matter. Cedar Grove should be ordered to immediately comply with the previous Commission order in this matter and submit a detailed plan to resolve this matter within 60 days. JMcs Attachment cws 7 H:\jauville\Word\l5 1946foster\finalmemo2.doc

5 DATE: TO: FROM: SUBJECT: April 12,2019 John Auville, Staff Attorney Legal Division Lisa Bailey, Technical Analyst Associate Engineering Division Case No W-C (Petition to Reopen) Jewel Ann Foster V. Cedar Grove Municipal Water Department Background: On January 14, 20 19, Jewel Ann Foster (Complainant) filed a letter requesting that formal complaint (Case No W-C) against Cedar Grove Municipal Water Department (Water Department) be reopened as a result of continued low water pressure to her residence located on Rube Hollow Road in Cedar Grove, West Virginia. The Complainant stated that she still has no water pressure and that the Water Department did not take any actions (such as the installation of a booster pump) to remedy the problem, as previously ordered by the Public Service Cornmission in On March 14,20 16, Technical Staff filed a final memorandum, containing the results of a very detailed case investigation, and making several case recommendations that the Water Department agreed to complete. In summary, Staff concluded the water line serving the five (5) customers along Rube Hollow Road is not a long service line and is the responsibility of the Water Department. The customers are not receiving adequate water service and the Water Department is required to provide the Complainant with water pressure that meets the Commission s b ate^ Rules (Rule 5.8.d.), either by installing a booster pumping station, or working with West Virginia American Water Company (WVAWC) to transfer service as soon as possible. Staff additionally requested the Commission to order the Water Department to file a status report with the Commission, detailing their plans to restore adequate water service to the Rube Hollow customers, every two (2) months, until proper water pressure was achieved.

6 John Auville, Staff Attorney April 12, 2019 Page 2 Case No C (Petition to Reopen) On July 1, 20 16, becoming final on July 2 1, 20 16, the Commission issued a recommended decision requiring the Water Department to submit a plan, within sixty days of the date of this decision, for improving the water pressure in the Complainants area, including the expected dates for the construction. To date, the Water Department has not complied with the Commission s order, no plan has been submitted to improve the Complainant s water pressure, and the Complainant s water pressure continues to be below the minimum required by the Commission s Water Rules, specifically, Rule 5 Ad. Staff spoke to the Water Department s Mayor on February 8,20 19, and informed him that a response to the request to reopen the petition needed to be filed with the Commission as soon as possible. On February 13, 2019, Technical Staff spoke to the Complainant s son (Timothy W. Alderman) who restated that no work has been done to improve the water pressure at his mother s home along Rube Hollow Road since the case was filed in The water service remains unacceptable. He further stated that in addition to not having proper water service, the Water Department s fees have increased and they are paying a higher cost than before for this inadequate service. Data Collection and Interro~atories: Staff requested the following information of the Water Department in order to prepare for a site visit: 1. A copy of a water line map, even if the map is hand drawn, that clearly shows the water line serving Rube Hollow Road, and the corresponding water line connection point to the Water Department s main. Please clearly mark on the map, each property served along Rube Hollow Road, locate the point of connection from the Water Department s main to each property, and the location of the water meter serving each property. 2. Please confirm the water pressure serving the Complainant s residence. 3. How many customers of the Water Department are located along Rube Hollow Road, and how many customers receive monthly water bills from the Water Department?

7 John Auville, Staff Attorney April 12,2019 Page 3 Case No W-C (Petition to Reopen) 4. Please provide a two (2) year billing and payment history for the Complainant. 5. Please provide a copy of the Water Department s plan to improve water pressure in the Complainant s area, with dates of completion, as previously agreed to and ordered by the Commission, on July 1, If the plan does not exist, clearly state what the Water Department s plans are to improve the water pressure in the Complainant s area. The Water Department did not respond to any of Staffs interrogatories and/or requests for information. In fact, on March , upon Staffs motion to compel the Water Department to respond to Staffs data requests, the Commission ordered the Water Department to immediately respond to this matter and granted Staffs motion to compel. On March 25,20 19, the Town of Cedar Grove (Water Department) filed a response to the case stating that the Complainant lives in an area where the water pressure is low, that at one point in time a pump was operated by Mr. Massey to keep pressure on the line, and that once Mr. Massey moved out of the area the pump was no longer being operated. Further stated was that the Complainant helped pay for the pump many years ago and the Water Department believes the Complainant should be responsible for operating and maintaining a pump to increase pressure at her residence. The Water Department also attempted to have WAWC service the area but it was deemed economically unfeasible to do so. On April 1, 2019, WVAWC filed a response to the Water Department s letter stating that a Water Rule 5.5 main line extension estimate was prepared and provided to the Water Department, on March 30,2016. The estimate showed the Town of Cedar Grove would need to pay a deposit of $28,695 prior to the start of construction. The Water Department did not pay the deposit, and WAWC did not build the extension; however, WAWC never deemed the main extension economically unfeasible to construct. W ~ W remains C open and willing to provide a main extension to the customers along Rube Hollow Road, but the estimate would need to be updated, and the Water Department would need to pay the deposit prior to construction.

8 John Auville, Staff Attorney April 12, 2019 Page 4 Case No W-C (Petition to Reopen) Field Investi~ation: On April 3,2019, Staff met with the Mayor of Cedar Grove, the Water Department Manager, and the Office Manager to review the case and to discuss the issues at hand, mainly, what actions does the Town of Cedar Grove s Water Department intend to take to remedy the low water pressure experienced by the customers along Rube Hollow Road? According to the Water Department, their engineer (Dunn Engineers, Inc.) is in the process of designing a project to replace most of the water mains and the water storage tank in the Cedar Grove area. Currently the Town of Cedar Grove experiences water losses of 55-60%, and the project will correct these issues and improve water pressure in the mains. This same project was discussed back in 2016, but has not progressed in the last three years as a result of the Utility s non-compliance on their utility audits. Staff reviewed the Commission s ate^ Rules, and reemphasized the Utility s ownership and responsibility for the operation and maintenance of the Rube Hollow line from the water main to the water meters, located at or near each customer s property line. The Water Department Manager and the Mayor of Cedar Grove agreed the Rube Hollow Line belonged to the utility. Rube Hollow is located at the end of the Water Department s system, and water pressure has been low since the original line was installed many years ago. The Town is unaware of any customers signing low pressure waivers upon receiving water service. According to the Office Manager, there are eight (8) customers located along Rube Hollow Road, and each customer is individually billed for water service each month, and each customer is paying their water bill. Since all parties agreed that nothing has changed since the last case investigation in 20 15/20 16, Staff did not install the pressure recorder in the meter pit of the Complainant. While in the field, Staff spot checked a couple of pressure readings at the individual homes of the customers, and found the pressures to be less than 20 psi. After talking with at least three (3) customers along Rube Hollow Road, it appears that at least 3-4 homes have installed individual pumps to boost pressure when needed; however, even with a small booster pump in use, the water pressure at the last home on Rube Hollow measured only 18 psi at static conditions, well below the Commission s required 30 psi.

9 John Auville, Staff Attorney April 12,2019 Page 5 Case No W-C (Petition to Reopen) Conclusions: The water pressure serving the customers along Rube Hollow Road is inadequate and does not meet compliance with the Commission s Wuter Rules. The Commission s Water Rule, 5.8.d., states, A customer s pressure shall be no less than twenty (20) p.s.i. at peak demand on system or thirty (30) p.s.i. static pressure at the terminus of the utility s service line (meter box or curb box) unless the customer has waived this requirement According to the Water Department, there are no special agreements or waivers in place for this service. Through further discussion with the Water Department s Manager and Mayor, there does not appear to be a dispute that the Complainant s concern of low water pressure is valid, and cannot be resolved with the existing system. While the Water Department and its Engineer are currently in the process of designing a system upgrade that will make improvements in the overall condition of the water mains, tank, and service piping, it will not correct the immediate water pressure problem, as the project is not planned to start up for several years, if the Utility is successful in completing their audits and acquiring appropriate funding. The Commission s rules and established policy are fairly clear that a public utility is to own and operate each utility main upon which it renders service to its individual customers. Once a public utility establishes individual meters to the individual customers and begins billing each customer at the appropriate Tariff rates and charges, the utility is expected to obtain the appropriate ownership and control over the main lines to ensure safe and adequate service to its customers. The water line in question was not installed recently, nor was there any allegation that it was done illegally many years ago; however, the Water Department has been aware that the Complainant and the other customers along Rube Hollow Road have been charged for and paid water fees since the time the meters were installed, several years ago, and there have been no protests or actions on the part of the Water Department to indicate they were not responsible for line maintenance. The Water Department has received revenues from the water line in question for many years with little investment on its part and the Water Department cannot provide service to its customers from a line it does not own (3rd party); in other words, once a utility begins using a section of line to provide service to its customers and bills its customers for service provided through that line, it must obtain ownership of the line. After discussing the line with the Water Department s management, Staff believes it is understood that the water line along Rube Hollow Road belongs to the Water Department, and the Water Department

10 John Auville, Staff April 12, 2019 Page W-C (Petition to Reopen) is responsible for properly maintaining it, including providing adequate water pressure to its customers. Staff concludes the water line servicing the customers along Rube Hollow Road is the responsibility of the Water Department, and currently, these paying customers are not receiving adequate water service. The Water Department should be required to take whatever actions are necessary to provide the Complainant with water pressure that meets the Commission s Water Rules. Technical and field Staff volunteered to assist the Water Department to identify possible solutions. The Commission s recommended decision, issued on July 1, 20 16, becoming final on July , required Cedar Grove to submit a plan for improving the water pressure in the Complainant s area, to include expected dates for the construction. Staff recommends the Commission issue an order enforcing the previous recommended decision and requiring Cedar Grove (Water Department) to provide the detailed plan for fixing the pressure problem at the Complainant s residence along Rube Hollow Road immediately. LAB